Socialism

[Schentler]

What are the political belives and view of human nature of Socialists?

[TheComrade]

I believe in Socialism - though I don't really know an immense amount about it. I gather that it strikes a balance between the competition of Capitalism and the Equality of Communism (I believe in both so it works for me!) A socialist economy - is that the state control of all 'essential' services and functions - the obvious services (health, education, transport etc.) as well as housing, water, power, agriculture, fishing etc (all things essential for human life) The rest, 'luxury' services and goods (tv's, cars, computers, legal services etc.) are privatised... Am I right? I believe in this because it ensures all people can have the things they need to stay alive and still gives those others a chance to have nice cars etc.

You can easily argue its human nature (nature as a whole in fact) for those who don't/can't work to starve - therefore to prolong the lives of the poor is unnatural (can't agree but its a thought)

[sfliberty]

Socialism sounds good, everyone gets what they need, for "free". The problem is simple, government doesn't work. Ask anyone who lives in a country like Canada where they've got socialized health care, it sucks. long lines and everything. Go down to the DMV, slow. Government, slow, inefficent, going to fail, doesn't work. Government, force, armed robbery.

[Punk Rocker]

Basically in socialism you are looking at industry controlled by the people, through democracy, instead of industry controlled by the rich, through corporations.

[JKP]

Originally posted by Punk [email protected] 20 2005, 06:17 PM
Basically in socialism you are looking at industry controlled by the people, through democracy, instead of industry controlled by the rich, through corporations.
That's anarchism/communism actually.

[rioters bloc]

Originally posted by JKP+Nov 21 2005, 02:09 PM--> (JKP @ Nov 21 2005, 02:09 PM)
Punk [email protected] 20 2005, 06:17 PM
Basically in socialism you are looking at industry controlled by the people, through democracy, instead of industry controlled by the rich, through corporations.
That's anarchism/communism actually. [/b]
well, that depends - are you [Schentler] referring to socialism in the pre-marxist sense, or the marxist sense?

because both punk rocker and jkp are right, technically. the political beliefs are quite different - socialism in the pre-marxist sense is an umbrella term, and includes anarchism and communis,

[Scottish_Militant]

There are many arguments used against those who advocate the socialist transformation of society, this we can put down to the relentless onslaught of the bourgeois and their capitalist system which is terrified of the revolutionary ideas of Marxism and the liberation of the working class. One such argument that finds many supporters in the ranks of the unconscious working class is that of “human nature”, we must expose this argument as the falsification that it is, but as always we must be prepared, as Lenin said, to “patiently explain”.

Certainly it is not uncommon for people to believe that a “natural human greed” may be present in our genetic make up. Such a thought is so widely claimed in this society that it might seem “perfectly normal” to someone who hasn’t given it a second thought.

This supposed “natural greed” can, and is used to justify so many things that happen in the world. Murders, robberies and wars, we put it all down to the general nastiness of the human being. It’s very strange though because when we see opposing examples of human behaviour, such as a heroic act to save someone’s life, or people contributing voluntary work to a good cause we do not make any reference to “human nature”, we might choose instead to claim that these are “good people” and very different from the “bad people” who kill and steal.

It is said that capitalism is a “natural” economic system, this claim is shattered by the fact that capitalism has only existed for a tiny fraction of the existence of human beings. All economic systems are part of the laws of historical development. As Engels explained during our evolution from the ape, Man came out of the trees which freed the hand for things such as hunting and making tools, which in turn lead to increased labour. Through labour new methods were established through time, the emergence of differences in classes took place, each system from primitive communism, to serfdom, to feudalism has came and went through the ages. Capitalism is no exception to this, and the idea of a future socialist society is something that must be prepared for today.

The truth is, there is no such thing as a naturally “good” or “bad” person. Each person’s character and being is shaped by the many factors around him or her from the day of their birth. As Marx said “conditions determine consciousness”, an extremely important factor in the conditions around a person would be the economic system around them. This system that will determine if poverty exists, if they are employed or unemployed, if they are in debt, if they are poor, or if they are wealthy, perhaps they sell their labour power to survive, perhaps they employ workers to make money. These are all vital factors, and combined they shape and mould the people who live under them. Capitalism is a profit-based greed operated system, and therefore those existing within it will always repeat these qualities on various scales. From stealing a television, to embezzling millions of pounds, these crimes are a reflection of society itself.

Ultimately, as humans, the main “natural” quality we have, as with all mammals, is a will to survive. In order to survive we are no longer required to compete against eachother to live. The capitalist system in its productive era has made it possible for all of mankind to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle without poverty or famine. But capitalism now holds us back. The fact that there is enough on earth to provide a good life for all is cancelled out by the fact that too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of too few people. The class system that operates the capitalist system will not allow a good standard of living for all – it could not, it would self destruct.

