The Socialist Cause

Socialist Cause
By Benjamin (Ohio) and Martin (Ohio)

Numerous people have a misinformed view of what a Socialist government and society would be. Many think that citizens would have no rights, no property; however this is not the case. In a Socialist society, economically speaking, due to government control, planning, and management of all forms of production, the basic needs of the people are met for little to no cost, leaving you with more money to spend on personal needs. The government in a Socialist society is democratically elected, controlled by the working class, making it a much more direct democracy than what we consider democracy today, and thus the government acts on behalf of the needs of the people. People come before profits. In today’s society, only the rich who pay the campaigns for politicians and such have any real say. The workers do not. Socialism in a nutshell is truly owned by the people, the working masses. The argument that Socialism is against private property is a false argument. In Capitalism, the government owns all property technically (since not paying taxes means you lose your property, thus making it pretty much like a renting, not owning, of property by the people.) In Socialism, the government would still own all property, but in a different way (not through taxes but simply legally) and since the workers control the government instead of the rich, you actually have MORE say than in Capitalism over our property.

Socialism is rooted strongly in a democratic way of life and is obligated to give everyone political and personal freedoms. Socialism is more open then Capitalism, because the goal of Socialism is the betterment of the people, not increasing profits. As mentioned before, in economic terms we have much more freedom to spend our hard-earned money on our own personal needs. In terms of personal freedom, Socialism promotes the fullest expression of individuality and the rights of the people. The Communist Party, USA, for instance, has even developed an expanded Bill of Rights for the USA that they see as absolutely necessary in a Socialist society. Laws in a Socialist society would probably be common sense, such as, as long as what you’re doing doesn’t hurt anyone, it doesn’t matter. As long as you work, you will be taken care of. This eliminates the lazy from benefiting unless they work, and usually this creates a chain reaction and such things as obesity or otherwise being overweight and other harmful bodily problems relating to lack of work can get quite a dent in their numbers. Now in the United States, the people have to worry about their primary needs while in Socialist countries you don’t, so people have more time to have fun, spend money, relax, work and do extracurricular activities, such as sports. In a socialist government, health care, education at all levels, and human’s basic needs are free to the people and are provided by the government. The cost you might ask? None. Taxes aren’t necessary in a Socialist society because other forms of production (non-necessary ones, like televisions, radios, computers, and so on) will make a profit that they use to subsidize (pay for) the necessities that are provided to the people. With a well-educated work force, and a healthy work force, the society progresses immensely in the areas of science, technology, architecture and other areas of life, and people are better able to express themselves and work together.

The current Socialist countries are considered somewhat Socialist, but most have never been a true socialist country. To be a true socialist country, the government has to be completely for the people, rid themselves of their military, and to promote peace, although while Capitalist nations still exist to threaten them in the world, militaries for defense only will still be necessary. In fact, military build-up is a strong negative for Socialism. In Capitalism, the government buys military products from companies, and the companies get richer. But in Socialism, the government already owned the military production companies, so they just use resources and there is no return whatsoever. There’s no economic benefit. In place of a large military, there can usually be instead a well-funded police force that keeps the peace, but does not violate the people’s rights. Businesses must all be owned and operated by the government in Socialism, usually according to a plan every few years to meet the people’s interests. The workers, having control over business democratically, will have a vested interest in making sure production goes smoothly, and thus control them themselves, without bosses, who are unnecessary and oppressive.

This concludes my little booklet. Now for a general ending to this is would I would like to end with, a simple math equation for those who are religious and support Capitalism.

Capitalism = Greed, imperialistic, inequality = Sin = Hell
Socialism = Sharing, equality, peace = Happiness and love = Heaven

