Crosswords1 min ago
True Socialism Always Ends With The Stasi
64 Answers
An article well worth the read.
It would be interesting to get some direct responses to the points raised by Daniel Finkelstein from our resident Socialists.
PLEASE: No name calling, no slanging or 'ists'.
https:/
It would be interesting to get some direct responses to the points raised by Daniel Finkelstein from our resident Socialists.
PLEASE: No name calling, no slanging or 'ists'.
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Og; All very laudable, but when the society changes, changes need to take place in the governing of that society. The carrying of ID should now be required in the UK -as it is in most free countries with no ill effect - for the police, in this age of terrorism and illegal immigration, to be able to establish who exactly a person is.
TTT // socialism requires human nature be different. QED it cannot work, //
Exactly. The problem with it is that it requires everyone to be happy to abandon self interest, work for the common good, and stick to the principle of 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'.
Yeah, good luck with that. There's obviously zero chance of it happening voluntarily, which is why it inevitably has to be enforced, and you end up with authoritarian hellholes like post war eastern europe, and tin pot dictatorships crushing all dissent and morphing into something just as corrupt and self-serving as the thing they wanted to replace.
Socialists can't even work co-operatively with each other for more than about 10 minutes , let alone get society as a whole to do it.
Exactly. The problem with it is that it requires everyone to be happy to abandon self interest, work for the common good, and stick to the principle of 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'.
Yeah, good luck with that. There's obviously zero chance of it happening voluntarily, which is why it inevitably has to be enforced, and you end up with authoritarian hellholes like post war eastern europe, and tin pot dictatorships crushing all dissent and morphing into something just as corrupt and self-serving as the thing they wanted to replace.
Socialists can't even work co-operatively with each other for more than about 10 minutes , let alone get society as a whole to do it.
I agree, but of course the same is true of pure capitalism as that is also unworkable also due to human nature. Paraphrasing somewhat, that does not, of course, mean that there haven’t been successful centre-right governments.
We found a long time ago that something in the centre works best and swing a bit either side, but not generally into the danger area of either one. You might argue that the time has come to rein in capitalism a bit as the fat cats have been getting a lot fatter recently.
We found a long time ago that something in the centre works best and swing a bit either side, but not generally into the danger area of either one. You might argue that the time has come to rein in capitalism a bit as the fat cats have been getting a lot fatter recently.
'We found a long time ago that something in the centre works best and swing a bit either side'
And we found out post 1997 that something too similar makes governments complacent, which makes them lazy and greedy and even more self serving. To whit; the expenses scandal and the banking crisis and a lax view on BOTH sides to immigration.
And we found out post 1997 that something too similar makes governments complacent, which makes them lazy and greedy and even more self serving. To whit; the expenses scandal and the banking crisis and a lax view on BOTH sides to immigration.
This sort of discussion (merits/faults of left right politics, different religions) usually ends up resembling its closest relative, class division, and "I hate them because they are not like us - just because they are they". The purists on all sides retreat further and further from the middle and become increasingly "more correct than correct", all others become insufferable enemies.
Some interesting thoughts there from you all, and thank you all for keeping it civil.
Jim your comment "apart from the observation that nothing seems to work very well in the long run" has to be very valid, not just in the economic sense. Any ideology that is not flexible enough to go with time can never be.
Jim your comment "apart from the observation that nothing seems to work very well in the long run" has to be very valid, not just in the economic sense. Any ideology that is not flexible enough to go with time can never be.
"Trying to make socialism work in a capitalist society is like trying to make a Diesel engine run on petrol. "
Although what Danny Finkelstein is saying that even if you strip out the capitalism completely no other system has been devised that works. And that is indisputably true: I am not sure that it is fair though to extrapolate from Laura Pidcock's silly remarks, or the equally silly (if amusing) "I've never kissed a Tory" mugs at labour conferences, that the end of the road = the Stasi. I suspect that what has most affected Lord Finkelstein are the remarks of Seumas Milne, quoted at the end of the article, about wishing we could have East Germany back - minus the Stasi. His (DF's) point about that, which also is indisputable, is that you cannot have one without the other.
What you CAN have, which he of course accepts, is non-Toryism, or reformed capitalism without the theoretical socialism of Paul Mason, which he rightly satirises.
