Socialism, Can It Ever Work?

[ToraToraTora]

Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary why do so many, often appearing intelligent, people still believe that socialism can work? Perhaps those that do can explain the mechanisms by which they think it could. Thanks.

[Old_Geezer]

It works fine in many places. The working class wouldn't have the freedom they have since the last world war without Labour governments. I wonder why folk pose this question time and again. Trying to convince I guess.

[naomi24]

No.

[bainbrig]

Nicely thought-out answer there, unsurprisingly.

[naomi24]

At least I answered the question, bainbrig - which is rather more than you did. ;o)

[KARL]

As elsewhere in western countries, many systems in the UK are at least in part run on socialist principles. It varies how well they work but that is largely down to differences in approach. Life in these countries would be unrecognisable if all the socialist concepts were stripped out and to a large extent societies would likely collapse. Perhaps you should explain how, for example, you see that the UK would work without any socialism. Socialism is the expression of how those who support its principles want state provision of the "safety net", including universal and uniform education, health provision, guaranteed pension provision, unemployment and disability support, etc. Perhaps your question is based on a concern about some form of totalitarianism under a "Socialist" banner, such as communism - rather like in the USA people confuse the two and moreover have a sort of irrational fear of what they see as the bogeyman (they are apt to slip into fits if they get a whiff of socialism).

[AuntLydia]

Socialism in a nut shell and why it never works:
They say, let’s pass a law to cut the prices of basics so people can be better off.I f they do it too many businesses stop providing the goods and supermarket shelves empty.
They say, let’s tax the rich more to give money to the poor. If they do that too much the rich take their money and their businesses, their jobs and their ideas, to a country which taxes less.
They say let’s take over profitable businesses, so we can use the profits to pay for public services Once they’ve taken them over they usually starve them of investment and talent, driving great industries into loss and sacking employees to balance the books
They say let’s just print some money to give more to the poor . That way leads to more inflation, often leaving the very people they wanted to help worse off, unable to afford the basics.
Labour’s great nationalised industries sacked hundreds of thousands of people, lumbered taxpayers with huge losses and failed to serve the customer well. Labour’s big spending sprees led to too much borrowing, to sterling crises and to high inflation
The final ignominy came when their policy meant the UK had to beg for a loan from the IMF, an organisation designed to help poor countries, as the country struggled from recession to recession .Labour’s tax assault on success led to the brain drain, as energetic and able people moved abroad.
Mr Corbyn heralded the government of Venezuela as a new way, an alternative to the capitalism he hates in free western societies. Thanks to laws cutting prices, to nationalisation, printing money , high taxes and state control, the economy is in collapse. The rich and the not so rich are rushing across the border to get away from the regime that torments them The nationalised oil industry produces precious little oil despite the huge size of the reserves, starved of capital and good management .Supermarket shelves are largely empty, with companies unwilling to make and trade in such a damaged economy. The poor have been given large increases in benefits, only to end up worse off as inflation soars to make their money almost valueless. The state keeps spending money it does not have, so inflation surges making trading almost impossible.

[naomi24]

Socialism embraces the philosophy “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”, which is all very well for those who have no ability or have it but won’t use it, preferring instead to claim needs. Only fools and horses …….

[ToraToraTora]

OG: "It works fine in many places" - for example?

[naomi24]

I would like to ask those who champion socialism/communism if they've ever visited a socialist/communist country, and if so what did they find attractive about it?

[ToraToraTora]

Karl: 13:58, yes certain things must be state controlled, education, defence, NHS and I would argue some elements of public transport. What I refer to in this post is the state running everything, badly, union power out of control eg UK 60s/70s.

[spathiphyllum]

"a law to cut the prices of basics"

You're explaining austerity.

[spathiphyllum]

14:11.

Agree.

[jim360]

A lot depends on what you mean by working. After all, (state) pensions are a fairly socialist principle, as are the NHS, sickness benefits, etc etc. Certainly no purely capitalist system would conceive of a state-provided health service, free for all at the point of use.

Socialism in extremis fails, but socialist ideas have their part to play in society.

[KARL]

Any country/state run on "pure" anything (meaning ideology) is likely to end up a mess because, as in religion, policy and arguments will end up centring around the purity of it all and not the actual usefulness/functionality. I think it is not too difficult to find examples of both dogmatic right and left (capitalism and socialism) bias leading to major problems - communism is simply the left's equivalent of the right's dictatorships. I still caution against equating socialism and communism, they are not at all the same nor does the former necessarily lead to the latter. It seems pretty obvious that capitalism without influence from socialism and vice versa is not the way to go - the mix that so characterises most societies today, including the UK, currently offers the best solution. But perfection has yet to be achieved..........

[Khandro]

For nearly 100yrs, the majority of the people of Glasgow have elected socialists - if not Communists - as to represent them at work, and at local and national levels.

In return, the unions destroyed the ship-building industries that employed scores of thousands, and resisted change in the mining and steel-making industries that resulted in closure too.

The dreadful living conditions, standards of education, social and levels of social advancement and even life-expectancy remained low and static until relatively recently.

Yet they still vote Labour, or for the socialists of the Scottish National Party, whose representatives have done nothing but line their own pockets, and keep the voters angry, aggrieved and poor.

[cassa333]

Pure socialism doesn’t work.

Social democracy has a far better chance. But it needs to be tempered with capitalism because you need it all to make a stable economy able to sustain its socialist ideals.

Too much of any one of them is doomed to eventually faulted excessively or fail completely.

[douglas9401]

Socialism's absolutely fine, a great idea and an ideal to strive for.

It's the socialists that stop it working in the end.

[KARL]

Khandro, the description you give suggests Glaswegians are entirely happy with what their electoral preferences have brought them and that is why, generation upon generation, they chose the same (if your description is factual). This is what one must accept, the people have chosen..............isn't that the refrain ?

[Khandro]

Karl; //This is what one must accept, the people have chosen..............isn't that the refrain ?//

I think you are trying to conflate the Glaswegian choice of socialism with Brexit. Well, why not? Brexit is being blamed for everything- including the weather.

But there is a big difference; the Brexit vote for leave, was based on a regard for British sovereignty and an optimistic belief the the British people will be able to cope and prosper under whatever the future brings.

Whereas the continual voting for socialist leadership in Glasgow, despite its century of abysmal failure, is to put it as politely as I can, Dr Johnson's,"Triumph of failure over experience".

[Khandro]

Dr J. Actually said 'optimism' - but I'd just used that word.