508 replies to this topic

[xanadu]

(xanadu)
QUOTE
How do you figure socialism is going to lead to a reduction of work hours and stress?

That's the standard assumption of most serious socialists. I've seen it crop up in the literature time and time again.

Assumptions are not facts. About the only place socialism/communism works is in a tiny unit where the participants are united and commited by a philosophy, creed or relationship. A good example is the family. Each member cares for each other (hopefully) and the parents take care of the kids often beyond childhood. They may pay their way through college and bail them out when they get into trouble. The kids may take care of the elders when they become frail. Even in families this often breaks down.

Beyond the family unit, soc/com only has worked in small communities such as hippie communes in the 50's, 60's and 70's, in monasteries, kibutzes and so on. Even in those units the soc/com breaks down unless a strict discipline is imposed by a government like body. Human nature rears it's head and work does not get done unless people are forced to do it. Assuming that soc/com will work in society as a whole is a fantasy, fairy tale type belief. Human nature assures that it will not work.

[william7]

(xanadu)
QUOTE
How do you figure socialism is going to lead to a reduction of work hours and stress?

That's the standard assumption of most serious socialists. I've seen it crop up in the literature time and time again.

Assumptions are not facts. About the only place socialism/communism works is in a tiny unit where the participants are united and commited by a philosophy, creed or relationship. A good example is the family. Each member cares for each other (hopefully) and the parents take care of the kids often beyond childhood. They may pay their way through college and bail them out when they get into trouble. The kids may take care of the elders when they become frail. Even in families this often breaks down.

Beyond the family unit, soc/com only has worked in small communities such as hippie communes in the 50's, 60's and 70's, in monasteries, kibutzes and so on. Even in those units the soc/com breaks down unless a strict discipline is imposed by a government like body. Human nature rears it's head and work does not get done unless people are forced to do it. Assuming that soc/com will work in society as a whole is a fantasy, fairy tale type belief. Human nature assures that it will not work.

So then, shouldn't we continue to try to overcome "human nature" and establish the perfect Utopian community necessary for obtaining long life and happiness? May be the hippie communes, monasteries, and kibbutzim were doing something wrong or leaving some necessary element(s) out of their program and this is why they failed. In order to succeed, certain things need to be done just right. The people need to be educated for it just right.

You're not one of those people that has hope for genetically modifying human nature or human aggression are you? I don't trust medical science to be able to do something like that successfully without negative side effects. Psychotropics, lobotomy, and electroshock were failures in too many cases.

[xanadu]

So then, shouldn't we continue to try to overcome "human nature" and establish the perfect Utopian community necessary for obtaining long life and happiness?

Maybe we should teach insects not to eat our crops? That may be more doable. Maybe we can teach criminals not to steal, kill and so on?

I don't trust medical science to be able to do something like that successfully without negative side effects. Psychotropics, lobotomy, and electroshock were failures in too many cases.

But surely you have the answer.

[william7]

(xanadu)

Maybe we can teach criminals not to steal, kill and so on?

So long as it's done in an equitable way without excluding big business and big government who are responsible for greater crimes than the small time criminal.

But surely you have the answer

I'm working on it.

[william7]

Look at the observation advancedatheist has made here. Makes another excellent point against capitalism.

[AaronCW]

Name a country (not commune) where socialism has ever been voluntary.  Wealth transfer mandated by law has always been the essence of socialism.  If you are truly advocating a voluntary system, you should find a different name for it.

The closest example that comes to mind is England. They voted themselves into a mire of social programs that have led to many of their best minds (in theoretical medicine, professionals, etc.), to leave England in search of freedom, a phenomenon commonly known as 'brain drain'. This action should properly be labeled as suicide.

Assumptions are not facts. About the only place socialism/communism works is in a tiny unit where the participants are united and commited by a philosophy, creed or relationship.

Agreed, Socialism/Communism is only acceptable when every member participates on a voluntary basis. Such a system cannot be imposed upon an entire nation, even if a majority of the population desires it. It is never morally acceptable for the majority to violate the rights of a minority (and vice versa).

