Socialist or Conservative Government

[Dr.Jack]

Approved by Ghan_04. Please take a minute to read the rules.

Another debate! This time the question is which government do you think is better socialist or conservative government. Please make sure why you explain your choice. Going into further detail, what would you like to change in your choice to make it the 'ideal' government in your opinion? Where should lines be drawn? Can you, perhaps, mix the two to create a better governing form?

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating social or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society where labor is the main source of wealth. Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.
Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.
Socialism is not a discrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, sometimes opposing each other. Another dividing feature of the socialist movement is the split on how a socialist economy should be established between the reformists and the revolutionaries. Libertarian socialism (which includes Socialist Anarchism and Libertarian Marxism) rejects state control and ownership of the economy altogether and advocates direct collective ownership of the means of production via co-operative workers' councils and workplace democracy.

Source.

Conservatism is a term used to describe political philosophies that favour tradition, where tradition refers to various religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs. It is difficult to define the term precisely because different cultures have different established values and, in consequence, conservatives in different cultures have differing goals. (Some conservatives seek to preserve the status quo or to reform society slowly, while others seek to return to the values of an earlier time, the status quo ante).
Even within one culture, different definitions of what it is that constitutes a 'conservative' may be found: Martin Blinkhorn, for example, asks the question, "Who are the 'conservatives' in today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing views of modern conservatives such as Margaret Thatcher?"
Samuel Francis defined authentic conservatism as “the survival and enhancement of a particular people and its institutionalized cultural expressions”; Roger Scruton defines conservatism as the “maintenance of the social ecology” and “the politics of delay, the purpose of which is to maintain in being, for as long as possible, the life and health of a social organism”; and Russell Kirk considered conservatism "the negation of ideology".
Conservative political parties have diverse views. For instance, Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, Independent Democrat Union in Chile, and Conservative Party in the UK are all major conservative parties with varying positions. Conservative parties usually identify as right-wing parties.

Source.

Please make sure you understand both terms before replying to the thread.

Let's have a constructive debate! Don't fight or take it personally!

 

[Zakyath]

What about liberalism?

 

[Dr.Jack]

Not part of the question. The question is basically should government give free hand to its citizens (Conservative) or take an important part of their lives (Socialism) especially when it comes to economic theories. Liberalism is something a bit different.

Liberalism is a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal. Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment.

Liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. Different forms of liberalism may propose very different policies, but they are generally united by their support for a number of principles, including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy, and a transparent system of government. All liberals — as well as some adherents of other political ideologies — support some variant of the form of government known as liberal democracy, with open and fair elections, where all citizens have equal rights by law.

Liberalism rejected many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. Social progressivism, the belief that traditions do not carry any inherent value and social practices ought to be continuously adjusted for the greater benefit of humanity, is a common component of liberal ideology. Liberalism is also strongly associated with the belief that human society should be organized in accordance with certain unchangeable and inviolable rights. Different schools of liberalism are based on different conceptions of human rights, but there are some rights that all liberals support to some extent, including rights to life, liberty, and property.
Within liberalism there are two major streams of thought which compete over the use of the term "liberal" and have been known to clash on many issues as they differ on their understanding of what constitutes freedom. Classical liberals believe that the only real freedom is freedom from coercion. As a result, they see state intervention in the economy as a coercive power that restricts the economic freedom of individuals. They favor a laissez-faire economic policy and oppose the welfare state; their brand of liberalism is often called economic liberalism.

On the other hand, social liberals argue that governments must take an active role in promoting the freedom of citizens. They believe that real freedom can exist only when citizens are healthy, educated, and free from dire poverty. They generally favor the right to an education, the right to health care, and the right to a minimum wage. Some also favor laws against discrimination in housing and employment, laws against pollution of the environment, and the provision of welfare, including unemployment benefit and housing for the homeless, all supported by progressive taxation.[4]

 

[esb]

Socialists ftw.
I don't like that conservatists "favour tradition, where tradition refers to various religious, cultural, or nationally defined beliefs and customs."

 

[EatShrooms]

Can we choose neither?

 

[esb]

Well the debate seems to be "Either, or", not "this instead" or "none". So if you only had these two options (neither not included), which would you choose and why?

 

[Dr.Jack]

> Can we choose neither?

What would you suggest instead?

 

[New_U.S.]

> Can we choose neither?

What would you suggest instead?

Fascism xD... Actually invading South America probably would help out our economy

 

[JerseyFoo]

Socialism (All) >< Individualism (One)
or is it Collectivism...

Conservative (Same) >< Liberal (Change)

Just in case you were not aware, these two are not comparable, only existing governments using them. Neither are they types of governments themselves.

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

1. a social theory advocating the liberty, rights, or independent action of the individual.
2. the principle or habit of or belief in independent thought or action.
3. the pursuit of individual rather than common or collective interests; egoism.
4. individual character; individuality.
5. an individual peculiarity.
6. Philosophy.
a. the doctrine that only individual things are real.
b. the doctrine or belief that all actions are determined by, or at least take place for, the benefit of the individual, not of society as a whole.

1. the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change.
2. the principles and practices of political conservatives.

1. the quality or state of being liberal, as in behavior or attitude.
2. a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
3. (sometimes initial capital letter) the principles and practices of a liberal party in politics.
4. a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptions, and the development of spiritual capacities.

