Is Socialism Feasable?

[ToraToraTora]

Given human nature is what it is.

[sandyRoe]

What would be the alternative to some degree of socialism, untrammelled capitalism? This would be a society where the success few trample on the rest of us as they make their way to the top. This dystopia would not be a place to be young, or to fall ill, or to grow old.

[sandyRoe]

* succesful few ^

[emmie]

we have the middle ground, not socialism, nor outright capitalism, most people have aspirations don't they, to own a property if they can, feed, clothe their children to the best of their abilities, to send them to private school if possible, not just middle, upper classes do that, it's called doing the best you can for you and your family.

[mibn2cweus]

Capitalism breeds contempt for the rich, socialism . . . for the poor.

The problem with capitalism is that in its proper form it is not a form of government but rather a political system in which the government is not for sale, a system that holds corporations no less responsible and accountable for the consequences of their actions than are individuals. It is when the government, whose proper function is to protect the producers of goods from those who demand an equal (if not greater) portion of the pie, goes up for sale to the highest bidder that capitalism rightfully earns and receives the condemnation it deserves.

[douglas9401]

It is at this time of day, all the lickspittle running dog capitalist enemies of the people are sound asleep.
I'm away to start the revolution, just as soon as I get my breakfast.

[Kromovaracun]

If you look at the objectives outlined by many self-identified socialists of the late C19, many of them have actually been achieved (save for nationalisation of key industries).

As to whether "socialism" is feasible, I think the question is a little nonsensical. Socialism is an extremely broad umbrella term for a huge number of diverse political views with only a few basic principles in common. One could identify as a socialist (and many do) just out of a sense of some kind of allegiance in that direction without wanting to pin oneself down to a specific label, but to ask whether socialism is feasible is unanswerable.

[mibn2cweus]

It's not a matter of whether or not socialism is feasible. The question to be asking is whether it's self-supporting and therefore sustainable . . . and how?

[naomi24]

I take the question to mean ‘socialism’, not a mixture of philosophies. According to Marx, one of the fundamental principles of socialism is “From each according to ability, to each according to need.” – and, human nature being what it is, it’s an ideal that can’t possibly work.

[beso]

I once lived in a community which propounded socialist ideals.

The central philosophy was cited as:
"From each according to their ability and to each according to their needs"

I found it tended to produce very needy useless people.

[naomi24]

No surprise there.

[beso]

I remember one guy in particular who advised that his major contribution to the community was his "spirituality".

In fact he was the most mean spirited, bigoted, intolerant, aggressive person I have ever met.

[Booldawg]

Most socialist/communist governments have to control the people with such oppression I think its indicitative of being a system that doesnt work and no-one wants.

[jomifl]

Socialism is the wealthy wing of the labour party.

[Kromovaracun]

"I take the question to mean ‘socialism’, not a mixture of philosophies. "

Then the question is mistaken, because in practice socialism is precisely that. That is why I called it nonsensical.

Although socialism long precedes Marx, socialists would probably agree with the Marx soundbite to some degree or another, but that really doesn't say much. Many for instance believe that that kind of society is unachievable but are happy to call themselves socialists because they believe in a model which they do deem achievable - most Social Democrats for instance would probably fall into this category, and have long constituted a huge part of the European left.

[naomi24]

Krom, Ahh, in that case I assume you mean it's impossible to put socialism into practice. I agree.

[beso]

Socialism could work if people universally matched their desire to have with their desire to do.

Unfortunately, many lazy people are also greedy.

[sandyRoe]

From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. The lazy greedy wouldn't get what they want.