Edited by rasputin, 18 December 2006 - 09:12 AM.

[william7]

The closest example that comes to mind is England. They voted themselves into a mire of social programs that have led to many of their best minds (in theoretical medicine, professionals, etc.), commonly known as 'brain drain'. This action should properly be labeled as suicide.

But this was "social programs" and not socialism/communism. England still had a ruling class, a monetary system, and wage slavery. This is no where near what Jesus Christ and the early Christian Church taught and practiced or what Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels advocated. Notice this description of socialism in "What is Socialism?", by the Socialist Labor Party. Does is sound like England had anything close to that?

Agreed, Socialism/Communism is only acceptable when every member participates on a voluntary basis. Such a system cannot be imposed upon an entire nation, even if a majority of the population desires it. It is never morally acceptable for the majority to violate the rights of a minority (and vice versa).

But that's exactly what the minority capitalist class is doing to the majority working class. They're denying them the fundamental right to real progress to practice true religion. They've imposed on the working class politico-legal systems and false religious systems that are ineffective and hinder true progress. There comes a time when bad things must change for the good of all.

[bgwowk]

Elijah3, if you are truly advocating a voluntary system of personal wealth relinquishment for religious reasons, please stop being an apologist for socialism/communism. "Opting out" is not allowed within a socialist jurisdiction. Socialism/communism are systems in which wealth is taken from people at the point of a gun. There are no benign versions of either.

[william7]

(bgwowk)

Elijah3, if you are truly advocating a voluntary system of personal wealth relinquishment for religious reasons, please stop being an apologist for socialism/communism.  "Opting out" is not allowed within a socialist jurisdiction.  Socialism/communism are systems in which wealth is taken from people at the point of a gun.  There are no benign versions of either.

True, Marxist communism has been a failure and can't work without God and the Bible being involved. There is, however, still much truth to Marxism. The Socialist Labor Party program is to educate the worker to take control of the means of production through democratic means, not through violence.

Being a scientist, you should have an interest in not having capitalism rule over you through a system of wages. Don't you think a monetary reward for your work to be some what demeaning? In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels said:

"The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the lawyer, the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers."

May be in the you'll have the opportunity to set up a cryonics laboratory during the Millennium without any financial gain being provided. Instead of for money, your work would be done as a service to God and your brothers in Christ. Would you participate under such circumstances?

[bgwowk]

Only if Christ himself collects the products of my labor.

[sw4qw]

The problem with all of this, as was already stated, is "human nature".

Almost every system of government ever proposed or practiced has had the potential to work very well, and solve the majority of humanity's problems. In theory.

Just like here on a forum people can speak intelligently and behave like rational creatures, a government can have the same appearance on paper. Its when you cross the line from forum chat to real encounters, and from white paper government to the real world of politics that the veil of reason is lifted.

People are hateful, mistrusting, and other things so vile that there are no words to properly describe them. And this goes from the top to the bottom. All races, religions, classes and creeds.

We may speak intelligently, but we are not. And we are not getting any better. But if it makes you feel better to think there might be a way to make it right, by all means, dream on.

[mitkat]

Mitkat, you have some points but you get off into hysterics

Oh man...I stopped reading this thread, and a bomb gets dropped. I'm sorry Xanadu, coming from you this means nothing.

[william7]

People are hateful, mistrusting, and other things so vile that there are no words to properly describe them. And this goes from the top to the bottom. All races, religions, classes and creeds.

We may speak intelligently, but we are not. And we are not getting any better. But if it makes you feel better to think there might be a way to make it right, by all means, dream on.

I think most, if not all, cultural progress was based on dreams realized. People had dreams at night or during the day then put the ideas from those dreams into practice. Leonardo da Vinci put his dream of a flying machine on paper in the 1500s, but it wasn't until much later, when the conditions were right, that other people dreamed up ways to make the flying machine actually work. And people continued to dream up further improvements as time went on.