In many ways, Capitalism promotes greed and inhuman treatment of others, and careless and extreme competition which can and usually does result in sinfulness. Socialism promotes the general welfare of its people and the distribution of all goods to everyone based on their contribution, creating as much equality as possible, peace, and friendship. The very early Christian practiced a form of Socialism, particularly in the book of Acts. The lived in communities, shared everything they grew and made, ate together, were peaceful and did not war with each other. They were in sense the first Socialists. They promoted equality, love, peace, sharing, and ultimately the true socialist cause! It is the Christian way to oppose oppression, much like Christians did in fighting to end slavery. Today, we just have a softer slavery. Imagine if a slave owner gave slaves an hourly wage instead of food, clothes, and shelter, and then imagine they could choose any slave owner they wanted to work for. They could try not being a slave, but then they’d have no money and might die. Now replace slave with worker, and slave owner with Capitalist, and you have modern-day slavery, wage-slavery. If we truly believe in what Christ tried to teach us, we cannot sit idly by and let sin corrupt people in their daily lives. We must fight it, and the only way to do so is to actively support a move towards a better world, a just, moral world. And only true Socialism can bring that.
 
since not paying taxes means you lose your property, thus making it pretty much like a renting, not owning, of property by the people.

I think that's a bit of a stretch.
 
CBsig3.png
= Heaven
 
Well, its more of a joke sig, I added that because my friend said that I should because he wanted to see if anyone would comment on it, your the first. And "Socialism or death" is a quote I read somewhere, I dont rememeber though, dont hold it to my heart but I like it.
-----------------

QUOTE
since not paying taxes means you lose your property, thus making it pretty much like a renting, not owning, of property by the people.


I think that's a bit of a stretch.


--------
Well, not if you think about it.
 
In a Socialist society, economically speaking, due to government control, planning, and management of all forms of production, the basic needs of the people are met for little to no cost, leaving you with more money to spend on personal needs.
Name an example...ie one that is not a hybrid capitalist-socialist gov't like Western Europe and to a lesser degree the United States.
The government in a Socialist society is democratically elected, controlled by the working class, making it a much more direct democracy than what we consider democracy today, and thus the government acts on behalf of the needs of the people.
Ok, so if it is the workers running the gov't, then who is in charge per se (ie the gov't)? Obviously there will be party (a good and just worker-oriented socialist one) that will guide the country into the direction that it wants or that the party (made of a small percentage of the population as a whole) believes it wants... By main point is there is no such thing a rule by exclusively the little guy. B/c by definition, there will be little guys that are over the top of other little guys, creating again a little guy and a mean ol' in control guy.
In today’s society, only the rich who pay the campaigns for politicians and such have any real say. The workers do not. Socialism in a nutshell is truly owned by the people, the working masses.
Actually that is a load of crap in a handbasket. There have been plenty of labor movements that have been quite popular...thus we have right-to-work, labor unions that have a lot of control in many industries (not that the system is maintaining itself) etc. There are also many social programs like social security, welfare etc. that all passed b/c people (many admittedly rich) wanted to look out for the small guy. Unfortunately peoples mind corrupted and they felt that their own society was not their own agenda b/c the gov't was doing it. In fact, it appears most treat some humans in this country like a broken bridge in need of fixing. Throw some money, creat a committee, bla blah. Human beings people. There is such an abundance of money that could be easily used to cure most every issue. Funny thing this is only possible b/c we have a capitalist society, one based on decisions...sorry that was a little off base rant

...There is a moral and civil decay that has created a system that anyone that cares has an absurd amount more say than those that don't. It is often people with money, but not necessarily (ie bloggers). The Vietnam War had the majority of Americans support it for most of its existence. A small core of people who cared were against it and pushed that message. Despite not fitting your desciption, their actions made the largest superpower bow down in an indirect fight with the 2nd largest superpower... that's power to the people. In China, that's called when the Revolutionary Guard start arresting and executing people.
In Socialism, the government would still own all property, but in a different way (not through taxes but simply legally) and since the workers control the government instead of the rich, you actually have MORE say than in Capitalism over our property.
How does that protect from discrimination? Are you saying all the workers will treat all other workers equal rights? Or will a group of workers dislike another group of workers and *gasp* be helped that they control the gov't that controls the land of the minority and disliked worker group... In the Nationstates Communist Party are there no outcasts, no people that are pushed aside by the leadership...or there also no groups that rise to power based on talent and productivity not necessarily based on their shown compassion towards the common communist. Is the party of the revolution, not revolutionary itself!?!


