The Many Faces Of Socialism

Socialism along with many other ideologies has a vast number of different strands and with a couple of different roads to achieving what is fundamentally socialism. Socialism being the ideology that utilises collectivisation to bring people together and to unite people by their common humanity. The two most obvious roads of socialism would be that of revolutionary socialism and also that of evolutionary socialism. This are taken on by two different types of socialists, revisionist socialists and fundamentalist socialists. Revolutionary socialism is the belief that capitalism can only be overthrown by revolution against the current political system. To them

Socialism is the underlying motivation behind communist movements in history. Socialists believe that it is unjust for a small amount of people to own the biggest portion of the wealth in society. This idea lead to the concept of a communist society, in which the existence of private property is eliminated in favor of government-owned property being shared among all it’s people. The government would provide jobs and care for all people equally. The idea was that through communism, there would be no social classes, thus eliminating alienation for any of the people in the society.

Throughout Europe, people of all different classes and moralities had different views of socialism and how it should be achieved/expressed throughout time in that area. An economic and political system based on collective or state ownership of the means of production and distribution is known as socialism. Socialism branched from Republicanism in the early 19th century, because people came to disapprove unequal distribution of wealth and goods. Socialists wanted equal rights for all, but they were opposed to upper class people who received more income for less work with little impact on society. A socialist economic system is the representation of attempting to eliminate economic inequalities and exploitation. Goals of this would be ending

Quotes like Winston Churchill’s have become part of the political rhetoric when leaders discuss the idea of socialism. In current events you can see the exact same argumentation being used against legislation such as the Affordable Health Care Act. Conservative talking heads such as Bill O’Reilly equate it to socialism because, as Mr. O’Reilly says himself, “[i]n order to provide for the have nots, the far left wants the federal government to seize the assets of solvent Americans. That’s what ObamaCare [the Affordable Health Care Act] is all about — taking from those who can afford health care to provide for those who cannot” (O’Reilly). This simplification of socialism does not do justice to the actual paradigm itself. Instead, in this paper I will try to refute our current idea of socialism because of a lack of understanding. The explanations and descriptions by Michael W. Doyle in his chapters on Marxist and Leninist socialism paints a picture that allows one to see how socialism could be beneficial to the common man while also critiquing the negative myths held by modern society.

“From each according to ability, to each according to his contribution”, is socialism’s slogan. Socialism is a social and economic system characterized by common ownership, democratic control, and production for use only. Common ownership means that the resources of the world are owned by everyone thus, nobody can take control of resources beyond their personal belongings. The concept of democratic control means that everybody in a society has the right to participate in the social decisions that affect them. Production under socialism is directly and entirely for use. For example, everyone receives their share of production based on how much they have contributed. After a percent of their share is deducted to go to the common good, workers receive their share of production. Examples of common good is transportation and education, but common good is also used to help those who cannot directly play a part in production like elderly people or children. Socialism works under the assumption that everyone is willing to

Three different types of economic systems used by governments are Communism, Capitalism, and Socialism. Each type of system is unique in different ways. Each has distinct aspects that make it what it is. In communism, the government runs everything and there are no social classes. The government in capitalism doesn’t interfere with any businesses and lets the citizens own and operate them. Socialism is basically a mixture of the two economic systems. The government runs certain businesses, but citizens run the rest. The three economic systems are different in the way they run things and regulate things.

However, believers in socialism would completely disagree with this ideal. Socialism is the economic system in which the workers, instead of a rich minority of entrepreneurs, own all industry. Workers receive the full fruits of their labors instead of being given miniscule compensation for backbreaking labor. Since the people are paid well for their work, work becomes a cooperative entity where people come to rely on one another and people actually are more inclined to do their fair share to help the advancement of society as a whole.

Socialism is defined as a centrally planned economy in which the government controls all means of production. Basically, the government is in control of all business in the country that adopts it as an economic strategy, in our case, The United States of America. Now when we dissect this idea of socialism we find that there are to thought processes behind it. Some truly believe that socialism could truly be the answer to the problems of our nation, both economically and morally. These people try to push socialist policies in hopes of helping the nation and they are doing so with the purest of intentions. However, there are also the people who completely understand what socialism leads to, and want nothing more than to gain while others

(2) There also exist opportunities for private wealth and ownership. Essentially, socialism is a less extreme version of communism. In the 2016 presidential race, the nation responded with shock and heated discourse over the candidate Bernie Sanders, an admitted democratic socialist. But this concept is not new to America, in fact it has been present since the early 20th century. We even have socialist programs existing today such as Medicare and Social Security. Those who support this ideology argue that a government of the people must provide basic necessities as well as equitable opportunities such as higher education, healthcare, and child care to its citizens. These all seem like fair and beneficial requests of citizens for their government. However, it still receives high criticisms and objections amongst Americans. That is because capitalism is considered a staple of the U.S. We value our individuality, our free market, and our opportunities for social mobility. That, after all, is the very idea of the American dream. Unfortunately, that dream is often crushed by the harsh realities of inequality, discrimination, and social class. The gap between the rich and the poor is widening rapidly, with 51.4% of income earned annually going to the richest 20% (3). The middle class is disappearing, the poor are getting poorer, and the rich are profiting. This leads many to the conclusion that a new political and economic system is the answer

“Socialism is an ideal state, but it can never be achieved while man is so selfish”. Socialism is a selfless government system that spreads wealth in the place of greed. In a socialistic government the government regulates all means of production to prevent the overflow and insufficiency of goods. This would help reduce debt and balance financial growth. Introducing socialism into America would be beneficial for the american people by stabilizing economic growth, decrease the financial tension between countries, and allow the american people to gain success by spreading wealth.

As mentions before socialism is the doctrine that espouses public ownership or control of a major means of production. It aims to achieve an equitable and efficient distribution of social goods and greater economic planning then exist under capitalism. Although the central concerns of socialism appears to be economic its ramifications extend to the moral, social and political realms, in fact together with nationalism, it is the leading ideological and political movement of the 20th century.

Socialism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and derives its wealth through exploitation.

The logistical system through which all goods and services are distributed and carried out is of concern to everyone within it. In the United States, through our esteemed representative democracy, we stifle this concern by giving the citizen a choice between two right-wing, capitalist parties. As a nation our propaganda attacks one-party states, but is this only to accentuate the difference between us and them? Is it truly better to be given the choice between two parties over just one to a citizen whose policies do not fall anywhere between, or is it an example of a failure of our education system to curtail the free thought of an individual to the extent where their political ideals cannot be labeled as “liberal” or “conservative?” Socialism

Accordingly, one idea or fact that is often raised to differentiate socialism from communism is that socialism in general is the political movement that refers to an economic system in that they believe that the state should be in charge of all important producing industries thus taking hold of the control of free market in order to promote economic parity and egalitarianism. Theoretically, socialism seeks to distribute wealth equally among its citizens in a way that the rich don’t take

Rather than eradicate capitalism, socialism exists within it. Moreover, democratic socialism is characterised through the balance and compromise between free market capitalism and the Governmental state (Bernstein 1993: 142, Heywood 2012:128, Anderson 1985: 10). Marx considered socialism as a class movement, which is what subsequently played out in the political realm, once universal suffrage had been achieved. For previously powerless people it was the only peaceful way to be heard: “Electoral politics constitutes the mechanism through which anyone can as a citizen express claims to goods and services.” (Przeworski 1985:11).