Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Why is socialism seen as a 'nice' philosophy? Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tea-Party)
    exaclty thats freedom. Individualism, I don t care if other people are starving, its not my responsibility. To look after my family and my friends is my responsibility but not strangers, and given human nature they also wouldnt care about me. And since when is healthcare and education a universial human right. Its luxury and people living in eu should be lucky to have it.Thats why I makes me so happy to see lazy guys at school be unemploeyed in the future.
    Is it freedom to die in early childhood because your parents are poor and cannot feed you, or have already died from undernourishment or some (possibly curable) illness? Is it freedom not to be able to go to school or university and get a job you're suited for, because you come from a poor family that can't afford it, while some of the children of rich parents get through school thanks to expensive private lessons and are even too lazy to write their dissertations themselves, but get a well-paid job anyway.

    If it's not our responsibility to look after each other, then why is it that we have always formed communities, doing exactly that? Just because those communities have grown to such an extend that most of their members don't know each other anymore doesn't mean their basic purpose has changed. You don't care if others are starving? How strange. I do. Lots of others do. (Why do you think there's charity?) Somehow I always thought that compassion and mutual feelings of responsibility and caring for each other are what makes us human. Without that, we are in no relevant way different from any other animal. To be honest, your point of view is not quite understandable to me. And please don't just assume that all the strangers you don't care about wouldn't care about you either if your places were reversed - that is an unjust accusation.

    Aha, so I guess that one out of four Spanish people is simply lazy, since 25% are unemployed? The same must be true for about 8% of the British and 10% of the French, but only 5% of the Dutch and 4% of the Austrians (wow, we rule!). If laziness is the universal reason for unemployment, it might be interesting to carry out a study about how degrees of laziness vary in different (or not so different) cultures.

    And yes, I am extremely happy to live in the EU and have access to education and health care, which I think are indeed universal human rights.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Socktor)
    Albert Einstein was a socialist when he was 70.
    Well I've got 5 months until my 21st and things are still looking ok, so far anyway.... but I still get the sentiment, conservatism is kind of the more logical, easy to sustain ideology. Because it is so easy to be individualistic lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nick100)
    But an individual is not formed by the government, and politicians are not the arbiter's of society's will.
    Who said they were?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    life expectancy was very short when Stalin was murdering millions in the 1930s
    Answer my question.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    Socialism is based upon the idea that humans won't cooperate with one another, this is why the state has to step in to prevent 'privileged' (read: hardworking) individuals from accumulating too much wealth at the expense of the poor. Socialists see it as their job to stop our innate selfishness in it's tracks so everyone gets a fair deal. Tbh I don't necessarily disagree with this dismal view of human nature, but the problem is because we're flawed those in charge under a socialist regime will end up abusing their power to line their own pockets.

    If socialists truly believed we're naturally cooperative they wouldn't place their faith in the hands of a great big state who's job it is to monitor and control every single economic transaction that takes place. Your interpretation of socialism demonstrates an all too common level of ignorance.
    No, just no. You don't have a clue at all.

    For a start, socialism doesn't necessarily mean the state controls things. There are different views within socialism on the state. Bakunin and the split in the First International etc. If you want to argue on this subject, do so with some knowledge of it!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    But when the state appropriates capital for the benefit of the collective the individual eventually ceases to produce it because it is no longer advantageous to do so.
    Maybe so. However I remember watching this:



    As it suggests, rewarding people only really works for manual labour tasks. Your bucket making example would come under this I'd think. Since manual labourers are usually the lowest earning people in the country I doubt they'd need to pay taxes anyway. Besides, as I mentioned before, primitive societies granted no physical remuneration for labour, yet people still did things. But anyway I think this is strawman argument anyway; I've never said people shouldn't be paid for work (at least until we've unlearned our tendency to demand payment), nor that they shouldn't be allowed to keep that which they produce.

    (Original post by chefdave)
    This is why socialist countries of old were all delipidated and technologically light-years behind their capitalist counterparts.
    Not entirely. The Soviet Union (a state socialist society - not something I support before you assume) did beat the capitalist countries into space and produced quite a lot of medical innovations.

    Also the anarchistic societies in the Spanish Civil War increased production in the factories and agricultural fields.

    (Original post by chefdave)
    Capitalism is nowhere near perfect I totally accept that, but it doesn't mean that 'Marx was right'
    I never said that, who are you quoting?

    (Original post by chefdave)
    or that socialism becomes the de facto alternative.
    Well, I guess we could go back to feudalism.

