Another Poll: Will Socialism ever be defeated by America

[Jersay]

Will socialism be defeated by America?

With South America and China and some parts of Asia in the socialist mindset will America ever be able to stop socialism and have its corporate buddies rule over the working man?

No I don't think so.

 

[FiveParadox]

I most definitively think not; I just don't think it's realistic.

 

[I think not]

History says you are both wrong, as well as grumpy.

 

[Jersay]

History says you are both wrong, as well as grumpy.

Nope. socialism is alive and well and who is grumpy?

 

[darkbeaver]

RE: Another Poll: Will So

Scocialism just getting started in your part of the world ITN.

 

[Jersay]

Scocialism just getting started in your part of the world ITN.

The word "socialism" dates back at least to the early nineteenth century. It was first used, self-referentially, in the English language in 1827 to refer to followers of Robert Owen. In France, again self-referentially, it was used in 1832 to refer to followers of the doctrines of Saint-Simon and thereafter by Pierre Leroux and J. Regnaud in l'Encyclopédie nouvelle. Use of the word spread widely and has been used differently in different times and places, both by various individuals and groups that consider themselves socialist and by their opponents. While there is wide variation between socialist groups, nearly all would agree that they are bound together by a common history rooted originally in nineteenth and twentieth-century struggles by industrial and agricultural workers, operating according to principles of solidarity and advocating an egalitarian society, with an economics that would, in their view, serve the broad populace rather than a favored few. Elie Halevy claims that the term "socialism" was coined independently by two groups advocating different ways of organizing society and economics: the Saint-Simonians, and most likely Pierre Leroux, in the years 1831-33, and the followers of Robert Owen, around 1835.

[edit]
A note on usage
Some groups (see below) have called themselves socialist while holding views that most socialists consider antithetical to socialism. The term has also been used by some politicians on the political right as an epithet for certain individuals who do not consider themselves to be socialists and policies that are not considered socialist by their proponents (e.g. referring to all publicly funded medicine as "socialized medicine" or to the United States Democratic Party as "socialist"). This article touches only briefly on those peripheral issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

African socialism
Arab socialism
Socialist feminism
Libertarian socialism
Anarcho-syndicalism
Anarchist communism
Christian socialism
Islamic socialism
Communism (see also Marxism)
Democratic socialism
Transhumanist socialism
International socialism
Syndicalism
Utopian socialism
Guild socialism
Popular Socialism
The socio-political or intellectual movements basing themselves in the Marxist-Socialist tradition can generally be further divided into:

Autonomist Marxism
Council communism
Left communism
Leninism
Luxembourgism
Mao Zedong Thought or "Maoism"
Marxist humanism
Stalinism
Trotskyism
Titoism
Situationism
Juche
Guevarism
Several forms of "socialism" are considered by those further to the left to be reformist or revisionist. These include:

Austromarxism
Evolutionary socialism
Fabianism
Social democracy
Popular Socialism
Yellow socialism
Socialism with Chinese characteristics and other forms of market socialism
Bernsteinism
Kautskyism
Titoism
Labor Zionism

 

[Jersay]

So from the poll, Socialism will not be defeated.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

No, socialism will never be defeated, barring the complete destruction of human civilization as we know it and the loss of all references to it. There are still Nazis, Marxists, Leninists, fascists, etc., around, despite those ideas having been completely discredited.

You can't kill an idea once it's out there.

 

[Jersay]

Poor Dexter, you haven't come over to the right side.

Capitalism isn't working nor is it ever going to work because of the greedy capitalist corporation guys but socialism will win in the end.

 

[Finder]

China is not socialist.... by name only maybe, but it is much closer to a facsist dictatorship then anything else.


Secondly I do not think the aim of the USA is to eliminate socialism as they have worked with social democratic nations in the past, the UK, Canada, France and Germany to name a few.

The swing to the left in Latin america is slightly offset by the swing to the right in Northern Europe and the swing to the right in Canada.

Also the "socialism" in 95% of these nations are closely linked to social democracy or democratic socialism then that of revolutionary socialism, or communism. The fact that all these new socialist, social democratic and labour parties have been elected instead of taking power by revolutionary means is another point. Also within 5 years who doesn't say that they will not just swing right again, as I'd bet we will see some of them do. In a democracy the citizens get to chose between socialism, capitalism and mixes of them both, so no socialism, nor capitalism will be "defeated" as long as you have a funtioning democracy in place.

Thats my two cents

 

[Kreskin]

Those in political control have implemented two massive corporate welfare scam; the number one and two socialist movements on the planet today.

Military socialism. The largest wealth transfer in world history occured in the last four years, whereby the US government issued bonds/debt for transfer to the military industrial complex.

Oil business. Government red tape has, for years, made it difficult for European automakers to introduce 4-cylinder deisels to the North American market. Now that the price of deisel is nearing the price of gasoline the vehicles will miraculously make it to market. North Americans have been raped by the oil industry for years.

