ADSactly Education - On Socialism
On Socialism
I have occasionally been accused of being a Socialist. I am not, under any definition of the word.
As you can see, Socialism is generally considered in political terms. The utopian version would have every single one of us be a willing worker in a state-owned industry. The dystopian version would have every one of us as a slave to the state.
There seem to be as many forms of Socialism as there are Socialists.
Major Types of Socialism
Marxist Socialism is characterized by total control and ownership of business by the state. Most who follow the Marxist vein advocate revolution and forced control by the state. Karl Marx himself believed that Socialism was a waypoint on the journey to Communism as the ultimate theory and government.
Market Socialism implies either public ownership and management or worker cooperative control of the means of production. There could also be a hybrid combination of the two in a single economy. The theory that the market determines what to produce and how much to avoid shortages and excesses. When the control is primarily vested in the state the resulting profits can reduce or eliminate taxes on the individual.
China and Vietnam both fit mostly into Market Socialism though they are sometimes described as State Capitalist systems.
Major Forms of Socialism
In the broad framework of Socialism, there are several forms of ownership recognized.
Socialist Planned Economy features a centralized government agency that is in charge of all production. Decisions on what and how much to produce are all done at a national level. Workers may or may not have any input on these decisions.
State-Directed Socialism has a central agency that is ultimately in charge but allows for local decisions on quantity administered by managers or worker councils. Some local or worker ownership is possible under this form.
Decentralized Planned Economy features ‘bottom-up’ planning and decision making allowing for local or worker control and ownership of production. The implication of this form is that all decisions are made in a democratic manner by the workers either directly or through councils.
Most Socialist theory and practice date to the early part of the 19th Century when theoretical models were widely suggested and debated. Almost endless models were suggested as the answer to ‘perfect socialism’.
Practical theory ranges from reform of Capitalism to make it ‘fairer’ to complete revolutionary overthrow of the existing government and implementation of State Controlled Socialism.
The Best Side Of Socialism
Inherent Fairness
Any Socialist system is inherently fair to all. Reward is based on overall production of the group and each member of the group is treated fairly.
Collective Decisions
The majority decides the course and it is in the best interest of all involved. Production is optimized and the producers in the economy are rewarded for their production. Every worker in the entire system is cared for cradle to grave.
Lack of Stress
There is no stress on any individual in the Socialist economy. Decisions are made by the collective mind and there is no need for any individual to worry. Clothing and housing are the same for all, with no variation. No stress.
Inherent Problems In Socialism
Termination of Individual Rights
These range from the simple loss of self-determination to death. Marxists believe that people dying is a necessary part of the process. It is estimated that 10 million died in the Russian Revolution and 60 million in the Chinese Revolution.
Personal Stagnation
In a life fully planned and implemented there is no reason at all for individuals to improve in any way. The decisions are all made for the individual so there is no reason to read or study or improve in any way. The workers are simply that and have no way forward to be anything more. Whether you work in a factory or an office or a store you are fully cared for and there is no reason for you to be more than you are today.
Loss of Freedom
In a system with no self-determination, freedom is severely curtailed. In a very liberal Socialism, you may be allowed to decide the Church you attend and what you will eat (within budgetary and supply constraints) and very little more. In a Marxist Socialism, even those decisions are made for you.
Lack of Innovation
Unless your job is to wonder about and research changes to any part of the system there is no reward for doing things better. Nothing changes and there is no reason for things to change. Personal innovation is at best discouraged at worst prohibited.
Minority Rights
There are none allowed for in Socialism. Where everything is aimed at and counts on the cooperation of the majority the minority any differences cease to exist. Culture, beliefs and customs are the provinces of the majority. There can be no minority.
Too bad for you if you are mentally or physically disabled in any way. The best, the very best you can hope for is compassionate care from whatever pool the majority sees fit to give you. Sequestration and death are a distinct possibility for those individuals in most Socialist constructs.
Socialism is generally regarded as a political system or a potential answer to a problem. There are obviously Socialist governments but almost all governments have some sort of Socialist leaning. Or do they?
Social
Though part of the root word, social and socialism are barely related. Social has individuals working together to produce a better outcome for all. Social is the urge that has led to the rise of civilization in general. Why do we gather in cities and nations? For mutual defense and protection in the beginning, and to meet mutual goals today. We all want a better life for us and our children and the ability to cooperate and share is critical to those primary goals.
In the US many aspects of our daily lives involve social solutions to problems of civilization. Transportation, Fire and Police protection, water and sewer all involve social rather than Socialist solutions. Taxes pay for these essential services and all are regulated and administered by government agencies.
Canada is much the same except that they add health care to the mix. Their health care is 100% funded by the Federal Government using tax revenue. But there are choices. If patients so desire they can go to private physicians. Physicians are not directed by the government to follow specific forms and protocols and they are free to take their practice private if they are inclined to. It is very much social medicine but probably not Socialized. There are restrictions and requirements to be certain but it seems a system that works very well.
_in_Cambodia,_leads_a_discussion_on_the_Right_to_Health_for_entertainment_workers_-Article25_(15304906428).jpg){kind=link}
The Result of Socialism
Socialism, more than any other governmental form, seems to lend itself to Totalitarian regimes. Leaders of purely Socialist systems tend to be dictators and not freely elected.
The next part of this series will deal with Capitalism. Good, bad, indifferent. In the meantime, I’d like to ask if the readers agree or disagree with Socialist principles and actions. How say you Adsactly?
I leaned heavily on Wikipedia for this post. Particularly for the types and forms of Socialism that you can find here and here.
Authored by: @bigtom13
Adsactly is a society for freethinking people. Interested? Click Here to join our Discord channel.
Witness proposal is here:
Go To Steem Witness Page
In the bottom of the page type: adsactly-witness and press vote.
Use small letters and no "@" sign. Or, click here to vote directly!
Thank you!
Nice post..for me Socialism is the idea that you can reduce misery in this world by redistributing wealth. Socialism redistributes other people’s wealth. If you give away your own wealth, it’s charity.
The idea of equality is central. People are born unequal. Therefore, to attain equality, the disadvantaged people must have preferential treatment. The costs of that must be covered by more privileged members of society.
Justice is another central tenet of Socialism. It means that wealth, or other advantages that people possess through luck, inheritance, or hard work, do not make these people more entitled to anything than other members of society.
Both justice and inequality are abstract constructs that people continuously negotiate among ourselves. Therefore, the definition of these things is fluid and always reflects interests and preferences of competing groups. The most usual definitions of Socialism, equality and justice are a compromise between the most influential groups at the moment.
Well said. It is one of the inherent problems with Socialism. Somebody has to pay.
I like your point when it comes to social vs socialism. In theory, if socialism does what it supposed to do, it redistributes the wealth so that there is no economic inequality in society, including health care for everyone, pension... In capitalism, there is ownership or business owners and there are workers. Usually owners become rich and workers compete for wages. Capitalism is about growth and how to get rich and socialism is about redistribution. It’s clear that Socialism and Capitalism are literally opposite economy policies. However, both if not led properly can lead to disaster. You can clearly see the example in Venezuela when it comes to socialism which led to dictatorship and then led to collapse. On the other hand if capitalism gets out of hand, rich become richer and eventually country can destroy itself as well. In US it’s just inevitable when the country collapses due to its debt and derivatives issues. Than of course there is social democracy which is in other word capitalism, but unlike socialism or capitalism it does allow private ownership, but it is socialism because it taxes the rich and redistributes the wealth to maintain equality. You could call it hybrid of both.
All of them can work well if handled properly. Unfortunately we are humans and eventually greed gets involved and evil replaces good no matter what we do.
My conclusion if I had to choose Socialism or Capitalism I would choose social democracy.
I'm really glad you caught that difference between Socialism and social. All societies need to be social in some ways. Even the Anarchists need to figure out how to keep the traffic lights lit.
You are right. Any form of government can eat it's own tail and end up in a mess.
Thanks for a very thoughtful comment.
A good and educativr article @adsactly and @bigtom13. Thanks for sharing this with us!
Even though I am passionately curious about almost everything, politics and -isms are things that I don't want to know a lot about. Throughout the history, people are experiencing with all -isms and it brought us almost nowhere. Socialism, comminism, marxism, slaveism, idiotism... I really believe thst these systems are made just to brainwash us to think that there is no other way, like love, respect, empathy, and other non-ism words... In every system until now, there were homeless people. Until these -isms solve the homelessness problem, I will stay away from it. For the most part, I believe that in the age of the information, being stupid is a choice. So, I hope we will find some good -ism and start to live a life that we were gifted, not this shaped up-boxed up life...
Thanks Tom for sharing this with us. Good morning read ;) Have a great day and coffee :)
I was a Political Science major in College. I thought of it primarily as history without all the pesky dates. It was, and continues to be, the ramifications of history. So, it interests me.
I agree that what ever form of government you are under tends to continue (Is that the second law of matter and energy?) and that most people are pretty convinced that their particular form of governance is superior. How we treat the poorest members of our society is truly the mark of a government.
Thanks for a very insightful comment.
This is completely the truth! I'm a Venezuelan who likes to read and get informed about the past socialist governments and regimes in history, and it's weird when you realize that everything Karl Marx said in his communist Manifesto is happening here in Venezuela and has happened in other socialist countries.
The first plank of the Communist Manifesto states: "Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose."
This is exactly what this regime is been doing since Chavez was in power. They are either forcing companies to leave the country by imposing sanctions and impossible rules they have to follow, or just directly expropriating the company (illegally), which 99.9% of the times will stop the production.
The fifth plank of the Communist Manifesto also says: "Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."
The biggest bank in Venezuela Banesco is now being taken away by the regime. Their main goal is to control the transactions and limit the amount of money people are allowed to spend. Many Venezuelans survive by receiving dollars from abroad or making them either working on the internet or re-selling stuff in Colombia. This is not convenient for the government because it makes them lose control over the population. Day by day, the limits decrease and the people who convert our dollars to Bolivares (including SBD), are afraid of being imprisoned and leave the country.
There are some people who say this is not socialism, but if you read all the 10 rules of the Marx's red book, you will realize that all of that is being accomplished here in Venezuela. The countries that proclaim to be socialists and don't follow these rules, are NOT socialist, as simple as that.
The centralization is never a good thing. Everyone must have the rights to decide what they want and the variety of ideologies is something that should always exist.
Finally, I think it's worth for foreigner people to know that tomorrow there are elections, but the regime knows how to play. ALL of the candidates are people from the government pretending to be opposition, in addition to the fact that the regulating entity of the votes (CNE) is Chavista, and they can easily fake the results, at the end of the day, they don't allow the foreign community to check the veracity of the elections.
Sorry for my bad broken English. I had to explain this, I hope my ideas ae understood.
Thank you @bigtom13 and @adsactly for the support!
Marx himself believed Socialism to be simply a way point to Communism.
Thank you for a wonderful 'on the ground' explanation of the process in Venezuela, and your thoughtful comment.
Just want to note that you made an interesting and constructive message. For me, socialism is not an empty word. Socialism is the environment in which my ancestors lived and we live. In fact, this picture of government which was supposed to level the rights of citizens and make their life much better. There are some positive aspects. But alas, this is not enough. The positive sides completely depreciate against the negative sides. That is, this is more bad than good. It's my opinion.
Socialism amazes strong leaders. Strong leaders want more power. When they strengthen their power, they become usurpers. This happens almost always. We can study the history carefully and see it. Simply put - socialism in the literal sense is synonymous with totalitarianism. (semantic synonym). I do not think that "real" socialism has ever been achieved. In fact, the idea of socialism is utopian.
You are right, every ruler creates his own form of socialism. But the basic ideas remain the same. As in other and the result.
I liked the article! It is interestingly described. Thank you
Thanks Franklin. I agree with your assessment, I don't think 'ideal' socialism has ever been achieved. And also you are right when you say it lends itself to totalitarianism.
Thank you for a very thoughtful comment.
Good buddy, I hope you're okay. Socialism is basically a political and economic doctrine that advocates the ownership and administration of the means of production by the working classes in order to achieve an organization of society in which there is political, social and economic equality of all people.
This definition expresses something very interesting:
The truth is that this equality is never fulfilled, except if you are with the government that exercises this type of doctrine, that is to say if you are "plugged in" as we popularly call it here in Venezuela, where we have a great crisis because we are victims of a dictatorship very, very well disguised as socialism, in other words in the style of Cuba.
In your post friend @bigtom13 you said that there could be different types of socialism which may be true, but I see it from another point of view.... socialism is one, only each government decides to adopt it in a different way, that is to say it brings about changes as it sees fit, both ways are valid!!
Well friend, your post has pleased me very much, I think that the inconvenience of the other day is already forgotten...., likewise I reiterate that you have my full support..... Now friend, I would like to know how I can join the @adsactly? writers community. I have a lot of content I'd like more people to read.
Greetings from Venezuela my friend, I hope you will continue like this, now I will follow you in your personal account friend @bigtom13
I am really glad to see your comment.
I like your perspective. That there is only Socialism and each government makes it unique. There are literally hundreds of variations listed in the scholarly material. I'll ponder on that some. A thing I had never considered.
Are you able to join our Discord room? We have others there from Venezuela. If you can come there I can give you the information about adsactly writers. There are some other programs you might be interested in also. https://discord.gg/bGNJ34
Thanks friend, it is true that everyone has a different perspective, but we are not so far from reality....
I will now join your chat discord @bigtom13, I would also like to receive the other information.
I think it is entirely untrue to say that there is “inherent fairness” in socialism. The state forcibly seizing a redistributing wealth hardly seems “fair”. I suppose if you are only considering the final out come its fair in a way, but what it would realisticly take to get there would be extremely unfair.
“Less stress” doesn’t even seem to make sense from a pro-socialist perspective. Surely if we are all working for the betterment of the state, we would have much less time for leisure than we would if we were filthy capitalist self-interested pigs, no?
There are no valid arguments for socialism.
Socialism sucks.
Better Dead Than Red
Well, lets just say I don't agree.
There is an inherent fairness in the Socialist model. All are equal. Not that it works out that way, but that is the model.
And if the state makes every decision for you, what do you have to stress over?
For the record: Generally speaking it is Communism that is considered 'Red'. Socialism is not Communism.
I am completely against socialism. If someone invests their authority in a social construct, they are a socialist.
If they invest authority in social constructs that deny individual liberty, they are a harmful and aggressing socialist.
How could you write a long essay on Socialism but never mention Leon Trotsky one time?
Or the different ideological goals between Stalin (National) and Trotsky (International)?
Or the History of these political movements, their ideological / organizational lineage say from the early 1900s up to today...?
This is more of an academic essay on the idea of Socialism in Theory rather than a study of the system through its application over time.
At least your conclusion hit the nail on the head:
"Socialism, more than any other governmental form, seems to lend itself to Totalitarian regimes. Leaders of purely Socialist systems tend to be dictators and not freely elected."
Well, I wasn't writing a book. You are absolutely correct, I was aiming for the idea of Socialism rather than the practice. I really was aiming at today's world and the little bit of history was for context, not study.
I'm currently writing a similar piece on Capitalism. Depending on how that goes I may go more in depth on specific forms and types.
Thank you for a good, questioning comment. Always appreciated even though I ducked the answer :)
Quests to create a Utopia invariably lead to Dystopia. That alone keeps me away from Socialism. I'm quite happy with the mixed economy model in my country - private companies running businsses, with a social safety net for those who truly need it.
Yes. I'm glad you mentioned the difference between Socialism and Social. Big difference. All societies need some sort of social structure. Finding the right balance for all is the key.