The current Socialist countries are considered somewhat Socialist, but most have never been a true socialist country. To be a true socialist country, the government has to be completely for the people, rid themselves of their military, and to promote peace, although while Capitalist nations still exist to threaten them in the world, militaries for defense only will still be necessary. In fact, military build-up is a strong negative for Socialism.
Why haven't there been true socialist countries? Answer: there has not been a bloody revolution spurned by a small and angry minority force that frightens the general population into following a preposturous utopian society. If you GB or Mary have a better idea for why the revolution hasn't properly occured, enlighten me and my mindwarped, brainwashed, capitalist indoctrinated mind.


Now, I am not ignoring the rest of this most interesting statement out of lack of disagreement, but I will resist. I would like to note that I am not an absolut capitalist that believes in full fledged man on man, fight to the death policy as a great way to live. I do believe though that capitalism is only bettered by a messianic utopian society with a king that is both benevolent and all-knowing with a close and personal relation with the Master of the Universe. I don't believe that is occuring currently nor do I feel a socialist revolution will either... I instead am working, learning, and getting ready for the world as is and praying and working here and there for a better one. We have a world that is not perfect, has not found the best answers only better than other answers, and has things that are annoying (both the taxes on your check and the boss). I though feel personal actions of kindness and generousity can save humanity amongst other things. A respecting of one's fellow man. I know this isn't coming about via a gov't decree nor a scientific study. It is out of a moral responsbility that appears lacking in modern society (and pretty much all others throughout history). It is sad, and I admit. How much all of use could have done in the time we played this game. Now, there is a need for recreation and cooling off...but I will be the first to admit that I might regret the amount of time I spent on NS instead of helping people tomorrow or down the road. But the sad thing is how people on both the left and right will rationalize this and make it "ok". (The Economic Right) Well, you have no moral obligation, its about the money and indiviuality bla bla. (The Left) Or the world is a cold and dark place that doesn't accept the truth as I see it. The real world is the fake one I live online...?

The thing is General Benjiman if the communist party made a sandwich for every red produced piece of merchandise; it could feed so many people. Instead, it has a lot of merchandise that covers many unsuspecting, irrational folk who are not capable of dealing with the world as is and instead have found solace in an extreme form of secular humanism, may its name be blotted out.

As many older and wiser people appear to make clear in my reading of them, its not all about the money. Life at the end is not the size of your bank account. And those so obcessed on either side will understand how futile their views are in time. Now, that saying, capitalism is a superior system that has created a world that has at its hand one that is fully-fed, clothed, sheltered, and happy. It is now up to the decisions of normal, working people. The Revolution has long begun...
 
Okay...I left it for a few days...but if I don't post it...my heads going to explode...

What really gets me about what you're calling socialism.....and all forms of Communism....


It's all based on this ridiculous concept of the workers being a bunch of uneducted fools who need the guidance of the middle classes to free themselves from oppression....haha...don't make me bloody laugh....
To quote cases....
the french revolution.....the workers do all the killing and being killed....and the middle class end up in power....
the american revolution.....the workers did all the killing and being killed...and the middle class end up in power....
the russian revolution....the workers do all the killing and being killed....and the middle class end up in power....

The other thing that really annoys me is this myth of the nobility of the worker above all others....
If their was any nobility or any other value to Work...then do you think the ruling classes would let anyone else but them do it.....
What about nurses....a noble choice of career....and yet because they are professionals they are counted as middle class....
What about Charity workers out in the field...surely that has a nobility to it...well no...because they are classed as volunteers....not real workers you see...

And for the record there has been NO Socialist or communist Government ever....there has only ever been dictatorships....

And finally what of the people who choose not to work...where is the place for them in Socialism...starvation/homelessness/ridicule....

The Daimiaena awaits further justification for a political system that has been shown repeatedly as a lovely idea...and theoretically very ethical etc.....Apart from one tiny little thing that gets in the way of actually putting it into practice.....Human Beings....

And No..I'm not a capitalist...don't even get me started on them...
 
I can't wait for OPA to add his :2c:, as our resident commie.
Thanks, Syd. I appreciate the shout-out.

General BenjaminA: Face it, your politics are boring as fuck.

You know it's true. Otherwise, why has the oppressed proletariat not come to its senses and joined you in your fight for world liberation?

