[Personal curiosity] Is a little bit of socialism such a horrible thing?

Is that how an ideal Islamic state is viewed by Muslims?

Further on the terms capitalism and socialism, I think these terms are good for theoretical discussions but for the most part have no practical meaning anymore. I think the relevant, practical, question for 21st century governance is, is a given service or part of the economy better run by the government or the private sector? The question is really just about good, efficient, government, in other words. Fire departments and police departments are fairly obviously better run by a governments, for example, which are held accountable though elections. If your city has a lousy police department and your mayor doesn’t clean it up, then you vote him/her out. The local grocery store, otoh, is clearly better run by the private sector, and there are good reasons for that. There is generally lots of completion, and the overhead and infrastructure costs aren’t huge, and third party interests aren’t as big an issue as they are for fire departments, for example. The talk about capitalism vs. socialism is old rhetoric from a different time, and unfortunately it diverts people away the important issues of today.

 

Brilliant post. I can't rep you because you're already my idol and I've tried to rep you about 4,000 times.

There is no doubt that Rudolf Rocker was correct in his scathing anarchist criticism of both capitalism and socialism. According to Rocker,

As for socialism, Rocker again correctly observed that:

Which was proven adeptly by the Bolsheviks under Lenin and their pseudo-totalitarian regime. None of which, of course, would have surprised Bakunin, who (as I emphasized earlier) brilliantly foresaw the enormous flaw in marxist socialism, that the "red bureaucracy" would prove to be the "most vile and terrible lie our century created".

In this is an unavoidable and sickly ironic truth. The propaganda mythos maligned by Grizzled in this thread was born about from both of the predominant philosophies of the 20th century. America, in its desire to promote capitalism at the behest of its property owning elite derided the sham socialism of the soviets just as the soviets praised the same sham system to hide from the peasant class just what a joke their supposed socialist state was.

Both sides of course hate and fear, with the deepest, most ardent seriousness, the specter of true worker revolution and the idea of class destructions. Witness, for example, how brazenly the Spanish Revolution was demolished by the fascists, communists, and the liberal democracies.

When the specter of true power-distribution and equality arises, the powerful spare no capability in arousing their respective armies to crush it with a ruthlessness supposedly left behind after Rome.

 

Are you saying a revolution is inevitable in this country?

 

We already have a lot of "socialism". Everyone knows this. Some want more than others.

Anyways, socialism and capitalism are just labels and ideals.

While the recent financial meltdown is certainly a black mark against capitalism, the chronic federal and state budget deficits are definitely a black mark against socialism and democracy in general.

I don't think there is natural progression from capitalism to socialism, but moreso a natural progression from democracy to socialism. People are generally going to vote for free stuff. So we now we have a debt-laden, bankrupt population who are supposed to know whats best for them? The whole premise behind democracy needs to be examined.

 

I've been reading this thread, and there is some interesting give and take here.

If it helps, here's the way I think about the OP's question:

Socialism is a lot like salt.

A little salt makes food taste good. Sometimes when it's really hot, a little more (salt tablet) is just what the doctor ordered. But, too much makes food inedible and a massive dose kills you. The same can be said -- in relative terms -- for fascism or communism or feudalism or capitalism or any other "ism."

 

Because driving is easier than diet and exercise, and I can just ride the bus, call a cab or just "be real careful" if my car insurance runs out. I bet I can go the next two years, maybe even five or ten, without a ticket or an accident; but I'll probably still weigh over 300 pounds. Thanks in advance for the quadruple bypass.

 

I think being wealthier than any other country our size helps too. Stick your nose in a book for 10-15 years, rack up a little deferred loan debt and move to a nice, mid-sized city, you end up with a low-six figure salaried job by your mid-twenties and you're better off than most of the planet.

 

I'm not even sure what side of the table you reside, and I really don't care. I just enjoy reading your posts. Thanks.

 

If you wait a while or search through enough of my posts, you'll probably find some bad ones. But thanks for the compliment, Landry.

 

This is textbook Chicom nonsense. Whenever I hear the term moral exceptionalism, 9 times out of 10 it's from some bitter Chicom berating the US for the plight of the 18th century Native American as they explain how the murder, torture, and displacement of 21th century Tibetans is an "internal matter". You've got to be kidding me.

The thing about a lot of Chinese learning about America is their complete naivette. They somehow got the idea that freedom somehow means right and truth. So they watch western media and they figure out that freedom isn't the nice little neat box they think it should be. They're simply not ready for nor are they interested in the complexities that come with freedom and so they backlash against it. It's ignorant.

As much as it obviously sticks in your craw, America has and does stand the moral high ground in the free world. This is certainly not to say it hasn't and doesn't make mistakes but it is to say that the US leads when it comes to civil rights and the world looks to us to lead. We've fought wars all over the world and saved tens of millions from Fascism and Communism. That's not lip service and that's not us trying to make ourselves feel better, that's paying for freedom with the blood of our brothers and fathers and grandfathers because we believe that all people should be free. You just don't undestand that. You think because Hollywood makes Rambo movies that it's some kind of a cliche but it's not. Do we fight all the right wars at the right time and make all the right decisions? Certainly not but the next time a nation of free men calls for help in defense of itself from a totalitarian state they're going to call the United States, not China. You can bet on that.

The funny thing about it is that you want to rip America for becoming involved in the affairs of other nations (Iraq) and then rip America for not becoming involved enough in the affairs of other nations (Saudi Arabia). I mean you are the guys who want to look the other way so the Janjaweed can continue raping women and children in Darfur, then you defend Kim Jong Il so he can play God as he starves and brainwashes a nation, and then you seriously want to talk about Iraq. I see threads by American posters angry about our involvement in Iraq all the time, I've yet to see any threads from Chinese posters discussing China's responsiblity for Darfur and North Korea or Tibet for that matter. You're talking about hypocritical behavior? Seriously?

 

He's not my idol but I consider him to be a very wise teacher and I look to him for spiritual guidance. I can assure you any support the Dalai Lama has for Marxism is in the spirit of compassion for all and in no way does he support the hatred and violence historically tied to Marxism.

I do appreciate your constant attacks on his holiness for not being China's lap dog, it's been very cool in like a sixth grade kind of way.