I believe that the socialism is the very best replacement for a capitalist system that has served its purpose, but no longer meets the needs and requirements of the great majority of the ordinary citizens. I believe that the socialism will be built according to the traditions, history, culture and conditions despite what the stereotypes have us believe.

Socialism in U.S. will be different from any other socialist society in the world as it is free of exploitation, insecurity, and poverty. It works to end unemployment, hunger and homelessness. It will contribute in ending racism, national oppression, anti-Semitism, all forms of discrimination, prejudice and bigotry. It also believes in ending unequal status of women.

The level of ignorance that exists in American public about the socialism is fogged by the glamorous media images of the capitalism. I think it is because corporate ownership of biased media, existence of wealthy white, anglo saxon, protestant politicians, and the dominance of commercial business elites do not want the working, minority class to be empowered. Powerful institutional actions were made against the socialists, so it exerts little or no influence over American political system

I think socialism is the essence of democracy in a way that it renewals and extends democracy as it ends the rule of corporate America and private ownership of the wealth of our nation. It works to create a truly humane and rationally planned society that will stimulate the fullest flowering of the human personality, creativity and talent.

Political power would be in the hands of working people and the working public will be the members and owners. The advocates and ideologues of capitalism hold that such goals are utopian; that human beings are inherently selfish and evil.

What I find fascinating about the socialism is that it starts with nationalization of the main means of production - the plants, factories, agricultural business farms and everything necessary to produce what society needs. The large monopoly corporations and banks come under public ownership. It will be under the collective ownership of the working class and people, who have the leading role in building socialism.

Socialism also means public ownership of the energy industry and all the natural resources. It eliminates the power of greedy capitalist class to exploit and oppress the majority. A socialist government draws up plans covering the entire economy. They are drawn up with maximum participation of the people, from the shop level on up. I think such plans are achieved because they harmonize the interests of all, because there are no conflicts arising from exploitation of workers and no dog-eat-dog competition.

A socialist government is based on all-around democracy, starting with economic democracy. The more people participate in running their own economy, the more firmly people's power is established, the more successful a socialist America will be.

Socialism in USA will benefit from the experiences, the mistakes and successes of the countries that built and are building socialism. But mainly it will reflect the distinctive features of U.S. development and environment. Unique historical advantages, like the unparalleled natural resources, nutritious soil and excellent weather, along with the contributions of generations of working people, enabled U.S. capitalism to achieve higher productive levels and living standards than capitalism in other countries. So the development of socialism here will have some distinct advantages.

socialism is not a solution. these ideas that societal ills can be fixed with it are false. i have yet to see anywhere a socialist system has proven to be effective on the world stage. most places that try to put a socialist system in place have to resort to essentialy keeping their citizens locked up within their borders by the threat of death. you seem threatend by the thought that someone can have an idea and can be in control of their financial future with that idea without the govt. taking over.
capitalism isn't perfect but, i will take it over socialism ANY day.

virtually all innovation in this modern era has taken place by citizens of nations with capitalist governments. people need a reason to do something. example: if you are creative and work hard you may be able to invent something and become wealthy. in these socialist systems, there are no rewards because the government will not allow it (along with many other things) the only reason china has been able to emerge from the doldrums is because they are evolving into a more capitalist system - not socialist.
if you look at countryies like cuba or north korea, the only time you hear about people from there who aren't government employees are the lucky few who risked death and escaped from those hell holes.
socialism?--- no thanks.
nice post though. i enjoy discussions like these and hope you continue because they are rewarding in their own way.
take care.

I guess c6h12o6 never heard of the Soviet Union. Socialisms been tried - and it failed. Miserably.

Actually, the Soviet Union failed because of a variety of factors, most of which were related to poor governing and misappropriation of resources. Also, I don't think you realize exactly HOW MUCH socialism is infused already into the US government. We are a democratic socialism. I believe that more facets of the economy should be infused with socialist principles, but that change only happens gradually.

i certainly don't want more socialism in my govt.

crimsonblade,

Socialism fails because, at it's core, it runs counter to human nature. Capitalism succeeds because it lets people be, well - people.

And yes, I'm aware that there's a great deal of socialism in our government already. However, increasing it would make us very similar to other countries such as Canada and Britain and the rest of Europe.

