Why do socialist ideologies have such a negative connotation?

[Saullos]

As I read into the history of socialism, I start to realize that socialism must have been considered a grand idea during the second half of the 19th century, and first half of the 20th. You look around, and we see writers such as Jack London, H.G. Wells, and George Orwell who were socialists. The writer, Francis Bellamy, of the United States Pledge of Allegiance was socialist. There was an international movement, as seen by the Socialist Internationales.

So why does it now carry this stigma? Is it because of McCarthy? Superficial looks at socialist countries?

[GPDP]

Relentless bourgeois propaganda and ideological hegemony, and a slight dose of Soviet fuck-ups IMO.

[FreeFocus]

Because when it comes down to it, we've lived in a capitalist world for at least the past 500 years. These powers have been entrenched for half a millennium.

[Os Cangaceiros]

It would be easy to explain it all away as the result of bourgeois ruling class propaganda, but I think that opportunists who used the word "socialism" while making people's lives hell have something to do with it, as well.

[mikelepore]

Socialism has about the same amount of negative connotation as there once as for the idea of trying to administer a society without an emperor or monarch, or the idea of allowing women to participate in politics, or the idea of visiting a far-away land for some other purpose besides kidnapping slaves, or several other ideas that are radical in one century, and then everyone's common sense in the next century.

[Annie K.]

Yeah, but socialism was common sense in the last century...

I think that, as you pointed, the evolution of the socialism from an international movement to a reference for national parties has to do with it. And this loss was an effect of the two world wars.

[gorillafuck]

I think it is due to the Soviet Union, as well as propaganda. The state "socialism" that has been applied in the past is used as an example of how socialism will take your freedom away, as well state socialism not working nearly as well (in my opinion). The media also suppresses successful socialist or collective projects from public eye. Also propaganda in schools (I've seen 1984 and Animal Farm used as capitalist propaganda)

[ernie]

(I've seen 1984 and Animal Farm used as capitalist propaganda)
That's how they are commonly used in middle schools throughout the US, and have been for several decades.

[LOLseph Stalin]

As I read into the history of socialism, I start to realize that socialism must have been considered a grand idea during the second half of the 19th century, and first half of the 20th. You look around, and we see writers such as Jack London, H.G. Wells, and George Orwell who were socialists. The writer, Francis Bellamy, of the United States Pledge of Allegiance was socialist. There was an international movement, as seen by the Socialist Internationales.

So why does it now carry this stigma? Is it because of McCarthy? Superficial looks at socialist countries?

It was popular back then because there wasn't jack off idiots like Stalin screwing things up. Stalin is the reason most people I know hate Communism. They just think Communism=Stalinism.

[PostAnarchy]

The convenient agreement of the two main imperialist powers - USA and USSR for most of the 20th century to label the Soviet Union as "socialist" thus destroying any hope of real socialists trying to spread the message of authentic socialism against the enormous propaganda efforts of Western AND Soviet propaganda.

[cop an Attitude]

easy, The media is owned by capitalist businesses and having a netural or pro-socialism standpoint is not profitable. Due to the fact that the major media companies oppose socialism then it will eventully become a social norm to disreguard the left. There is a reason why there are many advocating racial equality, cultural equality and even reliegious equality but very little are pushing for class equality.

[GPDP]

It also has to do with our school system.

If I remember correctly, I read in a book that in the classroom, there are three taboo subjects that must never be touched: sex, religion, and class.

[Robespierre2.0]

Gee, I wonder why, in any country in which the bourgeoisie and capitalism enjoy not only a political but cultural hegemony, the word 'socialism' has a negative connotation?

People who answer this by saying "s'all Stalin's fault" are stupid wankers who deserve a pick-axe in the skull. Even from a non-Stalinist standpoint, blaming all of a movement's current problems on the actions of a historical figure 60+ years dead is nothing more than a cop-out.
There have many times throughout history when 'big lies' have held sway over the majority of the population- by now, the human race should have learned that just because more people believe something is so doesn't mean it is, but alas, that is not the case. Hopefully some day Anti-Stalinism will disappear into the same void Phrenology and the Divine Right of Kings disappeared to.

