Why socialism is so popular?

[Raubritter]

You know, i'am a freedom loving person. Freedom is everything we have in our life. I don't like to be forced, i don't like it when my property is taken away and i don't like the threat of violance against me. I like it when people make aggrements on voluntary base, because that means both will make a win for sure.
But this isn't the trend of our time. Not anymore. The trend i notice is away from voluntary bases to forced actions and getting told what to do. And for worse, people seams to like that progression.
Yeah, they are realy into it. Its convenient if someone else makes the decisions for you and promisses everything you can dream of just for making a cross at the ballot box.


See, in my daily live here in the middle of the glorious european union i got daily confronted with lack of freedoms and the omnipresent of force.
When i wake up in the morning my radio goes on and what i hear is state funded radio, because it is as good as imposible to start an privat radiostation. The energy the radio works with comes from a city plant, just as the water i brush my teeth with. When i go to the bathroom i turn the lights on, the light comes from a energy saving lamp because the good old light bulb was banned. Under the ugly could lights of this thing i try to make some coffee, with milk that was produced after EU- and EG-Norms. I look around in my fridge and see the gherkins which makes me think about the EU Norms for gherkins growing, where buerocrates decide whats a EU gherkin and whats not.
I go in my car what is Technical Control Board proofen to get to my after the workplaces ordinance laws furnished workplace. Ofcourse my job is a subject to social insurance contributions which i be forced to pay. I also notice that gasprices rised up again and the newspapers blame gasstations for a 75% taxrate.

Just a little anecdote about how my day starts.

And than i see protesters in the streets which blame "Capitalism" for every freaking thing that ever happend on this planet. I see people with Che Guverra Shirts everywhere, i see Red Stars and black hooded Anti-Facist Action Thungs everywhere. I see Hammer and Sickle grafitis.

I turn on the fee required TV, a States television network, and see the "News" where leftwing politicians blame the free market for everything bad that happend today. Don't know about your country, but the people i see there have to 80% a ultra leftwing past. Even our head of state came from a socialist country and was/is a hardcore communist. Social Democrat this, social democrat that. Collectivise, Collectivise, Collectivise everything to help the poor. The poor who thinks the world owns them something. The poor who can't start their own bussiness because they are not allowed to.
Everyone celebrates while the only industry left gets shutted down because they can't fulfill government regulations anymore and new ones can't even start.
Everything they have, everything states TV and government and all of them has, was taken by force. I don't like that.
They showed a footballgame in the evening which costs millions of euros to buy the transmission rights. Thats great. I pay for beer bellies watching their freaking footballgame.

I go to a party in the evening where all these youngsters talking that the human species should die out to save the planet. People who are the scum of the earth wanna tell me how the beautyfull nature suffers under the human cancer. People who are pierced, tattooed, dyed hair tell me the humans consume to much. But what should they know else? Everyone of them visted a public school with federal curriculas and their parents are dumb as dirt because they did also.

How could that happen? I tought Western Capitalism had won the cold war. The Soviets won. The Reds won the cold war and they just fooled us and let us pay for.

[kesa82]

Its convenient if someone else makes the decisions for you and promisses everything you can dream of just for making a cross at the ballot box.

Ah, Fascism, Bolshevism, or Republicanism ; each one of them is about YOUR vote, YOUR opinion.

( not any extra-human, divine, law )

These folks like to say that every, and all, religions have a variation of the golden rule......

( though I rather think that it was actually one religion in particular that gave you the idea that you should fed your neighbor even if he is a deadbeat, or more, the idea that it is only fair, and practical, that you should pay the cobbler enough so that he can afford to buy the shoes he is making )

......but progress very shortly to , " But then we don't need any of these religions ( with their golden rule ) anyways ! "

And as the biological king should not rule, but "the people" , so the biological parent should not rule, but , "the people " there as well too. ( Whoever, " the people " are. I never seem to be one of " The people ". Are you ? )

[Confederate Jeb]

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. It's merely the cycle is coming back around.

[Hobbes]

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. It's merely the cycle is coming back around.

This is exactly why knowledge of history is a necessity for any self-respecting socialist.

[Confederate Jeb]

This is exactly why knowledge of history is a necessity for any self-respecting socialist.

Usually when I run into a socialist and ask them why they support its ideals after looking at history, the only responses they ever give is "every attempt at a socialist society so far has been done incorrectly" or "if a dictator hadn't shown up it would have been perfect." No information as to what exactly was incorrect about them is ever given, so I don't take these people seriously afterwards.

But then again these are high school students or freshman in college who don't know anything besides hipster music and trying to get marijuana legalized so take this with a grain of salt.

[kesa82]

Usually when I run into a socialist and ask them why they support its ideals after looking at history, the only responses they ever give is "every attempt at a socialist society so far has been done incorrectly" or "if a dictator hadn't shown up it would have been perfect." No information as to what exactly was incorrect about them is ever given, so I don't take these people seriously afterwards.

