What does one say to people that believe Socialism failed ?

[leftwinger2007]

Hello my question is What does one say to people that believe Socialism failed ? Many Capitalists will say Socialism failed in the Soviet Union it fell in China in North Korea and so on my other question is did does Socialism does not if it if the Socialist Country is isolated or if the rest of the World if Capitalist and their Economy due to competition and trade therefor my question is must Socialism Marxism Communism be global not just in certain Countries to really work
thank your for your time ?


　
WHAT DO SOCIALISTS SAY?
What happened to socialism in Russia?
By Alan Maass | November 1, 2002 | Page 7



Was the Russian Revolution doomed to degenerate? The answer to this question is yes--if the revolution remained isolated. The hope of socialists today--in a world where the resources to meet people's needs are vastly greater--is for an international revolution that will free all humanity.

[ckaihatsu]

I think you answered your own question by including this part:





Was the Russian Revolution doomed to degenerate? The answer to this question is yes--if the revolution remained isolated. The hope of socialists today--in a world where the resources to meet people's needs are vastly greater--is for an international revolution that will free all humanity.

[perardua]

Yes, but the fact that the revolution was isolated is not an exhausting answer. It doesn't tell us why the communist regimes took on the exact character that they did, or why the stalinist model was re-enacted almost ritualistically in all subsequent communist takeovers.

In fact: Is it absolutely given that the revolution failed because it was isolated? The stalinist trajectory was in part a response to the question: How do you continue the revolution WHEN it has been isolated? That the revolution has been isolated just means that you now are in a different set of circumstances than you planned for, and you have to change your plans accordingly. There is nothing written in the stars that just because this or that factor didn't occur, you are doomed to failure.

As to your question OP: Well, it seems obvious that socialism did fail - otherwise, where is it now? Now that doesn't mean that it failed irreparably, or that it was a failure everywhere, at all times.

In fact I think the view of 20th century socialism (or any other epoch) as this thing that started at this precise moment and ended at that precise moment and can be encompassed by some overarching definition that can explain its true significance, is outmoded and needs to be rethought. Rather those are concatenations of events that entangle with each other and whose significance depend on where you observe from. But that is another subject.

It is interesting that you ask: What would I say to someone who doesn't believe in socialism? Or not even "What would I say?", but "What does one say?". As in, what kind of ready-made answer would I present to someone in order to convince them? Naturally, the only way to can arrive at an answer is by studying and coming to a conclusion of your own. Having come to this conclusion, all you can do is have a discussion, assuming the other person has also done their study, and is interested in finding an answer.

[khrunos]

Socialism, as a concept, started as a branch of democracy; the other one being capitalism. Socialism was born as an alternative to capitalism, because capitalism,in its initial form was applied to a postmedieval society.The main characteristic of the postmedieval society was a very stratified society; 90% of the people were poor and living a hard life, and only 10% of the people had enough resources to sustain a decent life. When you apply capitalism to such kind of social conditions, the benefits of democracy will not have an effect from the beggining; it will take a good amount of time in order for the whole society to become uniform and together to benefit from democracy. In this context,socialism comes as answer to this status quo. Rather than to wait an undefinite amount of time, the power of the state intervines and speeds up the uniformization process of the society by making everyone equal in front of the law and helping everyone socially speaking. In socialism, the state is not just a law maker or a moderator; in socialism the state is your main helper; the state is the main engine that creates and monitors your way of life in order to achieve the supreme goal: for everyone to live in harmony and resourcefullness. That is the theoretic part.In the practicall aspect, socialism went sideways. Because everything we know in history as the Eastern Bloc, the USSR etc. is more of a fake socialism than real socialism In these regions, people like Lenin, Kim Ir Sen, Mao, have made the revolution in order to achieve some personal goals. When they installed the new order in their countries the called it socialism. No doubt, there were many socialistic elements in their new order, but we can not call these new order socialism; just because in all these countries terror become part of the main state aparatus. So we can conclude that true socialism was never experienced by humanity. No doubt,to apply the socialistic principles ad literam is a fantastic thing; its not real. but to create a socialist democracy, in my opinion is the next step in human evolution.