Socialism on the rise?

[greenguzzi]

Well that's a tall claim; care to elaborate?

A remarkably stable house of cards, one that has a lot speaking in favor of it, and which has, again, built our modern world. There's nothing inherently unstable about capitalism once you crucially consider factors such as the tragedy of the commons and related externalities.

At last, a decent opposing argument! Unfortunately it's half past midnight here, and I need to work in the morning. I'll have a think about your comments and respond (if I can) when I have time and am awake. Thanks.

 

[BrianJK]

To those who claim that proponents of neo-socialism or whatever you want to call it don't understand economics, would you please elaborate, with the consideration that laissez faire does not represent the only (and some world say not the best by a long shot) economic model?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Can we at least try to make sure we're all talking about the same thing? I'm pretty sure @greenguzzi isn't talking about Soviet Russia here.

Of course, Cadet. I can't imagine why I would have equated one version of Marxism with another.

But then that logical extreme had already been taken with regard to capitalism ... so perhaps the comparison wasn't nearly so off the mark as you would like to think. In its pure form Marxism (... and, yes, that includes "socialism") leads to untold misery and suffering.

Anyone seeing benefits to capitalism yet?

 

[The Cadet]

Of course, Cadet. I can't imagine why I would have equated one version of Marxism with another.

Because you don't really understand either permutation very well? For others, it's because it's a very useful political cudgel against changes they don't like. After all, arguing against the "socialism" in places like Germany and Denmark doesn't work very well (those countries are pretty darn great places to live); conflating that with Soviet Russia is so much easier.

But then that logical extreme had already been taken with regard to capitalism ...

"The other people I'm talking to are doing a very bad thing. Therefore I should do that very bad thing as well"?

For what it's worth, we're far more in danger of hitting the golden age of unfettered capitalism in the USA than we ever were of reaching full-blown socialism, and there really are legitimately attacks on things like the minimum wage or the existence of the environmental protection agency from serious political contenders on the right.

In its pure form Marxism (... and, yes, that includes "socialism") leads to untold misery and suffering.

Does the form of "socialism" proposed by Sanders have anything to do with the pure form of Marxism you're talking about (whatever that's supposed to mean)?

 

[BrianJK]

Of course, Cadet. I can't imagine why I would have equated one version of Marxism with another.

But then that logical extreme had already been taken with regard to capitalism ... so perhaps the comparison wasn't nearly so off the mark as you would like to think. In its pure form Marxism (... and, yes, that includes "socialism") leads to untold misery and suffering.

Anyone seeing benefits to capitalism yet?

I'd need some proof of the misery and suffering that is a direct result of any form of socialism.

And no, to be honest. I see benefits for the top tier but not for the average Joe. Have you ever read "The Jungle"?

 

[Albion]

Maybe not socialism as it has been practiced in the past, but as it needs to be practiced today. We can take ideas from socialism and adapt them to our needs.

We could, but then it wouldn't be Socialism.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

I felt that way a decade ago too. You may not change in the way I did. Many don't.

Again, there doesn't seem to be one formula or one right political view per age. We're humans; we're going to disagree with each other no matter how old we are.

I have a similar past to yours in regards to politics. I grew up in a very strict Christian household. Most of my childhood and teen years were spend attending a conservative Christian school and the Baptist Church it was housed in. Ironically (kind of?) back in the 70's when I was a pre-teen most of the conservative people in the Church and school were Carter supporters, because he was a Christian (and a Baptist). When Reagan came along, a small but vocal contingent were staunch Republicans and Reagan supporters. By the end of the 80's pretty much everyone was a "conservative" and a Republican. I was one of the most vocal.

When I went to college (state university) and was exposed to various views, and even challenged myself about my own Christian beliefs, my thinking changed. I don't think I became a liberal, but by today's standards I definitely am a liberal. I think what happened was that when I challenged my Christian beliefs I had a chance to refine them, be more clear about those beliefs and what they meant. I realized that while evangelization of the Gospel is the Christian's number one job, the example given to us is that we accomplish this largely by serving others, having a spirit of humility to others, showing love to others. And not just to others who we like - the Bible says correctly "Isn't that what the non-Christians do too?" but to show love and serve strangers and even our "enemies". That's difficult. That's radical. That's not even grasped by a lot of Christians, even Christians who read those words in the Bible and then quickly rationalize a way to get around it.