So why can't people dream up ways to refashion society and educate the people to live without hate, mistrust, and vile deeds? There's plenty of material on paper for people to dream about and work with. The Bible is full of such material. I don't believe man's character is totally immutable to change in this respect. In fact, the ethnographic record shows that there has been whole societies of people who have lived in an egalitarian and cooperative way without the hate, the mistrust, and the vile deeds you mention.

You're a participant on a website where people exchange information and ideas on achieving immortality, a very lofty goal. You should be more optimistic.

[william7]

sw4qw, this old Beatles classic sums it all up. .

This is a better video than the above.
http://www.youtube.c...related&search=

Edited by elijah3, 24 December 2006 - 01:03 AM.

[xanadu]

Oh man...I stopped reading this thread, and a bomb gets dropped. I'm sorry Xanadu, coming from you this means nothing.

You claimed that in the usa the poor were left to die in the streets. Now you make a personal attack against me when I pointed out your error. I am dissapointed in you, I expected better.

[ledgf]

There are no capitalist nations today... the US has what, 45% of the GNP sucked off by government? There are no real socialists anymore, either... any legitimate socialist would demand a totally capitalist nation as a control group:
http://www.strike-th...er/walker3.html

All we have now is a variety of scam artists.

[william7]

Doesn't make any sense to me ledgf. Socialism seeks to do away with all forms of exploitation and oppression irregardless of what brand name it goes by. Socialism wants to abolish private property and the monetary system. Check out the websites at http://www.slp.org/r...tm/siu_ism.html and http://worldsocialis...title=Main_Page.

[AaronCW]

Doesn't make any sense to me ledgf. Socialism seeks to do away with all forms of exploitation and oppression irregardless of what brand name it goes by. Socialism wants to abolish private property and the monetary system. Check out the websites at http://www.slp.org/r...tm/siu_ism.html and http://worldsocialis...title=Main_Page.

It's nice that you want to do that, but that is not what Socialism seeks to do, or is capable of doing. Socialism can only strip people of their rights, deprive them of their freedom of choice, and grant government officials the power to dispose of people's lives and property.

It is interesting to me that we can have a calm and polite exchange of ideas, while in reality the ideas you advocate are a direct threat to my life, my ambitions, and the ambitions of anyone interested in achieving the science that could potentially increase human lifespan. I must admit that you appear to me as totally intransigent in your political and religious beliefs, and I would be lying if I said that I didn’t regard you as a potentially dangerous person. This, of course, cannot be interpreted as a threat, and I am glad of your contribution to this forum as it has encouraged others that are only mildly inclined toward such evil ideas to come out of the woodwork.

[william7]

Doesn't make any sense to me ledgf. Socialism seeks to do away with all forms of exploitation and oppression irregardless of what brand name it goes by. Socialism wants to abolish private property and the monetary system. Check out the websites at http://www.slp.org/r...tm/siu_ism.html and http://worldsocialis...title=Main_Page.

It's nice that you want to do that, but that is not what Socialism seeks to do, or is capable of doing. Socialism can only strip people of their rights, deprive them of their freedom of choice, and grant government officials the power to dispose of people's lives and property.

It is interesting to me that we can have a calm and polite exchange of ideas, while in reality the ideas you advocate are a direct threat to my life, my ambitions, and the ambitions of anyone interested in achieving the science that could potentially increase human lifespan. I must admit that you appear to me as totally intransigent in your political and religious beliefs, and I would be lying if I said that I didn’t regard you as a potentially dangerous person. This, of course, cannot be interpreted as a threat, and I am glad of your contribution to this forum as it has encouraged others that are only mildly inclined toward such evil ideas to come out of the woodwork.

I take it you're an antisocial type then? I favor socialism based on a Biblical model as opposed to a Marxist/atheist model. I'm against forcing this on anybody through violence.

I'm currently assisting a small group of religious people establish a communal living program based on the early Christian Church model in Acts. We don't own any guns and we're not engaged in any political protests.

From my understanding, the socialist organizations I provided links to above are for establishing socialism through democratic means, not through violence. They seek to educate workers so that they can take control of the means of production once they're democratically put in power. This is the way our government/political system is set up. They've had candidates for various political office run on the socialist/communist ticket in the past. They had a socialist major elected to office in Milwaukee back in the 1920s or 30s. It's not all violence you know?

