Socialism

rypt

rypt

rypt

Soldato
Joined
22 Mar 2008
Posts
11,922
Location
London
Been reading an American car forum; and I just find it funny how people always scream "omg socialism, it is evil, just look at Europe".

I fail to see how socialism (unless taken to the extreme) is evil, or how Western Europe is "deeply socialist" - now I agree we have plenty of welfare state - but that is hardly socialism.

It makes me laugh how some Americans seem to think that such basic things as petrol tax; state funded health system and so on are almost the work of the devil.
 
It's all relative. The US is very capitalist, and as such we in Europe all seem very left wing.

I prefer the capitalist model for the most part, but there needs to be a suitable balance.
 
Duff-Man said:
It's all relative. The US is very capitalist, and as such we in Europe all seem very left wing.
I prefer the capitalist model for the most part, but there needs to be a suitable balance.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't necessarily say that Europe (or well at least the UK) are not capitalist though - we are as capitalist as the US; we just can see the benefit of having something to fall back on rather than having an everything or nothing system - something that has come about as a result of WW2 I think as after that Europe as a whole was pretty devastated so the state had to provide things as best it could.
 
Socialist is a dirty word in the states, so is liberal to a lot of people.

The NHS is a socialist idea, it might have it's flaws but I bet a lot of Americans wish they have one.
 
It's all routed in the propoganda of the Cold War and echoed through the generations. I bet half the people that throw the term around disparagingly don't even know the difference.
 
The USSR was as socialist as New Labour are democratic. In name alone.

Socialism itself is abhorrent because it destroys the individual, as much as organised religion brain washes and stupifies its followers.

I'm a libertarian at heart, the mechanism is government is always going to be massive and unwieldy, increasingly so with rising populations.
 
The americans recognise the loss of freedom associated with handing responsibilities to the state, and they value freedom highly.

In Europe, it's considered a good thing to obligate others to pay for your needs.

Guess who I think have the better idea...
 
Raymond Lin said:
The NHS is a socialist idea, it might have it's flaws but I bet a lot of Americans wish they have one.
Click to expand...

I remember Michael Moore gushing wildly while looking at the NHS in Sicko.
--
Yea, it's odd, I think the trouble is for the yanks that a lot of words associated perhaps with enemies of old which were "bad" convey only a negative image.

Even communism had its finer points in some circumstances that capitalism didn't offer. The USSR was a socialist coming together..

Also don't discount that a lot of Americans are stupid. :p
 
rypt said:
I wouldn't necessarily say that Europe (or well at least the UK) are not capitalist though - we are as capitalist as the US; we just can see the benefit of having something to fall back on rather than having an everything or nothing system - something that has come about as a result of WW2 I think as after that Europe as a whole was pretty devastated so the state had to provide things as best it could.
Click to expand...

We are most certainly not nearly as capitalist as the US. State funded health care, higher education funded (mostly) by the taxpayer, huge social security system, high income tax and duty on commodities. All these are hallmarks of socialism. But yes, we are more capitalist than a lot of the countries in Europe, in a large part due to Margaret Thatcher who was always searching for her 'third way' as a balance between capitalism and socialism.

Remember that 'socialism' and 'capitalism' are just extremes of the economic left and right. Pretty much all nations fall somewhere between these extremes.
 
Capitalism has no problem with state funded education and health care - as it allows for infrastracture, goods and services to be provided by the government - and healthcare and education are probably the most vital two (and if I dare say it, a possible human right?).
 
rypt said:
The point is, why are "liberal" and "socialist" such dirty words
Click to expand...

They aren't per se. It's all down to opinion (and opinions are like bumholes - everyone has one and they all stink).

For some 'neo-conservative' is a dirty word. For others 'liberal' is dirty. Others are proud to call themselves one or the other. It all depends on your point of view.

But in political terms, these words are usually brandished when one side wants to try and draw a line between them and their opponents on a particular issue. By accusing their opponent of being [insert suitable extreme classification] they can distance their views on the subject from those of their opponent.
 
rypt said:
Capitalism has no problem with state funded education and health care - as it allows for infrastracture, goods and services to be provided by the government - and healthcare and education are probably the most vital two (and if I dare say it, a possible human right?).
Click to expand...



Capitalism is an economic system in which wealth, and the means of producing wealth, are privately owned
Click to expand...

A 'pure' capitalist system would have 100% private healthcare, and education systems. Being alive and educated are, after all, primary driving forces for the production of wealth.

The point is that no nation is completely capitalist, nor is any nation completely socialist (although North Korea is probably pretty damn close). Capitalism and socialism are simply opposite ends of the economic spectrum. We all lie somewhere in between.
 
rypt said:
Capitalism has no problem with state funded education and health care - as it allows for infrastracture, goods and services to be provided by the government - and healthcare and education are probably the most vital two (and if I dare say it, a possible human right?).
Click to expand...

Pure capitalism would suggest is should be managed by the market, but that's not a good way forward

I would personally discourage it being provided by the government when a valid alternative exists though. There is no requirement for the government to fund and provide healthcare or education, only to ensure access to healthcare or education, which is a different thing entirely.
 
Dolph said:
Pure capitalism would suggest is should be managed by the market, but that's not a good way forward

I would personally discourage it being provided by the government when a valid alternative exists though. There is no requirement for the government to fund and provide healthcare or education, only to ensure access to healthcare or education, which is a different thing entirely.
Click to expand...

Do not you not believe that healthcare should be free?
 
Greenlizard0 said:
Even communism had its finer points in some circumstances that capitalism didn't offer. The USSR was a socialist coming together..
Click to expand...

It had no finer points unless you were part of the governing class, did you experience it.

Suppress the masses, long live the people and **** them.
 
Liefrich said:
Do not you not believe that healthcare should be free?
Click to expand...

There's no such thing as free, the closest is free at point of use, but it still costs.

I think a better question should be 'should I have the choice about how my healthcare money is spent'?
 
Dolph said:
There's no such thing as free, the closest is free at point of use, but it still costs.

I think a better question should be 'should I have the choice about how my healthcare money is spent'?
Click to expand...

No a better question and what I orginally meant was:

Do you not believe healthcare should be free (taxes included) to the public?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom