What is ethical socialism?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Norsefire, Jul 9, 2010.

  1. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    Though I am ardently against socialism, it is usually because most people, when discussing socialism, refer to all-encompassing, forced socialism.

    Though there is one scenario where I would consider socialism ethical, and this when the following conditions are met:

    1) all individuals within a socialist community are willing participants and agree to the terms

    2) the socialist community does not interfere with, seize the property of, impose obligations upon, or otherwise oppress non-members of the community

    3) the organization uses only the resources which have been legitimately acquired, purchased, or otherwise possessed and used, instead of claiming entire territories and telling people to "just leave".


    If all three of these conditions are met, then socialism can be a great thing. But that would also mean it's socialism operating under a laissez-faire environment, because people are leaving each other alone and letting live.

    I have no problem with socialism if it operates like this. This way, I can associate with whomever I want and engage in trade among my property, and I can choose not to participate in your socialist community, or I can choose to if I want to without imposing obligations onto others.


    This is still socialism, but we can also say that it is a perfect example of a laissez-faire society as it employs a philosophy of "live and let live"; i.e, it is socialism where specific individuals choose to participate and choose to give as they please, according to their whim; and it is socialism where only these voluntary participants participate and only with their legit property ("property" in relation to the rest of society)
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    That isn't socialism though. It's libertarian capitalism.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. soullust Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,380
    Most people have no clue what socialism is, canada is a socilism/capitalist mix..

    Is there anything Wrong with Canada
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Ganymede Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,322
    Socialist countries have the highest standard of living, end of story.
     
  8. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Like Cuba?
     
  9. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Cuba is economically isolated due to the United States' opposition to the totalitarian nature of Castro's regime.
     
  10. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Don't they have N-1 other countries to trade with?
     
  11. superstring01 Moderator

    Messages:
    12,110
    And some of the lowest! There are serious gulfs between many socialist nations. Most importantly, the socialist nations you're referring to (Nordic states, Western Europe), owe their economic wealth more to scientific capital, ecological resources and a--very quickly fading--work ethic. Were they not socialist, it's hard to imagine they'd be some of the poorest.

    ~String
     
  12. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,789

    Like China? :scratchin:
     
  13. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Can we define things so we're not talking past each other?
     
  14. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    It means collective ownership and management of certain institutions for the collective good. It does not consider private property to be the highest value and priority of the community. It assumes that certain things cannot be owned by the few.
     
  15. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    Who defines the ``things''?
     
  16. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    We decide Democratically.
     
  17. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    This doesn't seem to be what the OP is referring to. (It's entirely possible he doesn't know what he's talking about.)

    Would you say your claim is that Democracy is at the heart of socialism.

    To be clear: you do not consider Cuba a socialist country? And you would say that Venezuela is taking a turn in that direction?
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2010
  18. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    Spidergoat, you missed the entire point: you can do all of that "owned by the many" crap yourself, along with the others that want to do that, among yourselves while leaving everyone else alone; it's "live and let live".

    If you seriously still have a problem with that, then it seems obvious to me that you want to be able to force it on people, in which case your socialism is unethical.
     
  19. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    This is a common issue with any political philosophy. If it isn't done by everyone, it's practically useless. I think the Democratic process is as fair as you can get and still maintain a unified nation. I would never force socialism on people. When it comes it will be seen by (almost) everyone as the appropriate way to do things or it won't come at all. There will always be people that opt out of society, we can't help that.

    I am pretty sick of your Unibomber mentality, why don't you go live in the wilderness in Alaska while the rest of us figure out how to organize society. We don't want to end up a third world asscrack. Everyone doing their own thing only leads to the destruction of all, and the lack of the coordinated activity necessary to confront the challenges of the 21st century.
     
  20. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Democracy obviously doesn't have to be the heart of Socialism, but I maintain it's necessary to make it sustainable.
     
  21. BenTheMan Dr. of Physics, Prof. of Love Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,967
    I repeat my question:

    Do you see the self-proclaimed socialist nations of Venezuela, Cuba, China, and North Korea as socialist by your definition?
     
  22. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Not truly, since they are mostly dictatorships. The people in these cases are for the most part disempowered. They explain it as a gradual process, with pure socialism as the goal. There are socialist institutions that do help the poor, but the people want more, they want the freedom to criticise their governments, they want more transparency and more prosperity. But, they don't claim to be Democractic.
     
  23. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    I'm not saying people shouldn't co-operate, but it should be up to each and every individual to choose exactly how, to what extent, and with whom to co-operate. You are deliberately misunderstanding what I am saying, it seems, because you know that what you propose is unethical and immoral, and that is forcing it on everyone.

    If you want to share, go ahead. Who's stopping you? You WANT to force it on people. Just admit it.
     

Share This Page