Socialism wouldn't realistically work, if it was going to be implemented it would have to be over a very long time... Human greed always kicks in though and then it isn't socialism any more, see for example the Soviet Union and then look how bad off they are now....
[QUOTE=IncogMouse;42250904]Socialism wouldn't realistically work, if it was going to be implemented it would have to be over a very long time... Human greed always kicks in though and then it isn't socialism any more, see for example the Soviet Union and then look how bad off they are now....[/QUOTE]
I dunno there could be a chance that socialism would work. For example, indigenous Australians before European occupation of Australia lived in a society which arguably could be considered socialist, even communist. But in our society today I don't think it would be as successful.
I wouldn't necessarily blame the failure of the Soviet Union on the failures of socialism, although I suppose there is that argument that socialist societies are inherently vulnerable to power hungry people seizing power and twisting 'socialism' for the benefit of the ruling class, an incredible irony.
Errrm. Well there was certainly no government in Indigenous Australia, plus that community is very very small.
We'd need a benevolent leader for it to work but even if it worked out for the first leader what's to say the second stays in line.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;42269827]I dunno there could be a chance that socialism would work. For example, indigenous Australians before European occupation of Australia lived in a society which arguably could be considered socialist, even communist. But in our society today I don't think it would be as successful.
I wouldn't necessarily blame the failure of the Soviet Union on the failures of socialism, although I suppose there is that argument that socialist societies are inherently vulnerable to power hungry people seizing power and twisting 'socialism' for the benefit of the ruling class, an incredible irony.[/QUOTE]
Tribal society is a specific type outside of socialism/capitalism/etc. where the entire group is considered an extension of the family. So resources are shared like they are in the family.
I don't really think of it as a system, none of these ideologies are achievable because they are unverifiable. I don't call what we have now as "capitalism" we just do things and this is how it's turned out and it's always in a state of change. People say "we've never had real socialism", you're right, and we never will, because it's just someone's idea of how the world should be based on nothing tangible. Try getting people to live exactly how it's described in the bible. It doesn't take into account any of the sciences and it tries to make man separate from the laws of the universe by making up mythical boundaries.
a mix of both is the best in my opinion, full on socialism may have been working fine during the time of hunter-gatherers where the groups were small. but in the modern world it probably can't happen.
I'm not generally a Karl Marx fan, but I believe what he said about the market system eventually becoming unsustainable to be true.
I personally like a Nordic-style economy: very high taxes, which I consider a good thing in itself, as it provides for a more equal society and discourages too big a dependence on personal consumption: you don't need to get the newest iPhone to be happy. At the same time, it also gives massive revenue to the state, which can guarantee education, healthcare, welfare, etc. to all its citizens - basic needs much more important than shiny goods. And this actually comes with a citizenry strongly involved in politics - the latest election in Sweden had a 84% turnout. The idea that if the state is large, then it is necessarily distant from the people isn't universally true, and in several cases, the opposite has proven to be true.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