[Annie K.]

Not any country. In continental europe the label was tarnished but it has not a negative connotation.

[benhur]

This is why I feel these labels must be abandoned. If they're causing so much negativity, why can't we just abandon them, and come with up something else? Even anarchism isn't a solution, because the word is usually associated with disorder, chaos etc. It's unfair, but true. So we need a better word to adequately represent communism/anarchism etc.

[Bilan]

Shit load of propaganda. The most avid young anti-communists, or even old, don't even know what the fuck it is.
you ask them, they say "the soviet union", China, or whatever.
Fucking nonsense.
even a guy I know, who is majoring in economics at university, thinks that. They seriously have no clue - and it really comes to a fuckload of misinformation on it. And it's bloody intentional.

Added to that, past experiments - Russia, China, etc - which took on an extremely totalitarian, and reactionary nature, due to a number of factors - namely, the inability for them to spread internationally, the nature of the state (top down, as opposed to vice versa), and the material conditions.
Simply, things done under the banner of socialism and emancipation which did nothing but prolong class structures.
This adds to it.

Also, yes, class is something which many treat as if it is a thing of the past. The communism is a passé. This is rubbish. The fact that we don't all wear rags does not mean class has disappeared.

[ZeroNowhere]

That's how they are commonly used in middle schools throughout the US, and have been for several decades.
Oh Marx, they used Animal Farm as capitalist propaganda? Have they even read the fucking thing? :laugh:


This is why I feel these labels must be abandoned. If they're causing so much negativity, why can't we just abandon them, and come with up something else? Even anarchism isn't a solution, because the word is usually associated with disorder, chaos etc. It's unfair, but true. So we need a better word to adequately represent communism/anarchism etc.
Ever reviled, accursed, ne'er understood,
Thou art the grisly terror of our age.
"Wreck of all order," cry the multitude,
"Art thou, and war and murder's endless rage."
0, let them cry. To them that ne'er have striven
The 'truth that lies behind a word to find,
To them the word's right meaning was not given.
They shall continue blind among the blind.
But thou, O word, so clear, so strong, so true,
Thou sayest all which I for goal have taken.
I give thee to the future! Thine secure
When each at least unto himself shall waken.
Comes it in sunshine? In the tempest's thrill?
I cannot tell - but it the earth shall see!
I am an Anarchist! Wherefore I will
Not rule, and also ruled I will not be!


even a guy I know, who is majoring in economics at university, thinks that.
Of course he does, he is majoring in Economics.


People who answer this by saying "s'all Stalin's fault" are stupid wankers who deserve a pick-axe in the skull.
True, Lenin is also to blame, as is the Western media for pretending that the USSR was socialist. Well, Stalin should take some credit for that misuse too. Perhaps we can give Trotsky a bit of the blame here too, as well as a few who are a bit more obscure. Mao and such were just part of a chain reaction, pretty much.

[Bilan]

People who answer this by saying "s'all Stalin's fault" are stupid wankers who deserve a pick-axe in the skull.

Never lost the old ways, eh?



Even from a non-Stalinist standpoint, blaming all of a movement's current problems on the actions of a historical figure 60+ years dead is nothing more than a cop-out.

Erm, it's history - history is what determines the connotations of a word. You think when people think of communism, and say that it's the USSR and China they're not thinking of it under Stalin and Mao?
Guess again. Whether you think its all because of bourgeois propaganda (simplistic bullshit) is not the question, the fact is that it does relate to it. It's not all their fault, though. But they certainly played a big roll.



There have many times throughout history when 'big lies' have held sway over the majority of the population- by now, the human race should have learned that just because more people believe something is so doesn't mean it is, but alas, that is not the case. Hopefully some day Anti-Stalinism will disappear into the same void Phrenology and the Divine Right of Kings disappeared to.


I hope Anti-Stalinism doesn't do that. I hope it thrives, mirrored by the rise of internationalist communism.
Because its that which counts. Not some dead freak.