    (Original post by chefdave)
    There is more than one or two ways of arranging society so that more people get a fairer deal
    But capitalism and socialism are not [whatever the opposite of broad terms is], there are many different forms of both systems.

    (Original post by chefdave)
    This sounds more like the free market. I'm confused.
    Socialism and the free market are not mutually exclusive. Though I personally don't support a free market that doesn't exclude other socialist from supporting it, or practicing it for that matter.

    The difference is that free market socialist economy would be made up purely of sole trader, partnership and cooperative enterprises as they all grant their workers an equal say in decisions and that there would by no ownership for anything that the person isn't using or occupying (so, some CEO living thousands of miles away couldn't own the place you work at).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tea-Party)
    Simple question. Do you think people would actually work in Socialism, I mean all I hear from managers nowadays that the low income poeple work 40 hours to begin with, come late, talk all the time and always protest. Now imagine how much they d work in Socialism, probably nothing.
    Second point against why socialism will NEVER, and it doesnt matter what all the desperate, jealous ignorant lefties tell you, the human is by nature, greedy and selfish.
    Do you think there d be 1000 different types of smartphones (just an example of what capitalistic competition got us) in socialism,no, there d probably wouldnt even be a mobile, why would there be one? And if there would be one than you d have to wait 3 years for it. Not to mention how technological advances would be in Socialsm = 0.
    Besides, only Capitalism is pure freedom. No one can come to your house and tell you that you have to give him something because in his eyes you have too much. But the problem is that socialists are in 99% cases very unintelligent. Thats why it doesnt really make sense to argue with them. It s always such a pain, its like explaining an ignorant stupid child that eating vegetables is good for him.
    You're arguing for a notion of human nature independent of culture and society? How does that work then?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chefdave)
    What you're advocating here is theft. If I spend my time and effort creating a bucket (capital) why should anybody else be free to muscle in on my wealth? Make you're own God damn bucket, stop coveting mine. A consequence of your take on capital is that people will eventually stop producing it, why bother when the benefits will be socialised (stolen) anyway? I really believe the left need to go back to the drawing board on this one and ditch the ideology in favour of ideas that simply work, both in principle and in practice.
    You're gonna make a bucket all by yourself? You're gonna gather all the materials, raw from nature, make all the tools needed with material gathered raw from nature all by yourself, having never ever seen a bucket before?

    No, I don't think so. All human activity is dependent on others.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tea-Party)
    exaclty thats freedom. Individualism, I don t care if other people are starving, its not my responsibility. To look after my family and my friends is my responsibility but not strangers, and given human nature they also wouldnt care about me. And since when is healthcare and education a universial human right. Its luxury and people living in eu should be lucky to have it.Thats why I makes me so happy to see lazy guys at school be unemploeyed in the future.
    Individualism is a dumb philosophy. It just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.

    Presumably you think you were born with all of these opinions, with no outside influence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abc:))

    Someone [it is rumoured to be Churchill] said: “If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.”
    I was a socialist at 20, I'm now 41 and I'm still a socialist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You're arguing for a notion of human nature independent of culture and society? How does that work then?
    I don t get the point you re trying to make (typical left wing). I m sayint that capitalism is an expression of human nature, and socialism is a stupid utopian ( i mean its not even utopian, how horrible must it be to live in a society where everyone is equal, how boring, no dreams and no inspirations). The world would be like uganda with no competition and in socialism there is noooooo competition, competition = no advance.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tea-Party)
    I don t get the point you re trying to make (typical left wing). I m sayint that capitalism is an expression of human nature, and socialism is a stupid utopian ( i mean its not even utopian, how horrible must it be to live in a society where everyone is equal, how boring, no dreams and no inspirations). The world would be like uganda with no competition and in socialism there is noooooo competition, competition = no advance.
    You're arguing that human nature is independent of social influence. Tell me how that would work.

    You think there is no competition in Uganda? What?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You're arguing that human nature is independent of social influence. Tell me how that would work.

    You think there is no competition in Uganda? What?

    OOOOOOOOMMMMMMM****INGGGGOOOOOOO ODDDDDDDDD... why am I arguing with someone like you. You cant even understand, or you just try to twist and turn every of my arguements, a simple metaphora. Idiot. Of course ugandas competition is like **** compared to the US, not even ****, more like fly ****. Its like comparing a ferrari with a bike. It was actually just a little metaphora, but the fact that you pick this insignificant content of my arguement up just shows how stupid you are.