[bgwowk]

From my understanding, the socialist organizations I provided links to above are for establishing socialism through democratic means, not through violence. They seek to educate workers so that they can take control of the means of production once they're democratically put in power. This is the way our government/political system is set up. They've had candidates for various political office run on the socialist/communist ticket in the past. They had a socialist major elected to office in Milwaukee back in the 1920s or 30s. It's not all violence you know?

Once again, voluntary communal living is not socialism. No form of socialism, democratic or otherwise, has ever been voluntary. If a majority votes for a socialist government, participation of the minority is NOT optional. It is backed by force. A gang of thugs is a gang of thugs. Being a majority of thugs doesn't excuse it.

Be an advocate of voluntary selfless living if you wish, but don't be thug by defending socialism, which intrinsically uses threats of violence to enforce "selflessness".

[william7]

Once again, voluntary communal living is not socialism. No form of socialism, democratic or otherwise, has ever been voluntary. If a majority votes for a socialist government, participation of the minority is NOT optional. It is backed by force. A gang of thugs is a gang of thugs. Being a majority of thugs doesn't excuse it.

Be an advocate of voluntary selfless living if you wish, but don't be thug by defending socialism, which intrinsically uses threats of violence to enforce "selflessness".

I've never heard of a distinction being made between socialists who use democratic political process or violent revolutionary tactics as being exclusively entitled to the name socialists and those who practice voluntary communal living without a monetary system not being entitled to the name socialist or communist. Can you direct me to any literature that makes this distinction?

The military and the police use force and violence, just like any thugs do, to enforce the status quo for capitalists and their hangers on. What's the difference? Capitalists and their supporters want to hang on to their wealth and special privileges at all costs. In fact, they'll use violence on innocent people just to further their ambitions and satisfy their greed for more wealth and greater privilege.

[bgwowk]

No government calling itself socialist has ever allowed its citizens the freedom to opt out of the socialist system. No movement advocating socialist government has ever had "opting out" in its platform. Every time you utter the word "socialist", and especially when you point to organizations promoting socialism, coercion is implicit.

Think about it. Americans generally hate socialism, but are accepting of religious communes in their midst. Why? Because relinquishment of wealth and cooperative living by those who choose to is not what bothers them. It's *forced* relinquishment of wealth that they oppose.

If voluntary communal living is what you are really advocating, then you place an enormous and unnecessary burden upon yourself by calling your philosophy socialism. It would be like a philosophy of dedicated hard work under a banner calling itself fascism, blithely ignoring all the other ideology that goes along with that label.

Edited by bgwowk, 31 December 2006 - 06:40 AM.

[william7]

If voluntary communal living is what you are really advocating, then you place an enormous and unnecessary burden upon yourself by calling your philosophy socialism. It would be like a philosophy of dedicated hard work under a banner calling itself fascism, blithely ignoring all the other ideology that goes along with that label.

I think you might have a good point there. May be I'll just have to call it an essential part of real or true Christianity.

However, I see a strong possibility of some brand of involuntary socialism being forced on the public by the electorate in the near future due to global warming and government corruption and mismanagement. All it will take is a series of global warming related disasters and voters might opt for a more simplified lifestyle that only socialism can deliver. A few years ago, I read a United Nations report, by its Environment Programme, that implied this as a possible scenario.

[AaronCW]

The military and the police use force and violence, just like any thugs do, to enforce the status quo for capitalists and their hangers on. What's the difference? Capitalists and their supporters want to hang on to their wealth and special privileges at all costs. In fact, they'll use violence on innocent people just to further their ambitions and satisfy their greed for more wealth and greater privilege.

The military and police are two fundamental and necessary components of governing any society, even a completely free one, in the interest of protecting citizens from criminals and foreign invaders. If a business or corporation uses force than they are criminals and are subject to penalty under law (this issue is somewhat obscured by government-backed monopolies, such as most electricity companies). I fully agree that companies do not deserve special privileges, just as no group does (including the poor).