Perhaps, after years of struggling to educate them about their victimhood, you have come to blame them for their condition. They must want to be ground under the heel of capitalist imperialism; otherwise, why do they show no interest in your political causes? Why haven't they joined you yet in chaining yourself to mahogany furniture, chanting slogans at carefully planned and orchestrated protests, and frequenting anarchist bookshops? Why haven't they sat down and learned all the terminology necessary for a genuine understanding of the complexities of Marxist economic theory?

The truth is, your politics are boring to them because they really are irrelevant. They know that your antiquated styles of protest—your marches, hand held signs, and gatherings—are now powerless to effect real change because they have become such a predictable part of the status quo. They know that your post-Marxist jargon is off-putting because it really is a language of mere academic dispute, not a weapon capable of undermining systems of control. They know that your infighting, your splinter groups and endless quarrels over ephemeral theories can never effect any real change in the world they experience from day to day. They know that no matter who is in office, what laws are on the books, what "ism"s the intellectuals march under, the content of their lives will remain the same. They—we—know that our boredom is proof that these "politics" are not the key to any real transformation of life. For our lives are boring enough already!

And you know it too. For how many of you is politics a responsibility? Something you engage in because you feel you should, when in your heart of hearts there are a million things you would rather be doing? Your volunteer work—is it your most favorite pastime, or do you do it out of a sense of obligation? Why do you think it is so hard to motivate others to volunteer as you do? Could it be that it is, above all, a feeling of guilt that drives you to fulfill your "duty" to be politically active? Perhaps you spice up your "work" by trying (consciously or not) to get in trouble with the authorities, to get arrested: not because it will practically serve your cause, but to make things more exciting, to recapture a little of the romance of turbulent times now long past. Have you ever felt that you were participating in a ritual, a long-established tradition of fringe protest, that really serves only to strengthen the position of the mainstream? Have you ever secretly longed to escape from the stagnation and boredom of your political "responsibilities"?

It's no wonder that no one has joined you in your political endeavors. Perhaps you tell yourself that it's tough, thankless work, but somebody's got to do it. The answer is, well, NO.

You actually do us all a real disservice with your tiresome, tedious politics. For in fact, there is nothing more important than politics. NOT the politics of American "democracy" and law, of who is elected state legislator to sign the same bills and perpetuate the same system. Not the politics of the "I got involved with the radical left because I enjoy quibbling over trivial details and writing rhetorically about an unreachable utopia" anarchist. Not the politics of any leader or ideology that demands that you make sacrifices for "the cause." But the politics of our everyday lives. When you separate politics from the immediate, everyday experiences of individual men and women, it becomes completely irrelevant. Indeed, it becomes the private domain of wealthy, comfortable intellectuals, who can trouble themselves with such dreary, theoretical things. When you involve yourself in politics out of a sense of obligation, and make political action into a dull responsibility rather than an exciting game that is worthwhile for its own sake, you scare away people whose lives are already far too dull for any more tedium. When you make politics into a lifeless thing, a joyless thing, a dreadful responsibility, it becomes just another weight upon people, rather than a means to lift weight from people. And thus you ruin the idea of politics for the people to whom it should be most important. For everyone has a stake in considering their lives, in asking themselves what they want out of life and how they can get it. But you make politics look to them like a miserable, self-referential, pointless middle class/bohemian game, a game with no relevance to the real lives they are living out.

What should be political? Whether we enjoy what we do to get food and shelter. Whether we feel like our daily interactions with our friends, neighbors, and coworkers are fulfilling. Whether we have the opportunity to live each day the way we desire to. And "politics" should consist not of merely discussing these questions, but of acting directly to improve our lives in the immediate present. Acting in a way that is itself entertaining, exciting, joyous—because political action that is tedious, tiresome, and oppressive can only perpetuate tedium, fatigue, and oppression in our lives. No more time should be wasted debating over issues that will be irrelevant when we must go to work again the next day. No more predictable ritual protests that the authorities know all too well how to deal with; no more boring ritual protests which will not sound like a thrilling way to spend a Saturday afternoon to potential volunteers—clearly, those won't get us anywhere. Never again shall we "sacrifice ourselves for the cause." For we ourselves, happiness in our own lives and the lives of our fellows, must be our cause!