And what's wrong with Canada, Britian and the other European nations? They are not taxed any more than we are, yet they can provide health care to all? Maybe if we didn't stick our nose into every corner of the earth and try to FORCE it to be Capitalistic (only to make money off of THEM) we would have money for healthcare, decent housing for all, good education for all. The capitalism of America is a 'rich get richer and poor get poorer' the uneven tax breaks for the wealthiest ones in America is taking from the middle class and the poor. In Japan the CEO's of the companies make good money BUT the people underneath make up to 70% of what the CEO's make. This makes for much more workers productivity, less calling in sick, higher moral on the job, etc. The minimum wage here is a crime, it's a disgusting JOKE. SOMEONE has got to do the little jobs and we can't lay it ALL on highschool kids. Those kids are in school most of the day, most of the year. SOMEONE has got to give you your lunch at the restaurant, clean your clothes at the cleaners, etc. It's not that I am so much against capitalism or for socialism, but the capitalism in America has RUINED other countries. It is a cut throat business that gives little and cares nothing for the poor. What happened to some kind of social accountability to those less fortunate? I think the orginal poster make some wonderful points and anyone who is against it is fearful their own checkbook might dwindle because they have to pay better wages to those "underlings and no gooders" Anyway, that's my rant for the day. Peace.

email, i'm SHOCKED. i actually agree with most of what you say.

however, canada, britain and most european countries DO tax more than the united states. some european countries, such as the scandinavian couuntries, tax people at a rate of 50%, with little to NO loopholes.

canada has a higher rate than they u.s., approaching , in many cases, 40% (and we b.tch and moan about 30%).

most western european countries and canada have capitalism, but they are tempered with a socialistic mindset. in order to have a very successful socialist country, you need a fairly homogeneous population , like sweden, denmark and norway. where you DON'T have it, you get a certain amount of failure (like britain and canada).

thus, the u.s. will probably never successfully get a socialist system, since everybody is out for themselves.

Gillette,

OK, they do pay more in taxes, but wouldn't you think the benefits out way the cost? They do have healthcare and I doubt they have much problem at all with homeless. Their drug abuse is lower so they don't have the higher cost of lock em and throw away the key, which leaves many families destitute like in America. In fact, their all around crime rate is next to nothing compared to ours. I haven't checked their housing costs, but it seems with all the extra benefits even if housing were more it would out way the cost of the taxes? And, isn't attending a University pretty much paid for out of this extra tax?


Speaking of loopholes. The most rich among us (which I am not but I sure don't live in a trailer...) have their sweet little MASSIVE tax breaks. It must be nice....Bushie monkey face (that's my pet name for the dumber than a box full of rocks azzhole) gave away millions, can't remember the amount, to help the rich. More and more our companies just can't seem to make it unless they get extra tax breaks. And, the oil and gas companies cleared 8 billion last quarter, so they are some that most definitely need this extra tax break (sarcasm) It seems the Reaganomics is going to be the hardest mess to break that America faces. . The top 10% richest people in America own 90% of the wealth. 94% of the people who have the big bucks inherited it. The rest of us grovel for our measly 10% to share. Yes, there WAS an immense transfer of the wealth in this country. It was from the poor and middle class to our elite's. After all Reagan let everyone know if they worked hard and become a follower of the jewish tribal warrior god they would also be in the top 10% with the other elite's. This places a massive guilt trip on many, but mostly the whites.

See how I see it the only reason people like Bushie Monkey face get elected is out of fear. The 'christian' (don't even get me started on that subject) party of the right wing pretty much has the backing of the Big shots who own the money and run this country. The big shots can't get away with what their doing unless they allow the right wing christians to tag along. If the "christians" think the way this country is going is AOK then who are WE to argue. Dammit, we're heathens after all. They have it pounded from the pulpit that the way to heaven is to vote republican. To do otherwise is a grave and vast sin. I mean, after all, it's OK to kill on a lunatic rampage and start bombing the sh*t out of other countries who have next to nothing in the line of defense. But, god forbid a woman have an abortion. It's ok to have a high mortality rate compared to other industrailized nations.It's the jewish tribal warrior gods WILL that this is how America is to prosper. As long as the rich amongst have the backing of the church with their warped ideas nothing will change. After all, their "jesus" is coming to get them so it doesn't matter if they live in poverty. Blessed are the poor, they get to see the jewish tribal warrior god grant them the entire earth. So, let's rape the environment with the backing of the jewish tribal warrior god. Let's close our eyes to the thousands of homeless because they DESERVED it. For, if they worshipped the jewish tribal warrior god and worked heartily for that minimum wage paycheck, then he, the jewish tribal warrior god would bestow mighty blessings upon them. And, if he doesn't reward them on this earth, he will surely give them great honor in the next life. God IS a republican you know...

If the christians ever realized how damn duped they were, things might start looking up.