Until both of these scams can be addressed and resolved it's simply ludicrous to complain about social insurance programs, no matter what country they are in.

 

[Finder]

corperate welfare is not socialism... Though it is a type of bourgeoisie capitalist kleptocracy of the nations welth is what it is. Helping out the bourgeoisie. In helping the bourgeosie capital and means of productions and making sure these industires do not collasp is not a socialist idea but rather an anti free trade one which is closer to mercantil capitalism then anything else. The only gains to the
proletariat in this would be in the ability to keep there job and the wage they exchange for the labour to which socialists on the left see as the enslavement of the proletariat and thus corperate welfare is just another device capitalists use to keep the proletariat in bondage.

 

[Kreskin]

Kleptocracies having nothing to do with savings industries or jobs. It's about lining pockets. Warren Buffet called Bush's policies welfare for the rich. He hasn't been wrong on much.

 

[Finder]

Re: RE: Another Poll: Will Socialism ever be defeated by Ame

Kleptocracies having nothing to do with savings industries or jobs. It's about lining pockets. Warren Buffet called Bush's policies welfare for the rich. He hasn't been wrong on much.

Well a Kleptocracy in the way that tax money collected from the workering class and the middle classes are used to finiance the rich, in a thinnly vailed sell to the workering class as an excercise in trying to keep jobs in Canada or the USA. Like the heavily subsidized auto indestry. I'd consider that stealing. Also the GST reduction. Honestly 1% does nothing for the working and middle class. You think we will see a reduction in the prices of things. HELL NO, prices will stay the same and the company will eat that 1% as profit and we will end up with numbskulls like Harper saying we can't afford the puplic health care system or that it doesn't work. When you consider that the money recieved from the GST could be used to increase spending into healthcare instead of making the business owners richer!

In no way is coperate welfare, any type of socialism, unless you are using a abstract view of right-wing socialism, in which I still think a capitalist mercantile and tarif based enconmy is still closure to coperate welfare. As it is protectionist in thought at least.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Poor Dexter, you haven't come over to the right side.

How do you get that conclusion from what I wrote? There's no indication in it of which side I'm on, if any, and in fact on this particular issue I'd deny being on any side. I simply made an observation, with some examples, the point being that regardless of its merit or lack of same, once an idea's been widely disseminated out there in the public domain, it's there permanently.

I'd further observe that America as a society doesn't actually know what modern socialism is anyway, and neither do its leaders, so they'll never know whether they've defeated it or not.

 

[Doryman]

For an idea to be "defeated" it has to be wiped from the minds of the entire planet, which is pretty much impossible. One cannot destroy ideas ( though the Socialists of various countries made a good run at it).

Socialism will exist whereever there is a lower-class who want the money/land/sand-dollars of the upper class. Just as capitalism will always exist wherever a person wants to gain whatever he can as an individual.

 

[cortez]

socialism will never be defeated
it may take different forms
but cannot be defeated because it addresses the central human need for a just society

will justice ever be defeated- no

 

[Kreskin]

Re: RE: Another Poll: Will Socialism ever be defeated by Ame

Kleptocracies having nothing to do with savings industries or jobs. It's about lining pockets. Warren Buffet called Bush's policies welfare for the rich. He hasn't been wrong on much.

Well a Kleptocracy in the way that tax money collected from the workering class and the middle classes are used to finiance the rich, in a thinnly vailed sell to the workering class as an excercise in trying to keep jobs in Canada or the USA. Like the heavily subsidized auto indestry. I'd consider that stealing. Also the GST reduction. Honestly 1% does nothing for the working and middle class. You think we will see a reduction in the prices of things. HELL NO, prices will stay the same and the company will eat that 1% as profit and we will end up with numbskulls like Harper saying we can't afford the puplic health care system or that it doesn't work. When you consider that the money recieved from the GST could be used to increase spending into healthcare instead of making the business owners richer!

In no way is coperate welfare, any type of socialism, unless you are using a abstract view of right-wing socialism, in which I still think a capitalist mercantile and tarif based enconmy is still closure to coperate welfare. As it is protectionist in thought at least.

Well it certainly has nothing to do with capitalism. Disallowing free markets and free competition to protect those who line the pockets of politicians is a redistribution of social wealth. What does it have to do with keeping jobs? A free market is quite capable of job creation. And instead of the entire population getting gouged by oil they could support other business models/industries with the extra discretionary income.

 

[Sassylassie]

The "OIL INDUSTRY IS OUT OF CONTROL" the world needs to take a hard look at this industry and start putting safe guards in place to protect third world countries from being raped bare. Nigeria is a prime example of what should be stopped. Can they be stopped controled and held accountable? I doubt it. The Oil Industry is richer/bigger than any existing country, and rules and laws mean nothing to this industry. They destroy, mock and scorn anyone who tries to hold them accountable. Evil pure Evil.

 

[Jersay]

Everyone has made valid points.