The wikipedia definitions are also correct, but I believe you may have mis-interpreted such as Conservatism is not a government's tendency to let citizens do as they please, and Socialism is not a government's tendency to take control of their citizens lives. ( although most Socialist government's do, but a Monarchy and a Dictatorship would also fit under that definition )

Perhaps your thinking of Anarchy.

 

[Varine]

No government; anarchy.

 

[JerseyFoo]

Gee whiz; Anarchism. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

 

[Dr.Jack]

The wikipedia definitions are also correct, but I believe you may have mis-interpreted such as Conservatism is not a government's tendency to let citizens do as they please, and Socialism is not a government's tendency to take control of their citizens lives. ( although most Socialist government's do, but a Monarchy and a Dictatorship would also fit under that definition )

Perhaps your thinking of Anarchy.

Not at all, I was merely simplifying the idea. As you said yourself:

> a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

The government controls many aspects of the community and unifies it.

> 1. the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change.

Somewhat unclear. However, Conservative allows free hand at many aspects while being bounding its citizen with limits and laws.

1. the quality or state of being liberal, as in behavior or attitude.
2. a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
3. (sometimes initial capital letter) the principles and practices of a liberal party in politics.
4. a movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptions, and the development of spiritual capacities.

Take another look at my post above.

 

[n[u]ll]

I'm sort of a libertarian, so I would much rather be in a conservative lead country than some socialist one.

My dad earns a lot of money annually, and you know why? He worked hard, went to college, and continued to work hard after college. Now, why should he have to "redistribute" his hard earned money to people who didn't even work half as hard? If you don't do the work, you should be willing to face the consequences. As Karl Marx had said, socialism is the form of government preceding communism, and to me some socialist views that Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and other liberals have are pretty communistic..

 

[Zakyath]

Did your father's partents earn lots of money or were without good jobs and homes?

 

[n[u]ll]

Did your father's partents earn lots of money or were without good jobs and homes?

My dad grew up in a barrio (Mexican hood). His parents were far from wealthy. He grew up with 4 brothers and 3 sisters, so with the little wealth they had you can imagine how thinly it was spread out.. He did sports (wrestling/football), which got him the scholarship to go to college. I'm not sure about my uncles and aunts going to college or what not, but the most of them are successful upper-middle class families.

 

[pantrygirl]

Socialism invariably leads to communism. It's fact. It's been tested. Capitalism does not unfairly distribute wealth unless it's moving twards socialism. An example of today would be people in ghettos who do drugs and have kids, then say its not fair they don't have what people who work hard and limit thier family size have (which is hard to do kids are fun). That is unfair. Conservativeism is mostly related twards right-wing christian based ideals, but above those it is holding the ideals of the Constitution of the United States of America. In that respect I am most certianly a conservitive. Why fix something that doesn't work. Many liberaltarians (as the name refers) want to have a liberal interpertation of the Constitution. An example of a dearly dire fault by this would be the term "the Constitution is a living document". A living document doesn't mean it changes with the times and you can change the base of it. Barak Obama says the Constituion is inherently flawed even though it worked for 200+ years and wants to change it which is illeagal. But falling back on simply the term living document might changed that. If not Barak perhaps someone else. I hope not. a living document means it will always give us inalienable rights as men. Always
P.S. I'm one of those druggies but I was fortunet enough to get sober. It's not a judgement it simply is, lifes not fair we have it good. Capitalism keeps it good when we choose to do with our earned money.

 

[Zakyath]

>Socialism invariably leads to communism. It's fact.

No, it isn't. Socialism certainly could lead to communism, if, for instance, it were frustrated to the point that it's adherents turned to the communist doctrine of violent revolution. It could also fail to lead to communism, if it were implemented peacefully, and placed the means of production under the control of some polity other than "the workers." Saying that socialism leads to communism is like saying that evangelical christian preachers convert people to catholicism. It's not true, but the truth isn't any better than the misconception.

>Why fix something that doesn't work.

Because it doesn't work.

>Capitalism keeps it good when we choose to do with our earned money.

I agree witht his to a certain point. Everyone doesn't have the same chance for money.

 

[pantrygirl]

ya know the huge bailouts that don't work. that's an current event of a polity controlling other people'sI] money.

i don't know what having a chance for money means exactly, but i do know in communism no one has a chance to earn money. they work for what thier told.

communism is a dream of people making heaven on earth. we fuck it up. you ever see a small group of people in power that don't implement violence if the workers/group of anyone don't do what they want. after a while of course. with no checks and balances they can do wat they want.
there will never be a time where some savior can implement communism peacefully, if your forced to give charity it isn't charity, its a form of slavery. people are inherently evil and its choices that make us good. slave masters and tyrants aren't good. if you force your will on to others you are noting but a tyrant.

 

[Zakyath]

what the fuck man. read the title of the discussion. Where does it say communism!? Where? I agree with communism being a nice idea, but I also agree on that communism will never(!) work. So let's drop the communism here, because this is a discussion about socialist and conservative governments.

>i don't know what having a chance for money means exactly

in the states you can be homeless even if you work hard, because you don't earn enough of money. And if you don't earn enough money to even have a place to live, getting an education might be even harder.

 

[pantrygirl]

socialism ALWAYS leads to communism. they go hand in hand and always will. and people who work hard and are homless in America spend thier money on what they want.

the constitution does work. I don't know if it not working means people can do whatever they want and not have consequences. or if your not taken care of by the government (who shoud never be a parent figure ever in any case) or.......?

relax to hot showers and camomile tea, or warm milk are good. water trickles, certian dancing light contraptions help for me.