I commonly hear 50 year old professional historians or sociologists delving deeply into the 200+ year run of Republicanism,

or the 70 year run of Bolshevism

or the 12 year run of the Third Reich

As if this necessarily means anything.
When the findings of Archaeology seem to indicate that 200, or 70, or 12, years , may signify nothing , except that maybe a society can take a 300 year long wrong turn and wind up back in the same place ; the base of peasantry, the family, and the ( Catholic, Mayan, or Shinto ) church.

[Dr. Croccer]

Usually when I run into a socialist and ask them why they support its ideals after looking at history, the only responses they ever give is "every attempt at a socialist society so far has been done incorrectly" or "if a dictator hadn't shown up it would have been perfect." No information as to what exactly was incorrect about them is ever given, so I don't take these people seriously afterwards.

But then again these are high school students or freshman in college who don't know anything besides hipster music and trying to get marijuana legalized so take this with a grain of salt.

To be fair, the exact same can be said for many people on the other end of the spectrum. The kind of ultra-Liberal Randites that you see a lot on the Internet are overwhelmingly teens or students who've clung onto fringe ideals for the time being.

The political spectrum is horseshoe-shaped, if anything. The fringe ideologies which are eachother's antithesis are largely composed out of the same kind of people.

[Vizvii]

To be fair, the exact same can be said for many people on the other end of the spectrum. The kind of ultra-Liberal Randites that you see a lot on the Internet are overwhelmingly teens or students who've clung onto fringe ideals for the time being.

The political spectrum is horseshoe-shaped, if anything. The fringe ideologies which are eachother's antithesis are largely composed out of the same kind of people.

How exactly is libertarianism in any way similar to socialism? I've heard of this horseshoe-shaped political spectrum idea, but in this case it really doesn't make any sense.

[chilon]

How exactly is libertarianism in any way similar to socialism?

Both believe in idealistic ideals that are not supported by evidence from reality.

[Dave Strider]

How exactly is libertarianism in any way similar to socialism? I've heard of this horseshoe-shaped political spectrum idea, but in this case it really doesn't make any sense.

I indeed have heard of it, and I can kind of agree. Both Far-Left and Far-Right wings call for a large Government that watches over a lot of things.

[Dr. Croccer]

How exactly is libertarianism in any way similar to socialism? I've heard of this horseshoe-shaped political spectrum idea, but in this case it really doesn't make any sense.

Both (I'm mainly referring to Communism and other more radical Socialist beliefs, and their counterparts) are absolute ideologies, i.e. they're based upon a philosophy of ideals which is viewed as obvious and infallible. As a result, they are based on largely outdated philosophical pieces, the dogmas of their ideologies forcing them to continue to use these works as the basis for their beliefs, and are contained by its tight grasp. Both are theoretical and radical, not basing themselves upon democracy and pragmatic consensus politics but on their own vision for mankind. Their ideologies are intended to be international, as some kind of general blueprint which can be implemented everywhere in the world. Both are utopian, stressing that the world has been led astray by certain groups, and that humanity's zenith can only be achieved through them. And both ideologies generally have the same type of followers, as I mentioned earlier.

I believe it's fallacious to cite empirical evidence as an argument for political and economical ideologies. By that broken logic, every time a new system is proposed, you'll dismiss it saying it hasn't worked before.

Which is valid. Governments should change naturally, as the result of reforms and democatic action. The notion that one needs to invent a political system and then impose it upon the population is absurd. Creating a theoretical model which will steer society towards a supposed utopia, and then hoping that it will work in reality is a recipe for disaster. You can't plan the actions of millions of people working together. The ultimate goal of any government is to protect the interests of her population, not chase some utopian dream against their wishes, because a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals thought that might be a neat idea.

Yes, I think libertarianism has some historical precedent (though I hardly believe in anarcho-capitalism). Usually, the U.S. Wild West is cited as a successful example.
http://mises.org/journals/jls/3_1/3_1_2.pdf

I'd really take Mises with a pinch of salt, because that's like trying to use the Pope's word to prove Christianity is right.

The lifeblood of the West (as well as most of the US), the railroads, were very fragile due to incredibly reckless often downright criminal behaviour, leading in part to the Long Depression in 1873.

I'd also argue that trying to use the Wild West, a developing region during the Industrial Revolution, as a model for our modern globalized, largely post-industrial world isn't that smart.

[Vizvii]

Which is valid. Governments should change naturally, as the result of reforms and democatic action. The notion that one needs to invent a political system and then impose it upon the population is absurd. Creating a theoretical model which will steer society towards a supposed utopia, and then hoping that it will work in reality is a recipe for disaster. You can't plan the actions of millions of people working together. The ultimate goal of any government is to protect the interests of her population, not chase some utopian dream against their wishes, because a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals thought that might be a neat idea.

