RGacky3
17th April 2009, 12:32
For the Social Democrats, who actually believe in it.
Social Democracy is supposed to be a cross roads between socialism and Capitalism, supposedly taking the best of both worlds and blending it into a sort of Socialized Capitalism. Heres the problem:
Capitalism is based on the idea of private property, which means ownership of Capital and resources, which means that whatever is produced with the Capital and resources that the Capitalist owns is essencially his, he has the rights to it. THAT is the concept of Private Property. Also its based on the Market, which goes along with private property, production is based on what money can buy, essencially, and what you own can be traded at will with whatever you can get for it. Along with that comes the Capitalist hiarchy, which means the Capitalist, the boss who has Capital and resources may hire people without Capital and resources for a price and use their labor in order to make a profit, and that those workers, are selling their labor as if it were a resource.
Socialism is based on the opposite, that Private property is not valid, and that the things that come with it, the Capitalist hiarchy, the Capitalist market (which is not the only type of market btw) are not valid either.
Social Democracy accepts Capitalism and all that comes with it, but then tries to throw in the concept of the commons and the State, heavy progressive taxation, essencially the rich supporting the poor througH the State.
So what your doing essencially is (if you accept private property) stealing from people who deserve what they have, from what they have earned, and giving it to people who don't deserve it.
And what your doing (if you don't accept privat property) is keeping in an unjust tyrannical system, protecting people who have tyrannical and unjust power so they can exploit those who don't for profit, while just trying to minimize the damage to those without the power.
Its like Robin hood, but Robin Hood is the king, and he still does things relatively the same way.
Social Democracy is supposed to be a cross roads between socialism and Capitalism, supposedly taking the best of both worlds and blending it into a sort of Socialized Capitalism. Heres the problem:
Capitalism is based on the idea of private property, which means ownership of Capital and resources, which means that whatever is produced with the Capital and resources that the Capitalist owns is essencially his, he has the rights to it. THAT is the concept of Private Property. Also its based on the Market, which goes along with private property, production is based on what money can buy, essencially, and what you own can be traded at will with whatever you can get for it. Along with that comes the Capitalist hiarchy, which means the Capitalist, the boss who has Capital and resources may hire people without Capital and resources for a price and use their labor in order to make a profit, and that those workers, are selling their labor as if it were a resource.
Socialism is based on the opposite, that Private property is not valid, and that the things that come with it, the Capitalist hiarchy, the Capitalist market (which is not the only type of market btw) are not valid either.
Social Democracy accepts Capitalism and all that comes with it, but then tries to throw in the concept of the commons and the State, heavy progressive taxation, essencially the rich supporting the poor througH the State.
So what your doing essencially is (if you accept private property) stealing from people who deserve what they have, from what they have earned, and giving it to people who don't deserve it.
And what your doing (if you don't accept privat property) is keeping in an unjust tyrannical system, protecting people who have tyrannical and unjust power so they can exploit those who don't for profit, while just trying to minimize the damage to those without the power.
Its like Robin hood, but Robin Hood is the king, and he still does things relatively the same way.