My political view

[cocodtim]

Hi, it's me that high schooler from Romania. Here is my political view what i promised to present:

The basis is the social contract between the people and the state. The people give up some of their freedoms (and rights) so that state can administrate them. In case the state fails, people could sue it at the Supreme Court. This way no tyranny will be made. People will give up to some of their freedoms but not all (they will have free speech, free press, free reunion etc.)
This socialism will be instituted of course in an very well developed capitalist society. Then all rich people will have to pay very high taxes while poor will pay low taxes so to increase equality. All companies and owners of companies will not take advantage of the profit, but instead the profit will go to the state. So if you own a company but don’t work in it as a CEO or anything else, you won’t gain anything. Nationalization will not be superficial, but the companies will consist only of workers and representants of the state will have a word to say in every company. Even though the patron may try to sell its company to make a fortune, taxes will lower his rich status and he won’t be able to try and find a buyer except the state because no people will have the money to buy it.
All medical services will then be paid by the state so will be free for the citizens that work. The state will also give apartments and housing to those that work. Salaries will vary with some variables: the time he/she has worked, the effort on the work and the result of the work. These 3 will make up the salary and also there will be an extra funds added to the salary for the number of children, if you have/ look after a minor children. Advantages like state housing and medical services will not be applied to citizens that are not minors and do not work. After anyone has made 18 years old he must subscribe to a full job (if he/she isn’t a student) and to a part-time (if he/she is a student). That’s why the state funds entrepreneurship and will also construct new places for people to work. There will also be state agencies who will find jobs for people and a minor monthly sum of money for those who do not work.
Because people will not think on how to pay their houses and paying health and because equality will exist, they will start to think more towards the more important things of life – moral and human nature, politeness and other value rather than the fortune of a man/woman.
Immigration and emigration will be free, but for immigration people will need to prove they know the language of the state and will also take a national history/geography exam.
The state will strengthen the green values. It will invest very much in railroad and the state will finance a door-to-door recycling materials garbage collection.
A vacation for workers will be calculated by the time he has worked and the intensity. So those who work less per month will get a smaller vacation than those who work more per month.
The state will fund science and scientific development very much because if we progress, things will get easy and life will get better.
Work is important and for that, before leaving a man without his job the situation will be well analyzed and syndicates will be formed to negotiate with the state.
National military service is not mandatory but those who will engage in it before/after university will be promoted and will have a better reputation and will be able to find job easier. The state takes care of the ones who protect it.
Selling alcohol and tobacco to minors under 18 years old is strictly forbidden, but consuming won’t be if you are over 14 years old. Drugs are illegal.
The state will promote national companies and products over foreign and will still allow the foreign ones to be sold.
Farms will be funded by the state so that each peasant will have like a small company and get a salary. That company will own the lands of that peasant. The companies will be owned by the state and the father (the peasant with the most authority in the family will be the CEO)
Relations with other countries will be good and the state will not be isolationist.
If conflicts between the state and CEO will arrive the trial can cede the company to the state. So basically there will be no forced nationalization or ceding of properties but the state will buy every company from their CEO (ex-patrons) not all at once so that we avoid huge amount of money spent, but in a while. The CEO will get rich and will pay huge taxes so he will end equal with others.
Generous scholarships and school funding will be made so that the students can learn efficient, modern and easy. School busses will be assigned to all schools.
Police and justice will be very good trained and funded.
I think that’s all of what I can think now.

Questions: Is this democratic socialism? Or does it have another name for it? If not why? Oh and please tell me your opinion of this.

If doesn't have a special name can i name it? :laugh: codrinism sounds good.:thumbup1:

[ZeroNowhere]

The society is called capitalism, the belief is called reformism.
Anyways, hello. Also, if you want people's opinions on it, I would advise posting it in OI, where it can be debated and such.

[gorillafuck]

All companies and owners of companies will not take advantage of the profit, but instead the profit will go to the state.
So you encourage competition between companies, but all the profits they make go to the state?:confused:

[Killfacer]

welcome

[cocodtim]

no.

its reformed socialism or democratic socialism.
it is certainly not capitalism if i have nationalization, equality, state housing, state medicine, and what more have i said. Ok i will post in a forum but not that of opposite ideologies.

I do not encourage anything. I promote my national companies. So instead of buying Coca Cola, citizens would buy Brifcor (a soda made in Romania).

I think superficial is capitalism - i have CEO and "privater companies". Practically the CEO would receive less money then other workers who have more to work.

[Brother No. 1]

hello welcome.


democratic socialism

Isnt Socialism already Democratic:confused:

[Jack]

hello welcome.



