What's Wrong with Socialism

A Necessary Evil? or a Vital Function?

Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock has heard some pretty nasty things about socialism lately. We think we understand it, based on the rhetoric we are deluged with every day. We hear that socialism is the road to communism, where the government dominates every citizen's private
 lives, telling us where to work, when to work, who we should marry, and so on.

The truth is quite different. Would it surprise you to know that America already is a socialist nation? Or that, in fact, capitalism depends on socialism to survive?

To find the real truth, we Americans have to first realize that we don't really understand socialism at all. Then, we have to ask ourselves a question: What is socialism, really?

At its core, socialism is a vital need for every community, from cities and towns to great big continent-spanning nations. It is the pooling of resources into a communal fund in order to do something that no individual can do alone. Socialism is simply providing a service to a community at community expense.

In fact, every modern nation in existence today is socialist, to some degree or another. It is not a "necessary evil", as some would say, but an immense benefit; socialism is the entire reason that humans began living in communities to begin with, way back at the dawn of recorded history.

Despite what propagandists on the right have to say about it, even they are strongly in favor of socialism: every one of them proudly wears their pro-military status on their sleeve. That's right - having a standing military is a function of socialism.

It is the veritable definition of socialism: the entire community pays for the service of soldiers because the entire community benefits. Providing for the common defense is one of the oldest applications of socialism. Even in the pre-civilized era of humanity, everyone who could contribute to a community's defense, did.

Related information
 
Comments 1 - 8 of 8  
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

By the way, just to make it clear, I think this is a great article. I don't fully agree with your analysis, but it is very well written, and commend you for broaching the subject.

Posted on 10/29/2008 at 10:10:00 AM

No,it is not like saying that "Beef isn't meat," but rather very much like saying that "Reality TV" isn't real, "Modern Architecture" is no longer modern, and "Carrot Cake" isn't a vegetable. You are incorrectly (like many people are of late) assigning equivalence to "socialist" (an nonspecific adjective that you are using to generalize anything that is shared in a society) with "Socialism" (a VERY specific economic philosophy) and "Socialist" (a VERY specific form of government.) The three stem from similar principles, but are NOT the same.

Posted on 10/29/2008 at 7:10:21 AM

Scott - In a word: No. Government control, being representative of the collective authority of the people, over a project is very nearly the deffinition of Socialism itself. Anything funded by the pooled resources of the public is Socialist. That includes infrastructure, by the way; we could easily "privatize" our road systems, making them "Capitalistic". It would be incredibly inefficient to do so, but we could. To say these things aren't Socialism is very much like saying "Beef isn't 'meat', it's 'cow parts'" for political expedience. That's re-labeling (Freedom Fries) of the worst order.

Posted on 10/29/2008 at 5:10:22 AM

Scott - that's exactly the point of this article. Most people do not see the comparison. They only see what Hannity, Rush, and company tell them to see, which is a misrepresentation of what socialism really is all about. What we're told to be afraid of is actually a variant of totalitarian rule, having little to do with the economic system behind it. In reality, even they are in favor of socialism, when used for a reasonable purpose - not a one of them would ever suggest that we dismantle our military because its very existence is socialist and therefore (somehow) discourages personal growth and achievement.

Posted on 10/28/2008 at 12:10:23 AM

You raise some really valid points here thanks!

Posted on 10/27/2008 at 8:10:51 AM

Sheryl, I understand what you're talking about. That's the nasty stage that lies between socialism and communism. It looks wonderful and utopian on paper, but, alas, when you start mixing corrupt humans into the equation... Well, we all know what happened in Russia.

Posted on 10/26/2008 at 11:10:53 PM

Good points here - there are some aspects of socialism that help all government to work. However, "socialism" in the vein I was speaking of, in its twisted form - even if it starts out with good intentions - still leads to happy fat cats at the top and more poor people at the bottom - OR more people who take advantage of a system that is meant for the very poor but is used by lazy people.

Posted on 10/26/2008 at 9:10:39 PM

Very insightful. Socialism has come up a lot in this years presidential election.

Posted on 10/26/2008 at 3:10:26 PM

Comments 1 - 8 of 8