Anyway, that's why today I switched from being a staunch conservative with a narrow mind as a kid to having a more open outlook where I look to God's Word first for my values, even political values. And I have to say it is the "liberals" who more closely match my Christian values. A couple glaring differences like abortion and to some point "gay rights" where I don't align with the liberals; however, I think those issues are influenced by the bigger issues regarding economic fairness and helping all those in need - elderly, children, unemployed, sick, etc.

Well, just thought I'd share with you that I feel we share our experience to a large extent.

 

[The Cadet]

We could, but then it wouldn't be Socialism.

And maybe if people didn't constantly call such things "socialism" at the drop of a hat, we wouldn't have this problem.

Question - is this an issue more of the democrats, or the republicans?

 

[Chesterton]

You made specific assertions about people doing worse by specific measures than in the past. The burden is on you to demonstrate that. As far as 'people' being smart or dumb... half the world is below average.

Fine, if you're of the opinion that U.S. kids are real smart in spite of the national comparisons, fine. But I come from Lake Wobegon, where all are the kids are above average.

 

[Chesterton]

At least I haven't thought about you that way this week, Chez.

It's only Thursday.

Check this out, bro:

I really don't care at all about the rich. I tend to think in terms of time and space, i.e., history and geography. I don't take things for granted. I feel rich 'cause I've got electric light and hot running water at the turn of a knob, luxuries many kings never had, and many people in places today don't have. Much of the comfort and high standard of living I enjoy was made possible by individuals seeking to get rich. Capitalism been bedy bedy good to me.

 

[Aureus]

Fine, if you're of the opinion that U.S. kids are real smart in spite of the national comparisons, fine. But I come from Lake Wobegon, where all are the kids are above average.

So now instead of talking about current US generations versus previous US generations you're wanting to jump to national comparisons? That is an entirely different ball of wax all together.

 

[super animator]

Is it not obvious?

If it were obvious, then I wouldn't be disputing it would I?

 

[super animator]

It's well known that high school kids graduate with poor reading comprehension relative to generations past, and business complains that university grads are often unable to be hired for their lack of skills. I know there are lots of good teachers, but there are way too many bad ones. I know from friends and family in academia. I have a friend from my younger days who's now a professor of literature at a respected university and the guy literally can't even understand a country-western song lyric. I'm sure you've seen the flood of videos of college students who can't answer what nation America declared independence from. And I don't even need to go into the blatant political indoctrination teaching hatred of Western civilization which is rampant.

I don't not want anecdotal evidence, I want actual peer review studies on this.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Should it be up to me if I fund the military?

No, but it should be up to people to how to spend money when helping people.

 

[BrianJK]

No, but it should be up to people to how to spend money when helping people.

What's the difference between this and exerting control over the military?

 

[dogs4thewin]

What's the difference between this and exerting control over the military?

The military us for defense of the nation as opposed to helping people meet their INDIVUAL or even family needs.

 

[BrianJK]

The military us for defense of the nation as opposed to helping people meet their INDIVUAL or even family needs.

Invading Iraq was about the defense of our nation?

 

[dogs4thewin]

Invading Iraq was about the defense of our nation?

Well, it certainly had nothing to do with meeting any one group's needs.

 

[Belk]

The military us for defense of the nation as opposed to helping people meet their INDIVUAL or even family needs.

Our social safety nets are for the good of the nation and apply to all equally. Sorry but you are trying to create a distinction where none exists. You can use your vote to advocate for different policies or you can leave the country but you get to pay your taxes the same as the rest of us.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Our social safety nets are for the good of the nation and apply to all equally. Sorry but you are trying to create a distinction where none exists. You can use your vote to advocate for different policies or you can leave the country but you get to pay your taxes the same as the rest of us.

They apply to all equally ( really they do not because even among those that receive them it is based on need) but that does not mean that they should make for a comfortable living.