BTW, I am anything but an antisocial person. The benefits of societal living for humanity are immeasurable, as are the consequences of stripping even one individual of any one of their rights.

As I said before, you seem to be genuinely devoted to the cause of human welfare. The project you are involved in is something that I fully respect your right to do, and many people would see value in such a model of living. The danger is, and I hope that you can appreciate it, is that Socialism, as a form of government, can never mirror what you hope to achieve, and that physical force (even in the context of a majority vote) is a necessary and integral component of Socialism.

[bgwowk]

elijah3 wrote:

I think you might have a good point there. May be I'll just have to call it an essential part of real or true Christianity.

You could just call it Christian Communal Living, or something like that.

As an aside, I know a staunch advocate of laissez faire capitalism who spent part of his life living in a commune and enjoyed it. There is a world of difference between voluntary communities and enforced communal living. Monasteries and convents, which some people find fulfilling, require voluntary hard work without personal compensation. Involuntary hard work without personal compensation is a forced labor camp.

Edited by bgwowk, 31 December 2006 - 07:31 PM.

[william7]

You could just call it Christian Communal Living

I'm going to talk to the pastor here and see what he thinks. I'm pretty sure he'll approve of that.

Monasteries and convents, which some people find fulfilling, require voluntary hard work without personal compensation. Involuntary hard work without personal compensation is a forced labor camp.

Another problem with monasteries is that families and children don't receive the benefits of communal living. Their model of communal living is severely flawed. The kibbutzniks in Israel did a closer to perfect job when they were at their zenith in my opinion.

The military and police are two fundamental and necessary components of governing any society, even a completely free one, in the interest of protecting citizens from criminals and foreign invaders.

Both the military and the police do a very poor job of protecting anyone. All you have to do is watch the news. Their misbehaviour is much worse than what actually comes to light. A very large percentage is successfully covered up.

As I said before, you seem to be genuinely devoted to the cause of human welfare. The project you are involved in is something that I fully respect your right to do, and many people would see value in such a model of living. The danger is, and I hope that you can appreciate it, is that Socialism, as a form of government, can never mirror what you hope to achieve, and that physical force (even in the context of a majority vote) is a necessary and integral component of Socialism.

Thanks for the respect. I'm going to give what you and bgwowk said serious consideration. You've both made excellent points about involuntary socialism being bad. You wouldn't even approve of forced socialism in order to save the people from global warming disaster?

[bgwowk]

You wouldn't even approve of forced socialism in order to save the people from global warming disaster?

Environmental issues are often classic "tragedy of the commons" situations. When behaviors of individuals contribute infinitesimally to problems that become serious on large scales, the usual solution is to impose taxes and penalties on those behaviors to incentivize alternatives. There is no need to have governments take over entire economies to have that happen.

[william7]

Environmental issues are often classic "tragedy of the commons" situations. When behaviors of individuals contribute infinitesimally to problems that become serious on large scales, the usual solution is to impose taxes and penalties on those behaviors to incentivize alternatives. There is no need to have governments take over entire economies to have that happen.

It may take fundamental change that only a socialist society can bring to avert a major global warming catastrophe. Imposing taxes and penalties has never worked well in history. Punishment has always been notoriously ineffective. See http://en.wikipedia....ner#Behaviorism.

[bgwowk]

Imposing taxes and penalties has never worked well in history. Punishment has always been notoriously ineffective.

We'll make a capitalist out of you yet, elijah3.

[william7]

We'll make a capitalist out of you yet, elijah3.

With the global warming and all the fires will there be time? See http://www.time.com/...2006/heat_wave/, http://www.time.com/...06/heat_wave_2/, http://www.biblegate...-3;&version=31;

Malachi 4:1-3
The Day of the LORD
1 "Surely the day is coming; it will burn like a furnace. All the arrogant and every evildoer will be stubble, and that day that is coming will set them on fire," says the LORD Almighty. "Not a root or a branch will be left to them. 2 But for you who revere my name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings. And you will go out and leap like calves released from the stall. 3 Then you will trample down the wicked; they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day when I do these things," says the LORD Almighty.