Some people have said that you cannot give the workers power – they are too greedy. I say we are not greedy enough! Is it not the case that we toil and struggle, not for the fruits of our labour but only for a fraction of what it is worth? Is it not true that whilst we struggle the wealth produced by our labour is enjoyed by a minority of others? Effectively we contribute in the running of a system that enriches others and exploits ourselves. That is not greed, it is naivety. We must overcome this naivety by standing up as workers and revolutionaries, to show the way forward towards a new and better life for all, towards an international brotherhood of man, a world of socialism and peace.

[Punk Rocker]

That's anarchism/communism actually.

No dude, anarchism/communism has no classes and no state. Socialism is a state to transition to communism/anarchism.

[Lev]

I agree with punk rocker dude.

Socialism is definately a stage of development where the state is still an issue. Not the capitalist state of course but a state and industry that is under popular control by councills of workers. Socialism is where people take the productive capacity into their own hands and run it through democratic organs that allow ordinary men and women to decide collectively the organisation and use of the surplus that society produces.

Anarchism/Communism seems to be a final stage, an advanced stage where the international proletariat has turned society on its head and then begins to organise resources in a free society of producers, where labour and leisure are definitions that are more blurred. Communism is a society I believe where no democratic structures are needed, as the whole of human existence is organised on the basis of cooperation and equality and democracy. Where every man and women and even child is as much a leader in society as the next human being and all the components of a state wither away and allow the mass of ordinary people to coordinate their own lives in a situation where their is no contradiction between personal needs and the collective needs of humanity.

Socialism brings the existing productive capacity of society into the hands of the producers, toilers at the bottom and communism/anarchy is the ultimate freedom to which society can logically progress.

I think that anarchy/communism is highly idealistic and should be, but can only become reality after the revolutionary transformation of relations and the creation of a workers state. Capitalism won't simply internationally collapse, we have to sieze power and industry in one country, a weak chain like russia in 1917, or a highly industrialised western state. From that point the movement can begin to properly coordinate activity internationally and only from an international defeat of capital can the question of absolute freedom, a wolrd free of exploitation and class antagonism be raised

[black magick hustla]

We socialists do not believe in the spectacle of human greed.

Through out history, we have lived at the side of different modes of production and different systems. The obsession of accomulating an infinite amount of commodities has been solely an output of the current consumerist capitalist system.

Such things as private property didn't exist until much later. In fact, one of the things that made native americans and the british clash was that they had very different perspectives of property. The natives worked the land collectively, a land for everyone, while the europeans were used to partitioning the land into private property.

[chilcru]

Man has no nature outside of the material conditions of his existence. The primitive communal society produced the man who shared his catch; the slave society produced the submissive man; the feudal society produced the man of fealty; capitalist society produced "the miser who has come to his senses".

[Storming Heaven]

'Human nature' is nothing more than a lie.

The idea of human nature is that we have certian instincts/social characteristics to which we cannot overcome and which are immutable. In modern times, the most common version of this lie is that evolution has produced in us an innate capacity for competition, and that because of this a co-operative society is impossible.

For kick-offs the very idea of human nature is a misunderstanding of evolution, and biology in general. Any species that displayed a sort of immutable 'nature' would become extinct very quickly, simply because it would not be able to respond to changes in it's environment. The idea that evolution produces competition is simply false - competition and differential survival are mechanisms of evolution, not necessarily it's product. There are many examples where evolution has produced genuine co-operation rather than competition. Furthermore, if 'human nature' is unchangable, then it follows that we should have the same set of insticts as our earliest ancestors. Quite clearly our instincts are different from those of an ameoba.

[Red Leader]

I agree completly. human nature is manmade bullshit. Anyone can say things like its in our nature to be greedy or to want recognition for a job well done. This is only true i a society that advocates the means for greeedyness. In socialism, ther would be no greed because there would be nothing to be greedy about. capitalist decadence would be gone. One can counter the argument of human nature by saying that it is our nature to revolt against oppression, history proves this countless times.

[chilcru]

Originally posted by Storming [email protected] 25 2005, 11:03 PM
'Human nature' is nothing more than a lie.

The idea of human nature is that we have certian instincts/social characteristics to which we cannot overcome and which are immutable. In modern times, the most common version of this lie is that evolution has produced in us an innate capacity for competition, and that because of this a co-operative society is impossible.

For kick-offs the very idea of human nature is a misunderstanding of evolution, and biology in general. Any species that displayed a sort of immutable 'nature' would become extinct very quickly, simply because it would not be able to respond to changes in it's environment. The idea that evolution produces competition is simply false - competition and differential survival are mechanisms of evolution, not necessarily it's product. There are many examples where evolution has produced genuine co-operation rather than competition. Furthermore, if 'human nature' is unchangable, then it follows that we should have the same set of insticts as our earliest ancestors. Quite clearly our instincts are different from those of an ameoba.
I agree. And I think the lie started when philosophers like Hobbes and Locke, ever the mechanical materialists that they were, tried to analyze Man like the way old Greeks tried to look for some "philosopher's stone" that was supposed to make up the alchemy-like composition of the Earth, whether it be "fire", "water", or "gas". There is no such "stone" because Man, unlike the solid Earth, is possessed with Reason and speech as to enable him to alter even his genes.