    "You're arguing that human nature is independent of social influence." When did I say this. OMG what do you want? Everything I wrote makes completely sense, for intelligent people at least. Please stop wasting my time and join the dirt of society called "occupy wall street".
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    I was a socialist at 20, I'm now 41 and I'm still a socialist.
    Thats why you are most definetely stupid ( there were also other indications that you are below the average intelligence which is also bloody low, considering the fact that my ine is 138.)

    BTW I think you re a little bit too old for this forum with 41, perhaps you re pedophile, something with which most lefties probably dont have a problem as we all love each other soooo much. aaarrgghh

    BTW I am disgusted by how left wing you are. It actually makes me sick.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thecrimsonidol)
    People will always want more than what they need. Even in generations to come uner your model, people will still want more when they can get it. Socialism is an idea that will never work because humans are naturally greedy. Capitalism is an outlet for this.

    I don't see that we owe a formal obligation to each other. I believe we should be provided with an equal starting point - free education (up to say 18), free healthcare, and a very minimal amount of welfare (to be tightly controlled). After that, let people do business and gain what they wish.


    No man is an island,
    Entire of itself.
    Each is a piece of the continent,
    A part of the main.
    If a clod be washed away by the sea,
    Europe is the less.
    As well as if a promontory were.
    As well as if a manor of thine own
    Or of thine friend's were.
    Each man's death diminishes me,
    For I am involved in mankind.
    Therefore, send not to know
    For whom the bell tolls,
    It tolls for thee.
    John Donne
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You're gonna make a bucket all by yourself? You're gonna gather all the materials, raw from nature, make all the tools needed with material gathered raw from nature all by yourself, having never ever seen a bucket before?

    No, I don't think so. All human activity is dependent on others.
    Yes but your philosophy that "all human activity is dependent on others" makes it virtually impossible to identify who's resonsible for adding the value.

    Lets say that I am capable of making a bucket all by myself but for some reason I cannot make the handle. How would I satisfy my need for a handle? Well we could have a free market and see what turns up. One handle maker might offer me a handle in exchange for two buckets, another may only demand one, so if I was to accept the offer of the 2nd trader in order to get my hands on a bucket with a handle I'd have to make two buckets: one for myself and another to trade with the handle maker. This is how the economy works on a very simplified level, but even when we scale it up it still becomes possible to work out who's added what.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    You're arguing that human nature is independent of social influence. Tell me how that would work.

    You think there is no competition in Uganda? What?
    Socialism keeps the weak alive........

    Does a Lion eat a Zebra? Yes- so why do we pay the poor to have kids?

    EDIT In fact because the poor breed more than the wealthy- eventually the "weak" will easily outnumber the "fittest"....
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kibalchich)
    I was a socialist at 20, I'm now 41 and I'm still a socialist.
    Yah, my point isn't that there are no intelligent socialists over the age of 40. My point is that conservatism is seen as logical/calculated/functioning, socialism is seen as compassionate/desirable/'nice'

    You might disagree that this is how they are generally seen or represented. But that was my point, that quote is not meant to be taken literally, at least, I highly doubt it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tea-Party)
    OOOOOOOOMMMMMMM****INGGGGOOOOOOO ODDDDDDDDD... why am I arguing with someone like you. You cant even understand, or you just try to twist and turn every of my arguements, a simple metaphora. Idiot. Of course ugandas competition is like **** compared to the US, not even ****, more like fly ****. Its like comparing a ferrari with a bike. It was actually just a little metaphora, but the fact that you pick this insignificant content of my arguement up just shows how stupid you are.

    "You're arguing that human nature is independent of social influence." When did I say this. OMG what do you want? Everything I wrote makes completely sense, for intelligent people at least. Please stop wasting my time and join the dirt of society called "occupy wall street".
    You said it here

    "the human is by nature, greedy and selfish"

    This appears to be saying that there is such a thing as "human nature" that is a constant across all times, societies and cultures. One formed in the abstract, rather than grounded in actually existing concrete conditions.

    Now, instead of spluterring insults over the screen, you could instead think about what I'm saying and attempt to engage with it.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheHairyArmenian)
    You're an idiot. Go read any political philosophy book.
    What a great reposte! Now go take a lie down and rest your enormous brain.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
General election 2017 on TSR
Register to vote

Registering to vote?

Check out our guide for everything you need to know

Manifesto snapshots

Manifesto Snapshots

All you need to know about the 2017 party manifestos

Party Leader questions

Party Leader Q&A

Ask political party leaders your questions

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.