Capitalism vs Socialism - Your View?

[David]

Just be glad this clearly isn't the case [the poll results up to now] with Socialist Worker stands getting laughed at in the streets. Don't ever think these people have any majority of any kind, they're a downtrodden minority for all the right reasons.

I ask you once again Yoghurt, what's your definition of Socialism?

[Happ Hazzard]

Is there an agreed upon definition of socialism? One of the main problems with it seems to be the fact that it is split into different factions each with their own fixed idea of what socialism is and totally unprepared to compromise. Not to mention the fact that any failed socialist states are excused as "not being proper socialism".

[FireBrand]

Is there an agreed upon definition of socialism? One of the main problems with it seems to be the fact that it is split into different factions each with their own fixed idea of what socialism is and totally unprepared to compromise. Not to mention the fact that any failed socialist states are excused as "not being proper socialism".

 

There are vital tenets within Socialism to all who believe in it would adhere to but due to perspectives on what is or isn't a "pure" form of Socialism people will claim that nations of for instance The Warsaw Pact fell because of corrupt governements and not the system itself.

 

However any idealism has to deal with reality and when you trya nd apply a naked idealism to everyday life it fails, unless you are an indivual of such intelect and charisma you can force things through EXACTLY the way you demand them.

 

I have seen the same argument from those who say western nations would be better served by being an honest free market, the U.S being closest country to having such a system.

 

It's bullshit as an utterly free market would be horrific and trample anyone who isn't super-rich, you need some Socialist elements for a free-market to function properly, this is what I think.

[Happ Hazzard]

Is there an agreed upon definition of socialism? One of the main problems with it seems to be the fact that it is split into different factions each with their own fixed idea of what socialism is and totally unprepared to compromise. Not to mention the fact that any failed socialist states are excused as "not being proper socialism".

 

There are vital tenets within Socialism to all who believe in it would adhere to but due to perspectives on what is or isn't a "pure" form of Socialism people will claim that nations of for instance The Warsaw Pact fell because of corrupt governements and not the system itself.

 

However any idealism has to deal with reality and when you trya nd apply a naked idealism to everyday life it fails, unless you are an indivual of such intelect and charisma you can force things through EXACTLY the way you demand them.

 

I have seen the same argument from those who say western nations would be better served by being an honest free market, the U.S being closest country to having such a system.

 

It's bullshit as an utterly free market would be horrific and trample anyone who isn't super-rich, you need some Socialist elements for a free-market to function properly, this is what I think.

Controlled capitalism is the best way IMO. There is no room for idealism in politics because it just leads to extremism. If it works, it works, it can never be perfect because human beings are not perfect.

[Dynamite Duane]

Currently we don't live in a capitalist state, if we did the banks wouldn't have been bailed out.

 

The NuCons aren't even Tories anymore, since they are a strange hybrid of Marxism/Socialism/Communitarianism. Big Society has nothing to do with traditional conservative values. Some senior Tories work with Marxist groups such political charity - Common Purpose. Tory connection to Marxist political charity - ukcolumn.org

 

I would've called myself a socialist upto about a year ago, simply because it's about equality and fairness. However when you look further into it you discover it's about state control. I'm pro freedom and helping those in need, not taking away freedom via state control. If society is too equal taking away the opportunity for people to better themselves then some freedom has been lost.

 

Look at what happened with the NuLabour government, although we didn't consent to it more control was taken by the state. Marxist political charities and think-tanks now continue to work with the government plus we have the Big Society that Cameron is starting to implement, a continuation of more state control.

 

EDIT:

 

Just looked at some of the early posts, what needs to change I feel is the current monetary system. The problem is who controls the money. What we need is debt free currency issued by the governments of the land as opposed to a central bank. I recommend a docufilm called the Secrets of Oz, it explains it well.

[Carbomb]

The NuCons aren't even Tories anymore, since they are a strange hybrid of Marxism/Socialism/Communitarianism

 

This is possibly the most insane thing I've ever seen you post, Duane, and that is saying something.

[JNLister]

Just looked at some of the early posts, what needs to change I feel is the current monetary system. The problem is who controls the money. What we need is debt free currency issued by the governments of the land as opposed to a central bank. I recommend a docufilm called the Secrets of Oz, it explains it well.

 

You want yellow bricks to be used as currency AND road surfaces?