After we make politics relevant and exciting, the rest will follow. But from a dreary, merely theoretical and/or ritualized politics, nothing valuable can follow. This is not to say that we should show no interest in the welfare of humans, animals, or ecosystems that do not contact us directly in our day to day existence. But the foundation of our politics must be concrete: it must be immediate, it must be obvious to everyone why it is worth the effort, it must be fun in itself. How can we do positive things for others if we ourselves do not enjoy our own lives?

To make this concrete for a moment: an afternoon of collecting food from businesses that would have thrown it away and serving it to hungry people and people who are tired of working to pay for food—that is good political action, but only if you enjoy it. If you do it with your friends, if you meet new friends while you're doing it, if you fall in love or trade funny stories or just feel proud to have helped a woman by easing her financial needs, that's good political action. On the other hand, if you spend the afternoon typing an angry letter to an obscure leftist tabloid objecting to a columnist's use of the term "anarcho-syndicalist," that's not going to accomplish shit, and you know it.

Perhaps it is time for a new word for "politics," since you have made such a swear word out of the old one. For no one should be put off when we talk about acting together to improve our lives. And so we present to you our demands, which are non-negotiable, and must be met as soon as possible—because we're not going to live forever, are we?

1. Make politics relevant to our everyday experience of life again. The farther away the object of our political concern, the less it will mean to us, the less real and pressing it will seem to us, and the more wearisome politics will be.

2. All political activity must be joyous and exciting in itself. You cannot escape from dreariness with more dreariness.

3. To accomplish those first two steps, entirely new political approaches and methods must be created. The old ones are outdated, outmoded. Perhaps they were NEVER any good, and that's why our world is the way it is now.

4. Enjoy yourselves! There is never any excuse for being bored... or boring!

Join us in making the "revolution" a game; a game played for the highest stakes of all, but a joyous, carefree game nonetheless!

Cheers to Heft for telling me this essay was needed.
 
Dear OPA -

When I first came to TNP, I have to admit that I was a bit offput by you. You seemed brash, even rude. However, over the past year or so, I have found myself more and more drawn into your writings, even, dare I say, looking forward to them.

Then, I read the above diatribe. I fear the time has come for me to make a realizaion about my life, and my time here in TNP.


OPArsenal, can I be you when I grow up?

Yours,

Byard
 
:)

Cheers, Byard. Ironically, I think I'm about 10 years younger than you.

Thanks for the kind words about my essays.
 
They say if a liberal starts banging on a typewriter that it is bound to come up with Shakespeare at one point.

Guess that's true ;)
 
Your intelligent, OPA, far more than me, I fear a debate with you would be a waste of your time as well as mine, for you would most likely crush me. However, my beliefs our mine, and yours are yours.


Good day comrades,
Ben.
 
I'm no expert on Marx, but I'm pretty sure that the proletariat revolution will only come when capitalism fails by its own rules.

At the rate that the globalization of the world is leading to the closest thing to pure capitalism, it'll be soon enough.
 
Very soon hopefully, I am a member of the YCL, the predeccesor to the USACP, and they expect capitalism to fail very soon, as a depression is on the horizon, especially with how unstable the oil market and other markets are as of now. And with many business moving overseas, the amount of lost jobs in the US is rising which will create a mass amount of jobless and poor people. This will most likely set the revolution off. I foresee it happening within the next 30-40 years. And when the USA becomes a communist or even socialist nation, which will take many decades, but when the USA becomes communist or even socialist, I foresee the rest of the world shifting to it also.
 
This is a hypothetical socialist "revolution"...

Wealth will spead as much as it can (over borders, outsourcing etc). Soon the entire world will be in a USA type setting. Mostly middle class or better, and the poor not unlivably poor (esp. as technology increases). At this point, there might be an international movement to improve the bottom and make things more even. This potentially could be a political socialesque revolution.

I don't feel though that international war will wait, so unfortunately capitalism will not able to run its course and lead to world peace. Economics cannnot save us.
 
BanjaminA:
especially with how unstable the oil market and other markets are as of now.
Pssst. Oil and food markets are always unstable. That's why they're not calculated into the GDP numbers.

BenjaminA:
And with many business moving overseas, the amount of lost jobs in the US is rising which will create a mass amount of jobless and poor people.