Isnt Socialism already Democratic:confused:

Tell that to Lenin.

[Q]

Hi, it's me that high schooler from Romania. Here is my political view what i promised to present:
Thank you, I'll throroughly review it :)


The basis is the social contract between the people and the state. The people give up some of their freedoms (and rights) so that state can administrate them. In case the state fails, people could sue it at the Supreme Court. This way no tyranny will be made. People will give up to some of their freedoms but not all (they will have free speech, free press, free reunion etc.)
I'm afraid you misunderstand the purpose of the state. The state exists to enforce class rule of the ruling class, that is its sole purpose. For this purpose it has designed a very centralistic top-down hierarchy, with an army (often a standing army), a police apparatus and a bureaucracy to ensure a divide and rule strategy for the tiny minority to rule of the vast majority. For good measure the capitalist elite often allows the illusion of democracy and a sense that class society isn't a real thing. This is often done by means of a parliamentary democracy in which workers can choose their oppressers once every 4 or 5 years.

You see, the state's function is to defend the class interests of the ruling class; the capitalists. Under these circumstances any "social contract" would be a complete illusion. And even if it worked, why would workers have to give up certain freedoms to ensure this "social contract"?


This socialism will be instituted of course in an very well developed capitalist society.
Socialism has as one of its primary objectives the abolishing of capitalism. Socialism marks the rise to power of the working class as the ruling class of society. So, by definition socialism and capitalism cannot exist at the same time.


Then all rich people will have to pay very high taxes while poor will pay low taxes so to increase equality.
This is not socialism, but reformism. This strategy has been used by the social-democrats for over a century. All it ensured was their eventual betrayal to the working masses in favor of neoliberal policies. Any progress within capitalism can only be assured with class struggle, but even then the capitalists will look for the first opportunity to take back the gains we fought for to ensure their profits and their rule.


All companies and owners of companies will not take advantage of the profit, but instead the profit will go to the state.So if you own a company but don’t work in it as a CEO or anything else, you won’t gain anything.
This would be impossible under capitalism. Expropiation of the economy and to put it into the control and management of workers is the only way forward. In other words: socialism can only ensure what you want to achieve here. Trying to do this inside capitalism, would effectively be a declaration of war against the capitalists, one they will fight back in with the backing of imperialist powers. Why risk them being able to seize power again and unleash terror upon us?


Nationalization will not be superficial, but the companies will consist only of workers and representants of the state will have a word to say in every company.
In the Netherlands we have such "workers participation", these councils are utterly useless and designed for class collaboration. Class collaboration where the capitalists will always win of course.


Even though the patron may try to sell its company to make a fortune, taxes will lower his rich status and he won’t be able to try and find a buyer except the state because no people will have the money to buy it.
Again, why create such a halfway house construction? Why not kick the capitalist in the butt and take the company from him? We are the ones that create the wealth in the first place. The company rightfully belongs to us!


All medical services will then be paid by the state so will be free for the citizens that work. The state will also give apartments and housing to those that work.
Welfare states have been tried in the past and for a period seemed to work given exceptional historical circumstances in the West. However, these are now relics of the past and are under daily attack of cuts and privatisations under neoliberal logic. Again, that what we fought for in the past is taken away from us by the bosses and their lackeys in government in the name of profit.


Salaries will vary with some variables: the time he/she has worked, the effort on the work and the result of the work. These 3 will make up the salary and also there will be an extra funds added to the salary for the number of children, if you have/ look after a minor children.
This sounds reasonable. Also, why not institute a maximum wage? Say that the gap between the least income and biggest income can be no more than a factor 5. That would greatly increase equality.


Advantages like state housing and medical services will not be applied to citizens that are not minors and do not work.
What if there isn't a job? Only a democratically planned economy can assure everyone a job. Also I don't think such a pressure is the right way to go at things. People aren't naturally lazy and if they are there is something wrong (depression, no future perspective, low wage, etc). These factors should be dealt with instead of pressurizing people into work.


After anyone has made 18 years old he must subscribe to a full job (if he/she isn’t a student) and to a part-time (if he/she is a student). That’s why the state funds entrepreneurship and will also construct new places for people to work. There will also be state agencies who will find jobs for people and a minor monthly sum of money for those who do not work.
Why such an emphasis on work? One of the points I'm defending is shortening the working week to 32 hours, so people have more free time to be able to run society and to ensure that everyone has a job. In the long run the working week could turn progressively shorter as new techniques of automation become available. This then ensures that people can freely develop themselves in whatever they want to develop.