OK, I'll tell you something and you'll think "is THIS email" Let's take a look at poverty, I found a web site a few months ago and it said that the States with the LOWEST percentage of minorities usually granted their "poor whites" a welfare program that was more than mere sustenance. BUT, the stingiest states in aid to the poor were the states that had a HIGH minority of people. It appeared the more wealthy in our midst didn't mind too much helping their poorer white brothers and sisters. But, if there were too many minorities in the state they fought against any legislation that would give a helping hand.

Another sickening point...bushie monkey face's choices for the Supreme court will sit back freedoms and rights to the stone age. He is blatantly ruining our Country and there is barely a whimper from the people.

Anyway, I have the week from hell coming up. My flight leaves Wednesday to go "bury my Mother" damn...

dammit, email...who are you REALLY?!?!?!

seriously, about the states that pay their 'poor whites' more in welfare benefits versus states that are stingy for their poor minorities, it isnt a surprise. this is how/why poor whites stay on welfare less and are more likely to get out of the cycle of poverty.

PART (not all, but part) of the cycle of poverty for blacks and hispanics is due to the government and its uneven doling out of benefits. as someone once told me, welfare wasn't intended for minorities, but for whites who were temporarily down on their luck. soon, it was discovered that the best way to silence minorities as a competing force was to get and keep them on welfare. now, those that accept welfare have to shoulder some blame too. those that view welfare as a career (be they black, white, hispanic, other) have to shoulder some more blame. but when there are NO opportunities in appalachia or the inner city, how can one expect to get a job? how can one concentrate on food when their neighborhood harbors a higher percentage of crime? how can crime go down in these 'hoods when there are no opportunities.

again, a vicious cycle. and poor people TEND to have higher rates of out-of-wedlock children than middle class and higher people. they TEND to have children that go into the welfare cycle, thus it repeats itself.

and, though whites, on average, spend less time on public aid than blacks and hispanics, they do spend TIME on it...and close to 30% of the recipients are whites (poor whites). it seems, according to that article, that they just get more breaks. that sucks for blacks and hispanics, but thats life.

and email, i'm sorry to hear about your mom.

as far as socialism in america, YEAH, it would be great. the costs (higher taxes) would be outweighed by the benefits (universal health care, college education free or near free, etc.), but again, socialism has been shown to work ONLY where people have a common and shared identity.

sweden is something like 98% plus white AND scandinavian. same with norway, except more blondes. same with denmark. people have a common history, racial background and heritage. the scandinavian countries have relatively small populations (sweden has 9 million, and norway denmark have the same of slightly fewer). that means there are about 3 million more folks in the STATE of illinois. the chicago metro area, in fact, has almost as many folks as sweden. this small size of people who are linguistically, historically, ethnically related means that they are more likely to care about each other's welfare than the u.s., with 14% black population, 14% hispanic population, 4.5% asian population and about 1% native american population to go with the 70% or so white population; each group has difference , such as city versus suburb versus rural, north verus south, east versus midwest verses west coast. all this with about 294 million people.

everybody has their own agenda, and with its history of capitalism (every man for him/her self) the u.s. simply CAN'T do socialism. it wouldn't even get a chance to get STARTED, much less succeed.

SOCIALISM AS AN ANSWER...HA, HA, HA!!!

That's the funniest sh** I've ever heard in my life! Obviously the individual who started this thread is an ignorant fool with knowledge of neither economics nor history.

He began by speaking of nationalizing agriculture. HA! The Russians nationalized agriculture and STOLE my ancestors' wheat farms after the 1917 Revolution. Do you know what happened? They failed within two years, and the people starved! Prior to Communism, Russia was world-renowned for it's "Russian Wheat."

Private enterprise brings out the best in people and beurocracy always kills efficiancy. Consider the DMV or IRS (in America). Are either of these "socialized" agencies effective? HA! Without a profit motive, people become BUMS, and I suspect that's what our little poster here is...a degenerate.

And speaking of human trash, who really cares about homeless people? These "humans" (and I use the term loosely) are people who chose to live like animals. They don't want help, they want to graze in the fields like a common bison. Let them...as long as they don't start stinking on me. LOL.

Finally, I challenge the person who started this thread to give just ONE example of a socialist society that has succeeded. Russia...FAILED. China....reforming after brink of failure. Cuba...too small to be a relevant example, and also a failure. North Korea...HA! Let me guess what our little socialist friend is about to say: "What about Western Europe"? Good question Sherlock Holmes. Germany is nearly bankrupt, with one of the highest unemployment rates of any industrialized country. France....the same. Furthermore, both countries are about to drastically reduce their welfare state in order to survive. And the "Muslim" problem they are battling is also a direct result of socialism. They were required to import labor in order to generate taxes to support their welfare state. Laughable.

God...some people are so naive.