Is socialism a system or a theory?

[Charles Brough]

My point was that socialism is only an unworkable theory and that there is no functioning socialistic state in the world and never has been.

The posts have included horrendous explanations of how "socialism" works but not one example of an existing socialist economy in the world. People like to think of Sweden, perhaps, as being "socialist," but in Sweden, most corporations are not owned by the government, prices are still determined by supply and demand, there are classes, and decisions are not forced but voted.

Are people thinking of the former Soviet Union and Marxist China? They set up ideologically forced communism---not socialism. When you turn a state into a giant commune, you have communism, not socialism. Even China is now capitalistic (or shall we say Mercantilisitic?)

Communes have and still do exist---even in the U.S. There are religious communities which are communes. Israel was founded by communes. When idealism is high, people love to become totally involved with each other and share eveything. It is a spontaneous process. When idealism begins to break down, then capitalism becomes a much more efficient system. Then, as society and idealism continue to decline, capitalism becomes corrupt, people become selfish and greedy, and the system degenerates---as it is doing now.

Capitalism is a fine system when people are idealistic and honest. It is a means by which people can take care of their own interests in ways which also benefit everyone else. That is the ideological basis of capitalism, but societies change and it is time to begin looking to the future and seeing what is happening--to be forewarned.

charles
http://humanpurpose.simplenet.com

 

[selfAdjoint]

Your problem, or rather our problem with you, is that you never carefully define what YOU mean by socialism. Evidently the Democratic Socialisms of Europe, so called by the Europeans themselves, don't meet your criteria, so you can say there has never been a successful socialist state. How about some usable criteria?

 

[WhiteWolf]

That is exactly true, you are able to acquire more material possessions by getting an education and getting a high paying job. You pay for that education 10 times over with your taxes. It is the people living on welfare that takes and doesn't give MUCH back. You earned what you have, no one has the right to take it from you. And this is coming from a Marxism idealist.

 

[EnumaElish]

Capitalism is a fine system when people are idealistic and honest.

I thought many proponents of capitalism (at least under this thread) were of the opinion that no system other than capitalism "works" because human nature gets in the way of idealism and honesty. Is it only me, or are there others who are confused?

It is a means by which people can take care of their own interests in ways which also benefit everyone else.

Normally, capitalism is justified as a system that benefits everyone else because people care about their own interest and utterly disregard others' interests. Hence Adam Smith's popular metaphor "the invisible hand." Supposedly, one does not have to think about which ways would benefit others and which wouldn't, and being idealistic and honest, choose the former. Supposedly, if self interests are doggedly followed by everyone, then the market mechanism will see to it that everyone will benefit from individuals' self-centered behavior.

P.S. For example, the most commonly used concept of equilibrium in Game Theory, Nash equilibrium, is based on the axiom that each seller looks for an angle to further his or her self interest (e.g. net profit), by cheating if necessary. In the simplest form of this market game, a price fixing agreement by a cartel (look under Encyclopedia) is inherently unstable. Buyers benefit from ensuing competitive prices. Explicitly, this whole notion has nothing to do with idealism or honesty; and it has everything to do with material interest and deceit.

 

[flotsam]

Socialism can never be built in a single place. No system is an island. This applies to capitalism too. A single socialist state could never abolish curency in a sea of capitalism, such a state needs to economically interact with the outside world whether it likes it or not. A single capitalist state would find its goods worthless in a socialist world where goods are moved according to need and not to the highest bidder. Any move towards socialism would be one that embraced most of the planet and all of it eventually. It would be part of world movement due to the failings of global capitalism. True socialism as I see it would have a productive capacity far greater than capitalism. Capitalism wastefully duplicates production all the time and the market inherently moves goods that in reality don't need moved. A simple example; the UK imports millions of tonnes of milk and exports millions of tonnes of milk every year. Global socialism would end this senceless waste of resources and only import when there is a shortfall in local production. Thousands of identical products meet each other at ports around the world every day. Logistically this is stupid and unessecary and a waste of energy. A planned world economy could increase productive capacity dramatically by producing for need by local means as much as possible.
Whether socialism will come about, you might say is a unrealistic dream. Howerver as I am posting this in a science forum surely one will realize that nothing in this world endures and that applies to capitalism too. Capitalism like socialism is a system and systems come and go. Capitalism has not been around forever and will not endure forever. It will have to go someday, but as its a class based system serving the interests of a tiny powerful minority, it will not give in easily. But I wager it would not be the choice of capiatalism to give up. It would simply die out and be replaced by a superior system, after-all, we as humans are still bound by evolution.
World socialism would as Marx says be a dictatorship, a dictatorship of the proletariat. And I can't argue against that.

 

[Genecks]

Anarchy is the only real system, everything else is a theory for how things "look".
Anyone can turn on anyone else, stealing everything and taking everything they own and love at any time.

 

[flotsam]

Anarchism has some great common ground with socialism. We both fundamantally want the abolition of the state and capitalism. Both are misunderstood philosophies. Both relate to systems that are, essentially, currently outwith the thinking of a modern consumer western culture. Never forget the great sacrifice of the anarchists, fighting alongside socialists in the Spanish Civil War to protect a democratically elected government that was being usurped. I know that if the time was to come again I would fight to preserve and forward socialism beside my anarchist friends. I know that socialism is the future of mankind. What shall we do otherwise. Can we carry on as we are going? Can the Earth sustain capitalism? I think everybody knows the answer to that question. Venezuela is a taste of what radicals can expect if you try to introduce social justice into society in a capitalist world. But you cannot hold back good ideas, Galileo speaks to that. One day the decrepit gives in.

 

[Smurf]

But you cannot hold back good ideas, Galileo speaks to that. One day the decrepit gives in.

I think what everyone's worried about is wether it will happen soon enough

 

[flotsam]

Capitalism is a fine system when people are idealistic and honest. It is a means by which people can take care of their own interests in ways which also benefit everyone else. That is the ideological basis of capitalism, but societies change and it is time to begin looking to the future and seeing what is happening--to be forewarned.

Capitalism has one single ideology, to maximise profit. Ask any company director what his job is and he'll tell you that it is to maximise profit.
How can taking care of your own interests benefit others. Presumably this is a reference to the 'trickle-down-effect'. The right-wing idea that if you make the rich, richer, then some of the money will 'trickle down' to the poor. A useful analogy to illustrate the effectiveness of this policy is to imagine you have just been mugged. You don't report the crime in the hope that due to the merry-go-round of the market, some of the cash will find its way back to you.
Capitalism is a system that encourages individualism. Humans are not individuals. We rely on each other from cradle to grave. We are social beings. This has had the most important part to play in our evolutionary success and will continue to do so. A human trait irreconcilable with capitalism.
Capitalism is the great race to the bottom. A contest where the one at the bottom of the league is the winner. The greatest gain comes to those who pay the least wages, plunder the most resources, vandalise the environment the most and generally bully governments into lowering barriers to profit such as employment rights, taxes, environmental controls and objective research.
Be forewarned indeed. Things will only get worse. Global warming is something to look forward to. Never ending war is another great achievement and who could forget the fact that while billions on this planet live on a dollar or less a day about 700 billionaires are benefiting society by living on a combined wealth of a mere £1.2trillion. Capitalism is a fine system indeed for that tiny minority.
If capitalism is the greatest reflection of what mankind is capable of then we are doomed to the evolutionary scrapheap. But I believe the next great leap forward in human history will indeed involve extinction. The extinction of capitalism. Then we can really see what we are capable off, free from the shackles of a catastrophe that some have the audacity to call a 'fine system'.