But I come back to the point I made earlier: Lord Finkelstein is a classic liberal, left-of-centre Tory ("what is he doing in the Tory party anyway?") as his colleague ex-communist David Aaronovitch once playfully remarked. So I would in turn like to ask the OP what he thinks is so reprehensible about the "liberalism" of a moderate Tory Lord?
Although what Danny Finkelstein is saying that even if you strip out the capitalism completely no other system has been devised that works. And that is indisputably true: I am not sure that it is fair though to extrapolate from Laura Pidcock's silly remarks, or the equally silly (if amusing) "I've never kissed a Tory" mugs at labour conferences, that the end of the road = the Stasi. I suspect that what has most affected Lord Finkelstein are the remarks of Seumas Milne, quoted at the end of the article, about wishing we could have East Germany back - minus the Stasi. His (DF's) point about that, which also is indisputable, is that you cannot have one without the other.
What you CAN have, which he of course accepts, is non-Toryism, or reformed capitalism without the theoretical socialism of Paul Mason, which he rightly satirises.
But I come back to the point I made earlier: Lord Finkelstein is a classic liberal, left-of-centre Tory ("what is he doing in the Tory party anyway?") as his colleague ex-communist David Aaronovitch once playfully remarked. So I would in turn like to ask the OP what he thinks is so reprehensible about the "liberalism" of a moderate Tory Lord?
By definition the citizen isn't free when they have to validate themselves with government papers. It's the sort of project fear issue used to frighten people into accepting control over them.
Socialism has no more need for human nature to be different than it is, than any other political system. However it does try to be fairer whilst working with human nature. (I suspect some folk are getting confused between socialism and communism.)
Socialism has no more need for human nature to be different than it is, than any other political system. However it does try to be fairer whilst working with human nature. (I suspect some folk are getting confused between socialism and communism.)
// 'We found a long time ago that something in the centre works best and swing a bit either side'
And we found out post 1997....//
I saw Bliar maundering about Ladi Di and her unimely death
and thought - as he went on - "I was a young prime minister and just learning ..."
and thought - "yes we hoped so much from Bliar in those early days and got so little...." - shri doesnt think that - of course
she got £50m from the exercise didnt she ?
And we found out post 1997....//
I saw Bliar maundering about Ladi Di and her unimely death
and thought - as he went on - "I was a young prime minister and just learning ..."
and thought - "yes we hoped so much from Bliar in those early days and got so little...." - shri doesnt think that - of course
she got £50m from the exercise didnt she ?
OG //By definition the citizen isn't free when they have to validate themselves with government papers. It's the sort of project fear issue used to frighten people into accepting control over them.//
Do you not have a passport, a driving licence, a N.I. number?
The reason people aren't "free" today isn't because of documents, it's because they can't speak their minds without accusations and incriminations from the establishment PC bigots.
Do you not have a passport, a driving licence, a N.I. number?
The reason people aren't "free" today isn't because of documents, it's because they can't speak their minds without accusations and incriminations from the establishment PC bigots.
ichi; not a lot of freedom here; http://
Multinationals have been firing people for dubious reasons for decades, although I wonder if there isn't more to this than meets the eye. I wouldn't like to say any more than that.
It is interesting that Assange has offered to defend him. Assange being a classic example of how to give freedom of expression a bad name.
It is interesting that Assange has offered to defend him. Assange being a classic example of how to give freedom of expression a bad name.
ichi; //What tosh.There have never been more people in the "free" world exercising their right via twitter, facebook, answerbank, comments pages on papers, etc etc lamenting how little freedom they have to speak://
Well, I don't use twitter or facebook and I don't know what you mean by " comments pages on papers, etc" but I get removed frequently on Answerbank and there is much to be desired on the subject of freedom in your other suggestions;
https:/
Well, I don't use twitter or facebook and I don't know what you mean by " comments pages on papers, etc" but I get removed frequently on Answerbank and there is much to be desired on the subject of freedom in your other suggestions;
https:/
Latest Posts
News6 mins ago
ChatterBank17 mins ago
Crosswords21 mins ago
Leicester Tigers Vs Bristol Bears - Is...
Sport25 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.