It's not valid. Why you assume such a model will be "imposed" upon the population is beyond me. You're assuming a lot of things that are unrelated to the matter at hand. How exactly is the libertarian model based on planning the actions of the working people in advance?

I'd really take Mises with a pinch of salt, because that's like trying to use the Pope's word to prove Christianity is right.

Who do you expect to advocate libertarianism, other than people who believe it can work? Do you want me to provide a source from somebody who is opposed to it?

I'd also argue that trying to use the Wild West, a developing region during the Industrial Revolution, as a model for our modern globalized, largely post-industrial world isn't that smart.

With this reasoning, any kind of historical precedent is "not smart". You should stop using the precedent argument at all, then.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

Usually when I run into a socialist and ask them why they support its ideals after looking at history, the only responses they ever give is "every attempt at a socialist society so far has been done incorrectly" or "if a dictator hadn't shown up it would have been perfect." No information as to what exactly was incorrect about them is ever given, so I don't take these people seriously afterwards.

But then again these are high school students or freshman in college who don't know anything besides hipster music and trying to get marijuana legalized so take this with a grain of salt.

you're talking about communism. What people in this thread mean by socialism is the social market economies of the developed world, and the USA is one. These are not communist, although communism and socialism can be synonymous sometimes.

Confusing I know since socialism means a million different things these days, but I believe it is this that we are discussing here.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Usually when I run into a socialist and ask them why they support its ideals after looking at history, the only responses they ever give is "every attempt at a socialist society so far has been done incorrectly" or "if a dictator hadn't shown up it would have been perfect." No information as to what exactly was incorrect about them is ever given, so I don't take these people seriously afterwards.

But then again these are high school students or freshman in college who don't know anything besides hipster music and trying to get marijuana legalized so take this with a grain of salt.

But what they and you are referring to is not the same as the OP. It sounds pretty clear the OP is criticizing western social market economies and comparing them to Socialism or Communism which is flat out wrong.

So if Socialism = welfare, healthcare, public infrastructure, public aid, etc then most of Western Europe is a Socialist state and its all pretty much a success.

This myth again. This Social programms where in the beginning just for the poor, just for them. No one else should be forced to buy social security. And what if i don't wanna swim and drown with them? I don't wanna be a part of this collective of dumbed down drones.

Um no social programs are for the poor.

You dont want to buy social security then dont live in our society, leave. Point is if everyone didnt pay into the system do you think the poor could? They ing poor.

Your exaggerating everything. Nothing is going to come crashing down except of course what your not expecting to. In at least 50 years your see a sharp rise in gas prices and decline in suburban maintenance. Roads will decay and sewer mains will rupture a little more frequently.

[Caelifer_1991]

Come back after you've learned what Socialism is Raubritter and then maybe I'll post an answer.

[Copperknickers II]

I turn on the fee required TV, a States television network, and see the "News" where leftwing politicians blame the free market for everything bad that happend today.

Well, to be fair, everything bad on my country's news page right now is to do with the Euro crisis and economic disaster, which are all directly the results of poorly regulated capitalism. Not including England losing to Italy in the football, but then its arguable as to how bad that is given their horrific performance.

The poor who thinks the world owes them something.

Well frankly, I don't know where you live but the poor here are certainly owed some of the money they lost as a result of rich bankers and industrialists causing a finance meltdown.

They showed a footballgame in the evening which costs millions of euros to buy the transmission rights. Thats great. I pay for beer bellies watching their freaking footballgame.

You don't like football? Well that's your problem, most of the male European population probably has some interest in the world's third largest sporting event after the world cup and the olympics.

I go to a party in the evening where all these youngsters talking that the human species should die out to save the planet. People who are the scum of the earth wanna tell me how the beautyfull nature suffers under the human cancer. People who are pierced, tattooed, dyed hair tell me the humans consume to much.

I don't know what kind of parties you are going to. Sounds like some kind of 1960s themed hippie-disco. I can only advise that you go to better parties.

Everyone of them visted a public school with federal curriculas and their parents are dumb as dirt because they did also.

However, the fact that you hear these arguments from new-age eco-lunatics does not mean that they are wrong. They are backed up by most of the world's environmental scientists including those from the likes of Harvard, Oxford, and CalTech. People who are certainly not 'as dumb as dirt'.

How could that happen? I tought Western Capitalism had won the cold war.

No, that would be the Western Capitalists. Genghis Khan was a rather talented military commander, but that doesn't mean that his economic policy was particularly inspired.

[King Gambrinus]

Because Socialism is not evil. It is just idealist.


But seeking perfection is what drives people forward.

[Himster]

Because places like the Netherlands and Denmark have the highest rates of life satisfaction reports.

[Claudius Gothicus]

Ohhh ... the trash-posts are back

[eisenkopf]

Ohhh ... the trash-posts are back

?!? They had been gone?!?