Which will force people to accept lower wages and longer hours if they want to work. If anything, this will cause Congress and the "leaders" in Washington to repeal minimum wage and work week laws that we take for granted in order to entice companies to come back to the US. They then will, and we will have a perfect example of capitalism at its finest.

Sarcodina:
Wealth will spead as much as it can (over borders, outsourcing etc). Soon the entire world will be in a USA type setting.

And with very few exceptions, every worker in the US will have to compete on a global scale with every other qualified worker for their job. Since others will work for less, the US workers will be forced to do so, thus lowering the United States' standard of living, whilst raising the SOL of other developing nations until an equilibrium is achieved.

Sarcodina:
At this point, there might be an international movement to improve the bottom and make things more even. This potentially could be a political socialesque revolution.

Doubtful. As long as it keeps businesses profitable and the GDP of certain countries high, there is little incentive for the government to change anything, and full-scale organized revolution will be an impossibility. That is why those who wish to partake in the "revolution" must (MUST) make it an individual effort.

Sarcodina:
unfortunately capitalism will not able to run its course and lead to world peace.

This statement is a fallacy. Heartless exploitation is the backbone of capitalism, even moreso when one considers the the doctrine of modern "capitalizm." The only way that capitalizm can lead to world peace is by forcing the people to subjugate their desires to the whims of their employers, thus keeping them so busy that there is literally no time left to fight. And what kind of peace is that? It is not peace, but the people acquiesing to their own oppression.

Whew.
 
//This statement is a fallacy. Heartless exploitation is the backbone of capitalism, even moreso when one considers the the doctrine of modern "capitalizm." The only way that capitalizm can lead to world peace is by forcing the people to subjugate their desires to the whims of their employers, thus keeping them so busy that there is literally no time left to fight. And what kind of peace is that? It is not peace, but the people acquiesing to their own oppression.//

My arse. Employers are people too. They act for their own interest as do workers. Capitalism provides them both with better than in a socialist setting. Sure no one wins a complete no-hit shutout, but it is the best that anyone has come up with so far.
 
Sweet. Now you're arguing like me! :lol:

Sarcodina:
Employers are people too. They act for their own interest as do workers.

But the fact of the matter is that what is in the employer's self-interest is remarkably different than what is in the worker's self-interest. In fact, they are completely the opposite.

Sarcodina:
Capitalism provides them both with better than in a socialist setting. Sure no one wins a complete no-hit shutout, but it is the best that anyone has come up with so far.

You really think so?

I'm sure all the AOL employees here in Jacksonville who lost their tech support jobs to Indian workers that will work for LOADS cheaper and don't demand pesky things like meal breaks really appreciate all that capitalizm has done for them.
 
O, snap.
I am not saying that people don't lose their jobs...

Also, most employers are employees as well (even the CEO can get his handed to him or her if he screws up ever so slightly). They want money, job security, and what is best for them in their job. Same with the "workers".
 

:lol:

they expect capitalism to fail very soon

On what grounds do they stay this, because it seems to me every communist state is failing. China is acting more like capitalists all the time, and that leaves N. Korea and Cuba. ( I know they are not pure communist)

The USA will almost certainly not be pure communist, the farthest I could the US of A taking socialism, is one or two programs say, medicine or education.
 
I am a hardcore capitalist. In essence I am known as a classic liberal, a full-on libertarian.

Marx said himself that socialism is a temporary government in which a nation can ease into communism. Socialism is by no means any sort of permenant form of government and to treat it as such is nothing short of pure folly.

As such, I have far more respect for people that are openly communist. At the least, they mean what they say and they're not trying to win you over with obscure language. Socialism, in my opinion, is an attempt to be communism while maintaining personal liberty. I feel that as a long-standing policy of governance, this is impossible to maintain and eventually self-defeating. In fact, the real debate should be more or less focused around so-called "planned economies".

You either have the government control everything, or next to nothing. Frankly, the US in my opinion *is* a socialist state. It has a socialist tax code, laws, regulations, provisions for minimum income, a forced pension plan, social welfare programs, and thickly regulates the lives of people and businesses as a whole. I don't really see why any socialist would have problems living in America, but for us real capitalists, it's rather a big pain in the butt.
 
Back
Top