Also, why should students work at all? Aren't they already working hard enough to complete their study? Why not ensure free education and a living wage for as long as they study?


Because people will not think on how to pay their houses and paying health and because equality will exist, they will start to think more towards the more important things of life – moral and human nature, politeness and other value rather than the fortune of a man/woman.
Why yes, only thing is that your program doesn't ensure this at all.


Immigration and emigration will be free, but for immigration people will need to prove they know the language of the state and will also take a national history/geography exam.
Why such restrictions? This sounds rather nationalist in my opinion. Why not strive towards a true and genuine world community where everyone can live as they please?


The state will strengthen the green values. It will invest very much in railroad and the state will finance a door-to-door recycling materials garbage collection.
It's a good start. Investing in solar and fuel-cell technology would be vital too if we ever want to drop our reliance on fossil fuels and drop our CO2 emissions to safe our planet.


A vacation for workers will be calculated by the time he has worked and the intensity. So those who work less per month will get a smaller vacation than those who work more per month.
Rationing vacations? Again this emphasis on work puzzles me.


The state will fund science and scientific development very much because if we progress, things will get easy and life will get better.
Obviously I agree.


Work is important and for that, before leaving a man without his job the situation will be well analyzed and syndicates will be formed to negotiate with the state.
Why negotiate with the state if workers can have a direct say in it?


National military service is not mandatory but those who will engage in it before/after university will be promoted and will have a better reputation and will be able to find job easier. The state takes care of the ones who protect it.
What about abolishing the army (a bourgeois state instrument) to make way for a workers' militia?


Selling alcohol and tobacco to minors under 18 years old is strictly forbidden, but consuming won’t be if you are over 14 years old.
So, how are the minors getting their tabacco and alcohol then? I see a huge black market blooming here. Also, why forbid it at all? Who is the state to tell us what we can and cannot do?


Drugs are illegal.
What about soft drugs, like marihuana? Legalising weed is a traditionally big issue for leftists in many places.


The state will promote national companies and products over foreign and will still allow the foreign ones to be sold.
So how will it promote it then? Higher taxes for foreign products? This sounds like classic protectionism and is stuck in a rather nationalist outlook. A socialist planned economy is internationalist in outlook and strives for the optimum in production, transcending national borders.


Farms will be funded by the state so that each peasant will have like a small company and get a salary. That company will own the lands of that peasant. The companies will be owned by the state and the father (the peasant with the most authority in the family will be the CEO)
Your formulation is vague, but you seem to defend a variation of collectivisation. I think this is an outmoded concept though. We're now in a position to automate agriculture and vastly upscale things. I see vast multistore greenhouses that are mainly controlled by computers in the future.


Relations with other countries will be good and the state will not be isolationist.
This sounds in contradiction with the nationalist policies you put up earlier.


If conflicts between the state and CEO will arrive the trial can cede the company to the state. So basically there will be no forced nationalization or ceding of properties but the state will buy every company from their CEO (ex-patrons) not all at once so that we avoid huge amount of money spent, but in a while. The CEO will get rich and will pay huge taxes so he will end equal with others.
Why on Earth would the capitalists agree with something like that? Again, you seem to lay the seeds for civil war. Only a socialist revolution is the way forward.


Generous scholarships and school funding will be made so that the students can learn efficient, modern and easy. School busses will be assigned to all schools.
Again, what about free education as a principle? In that way you don't have the hassle with scholarships and stuff like that.


Police and justice will be very good trained and funded.
Same point as with the army: why not abolish the police force and replace it with a workers militia?


Questions: Is this democratic socialism? Or does it have another name for it? If not why? Oh and please tell me your opinion of this.
It is not even remotely close to socialism, but is generally known as reformism. This idea has shown its bankruptcy many times of the past century.

[Sam_b]

National military service is not mandatory but those who will engage in it before/after university will be promoted and will have a better reputation and will be able to find job easier. The state takes care of the ones who protect it.


Not only is this a pretty nationalist idea, but its also encouraging a two-tier system of opportunity. Are conscientious objectors worse people than those doing national service, and if so why does the latter get to enjoy finding work easier? This goes agaisnt your assertion of 'equality' earlier in the post.

In my opinion, your political view is not based in any class struggle or working class politics, and some ideas are put in completely arbitrarily ('drugs will be illegal' 'selling alcohol and tobacco to minors under 18 years old is strictly forbidden'). Where did you pluck these legalities and age restrictions from? Surely the state does not have control of people's bodies as well?

[cocodtim]

lol Thanks Q you are the only one who truly explained and made me understand some things, unlike the others...

haha i think i need to read more...