What does socialism mean to you?

There are many psychologists, artists, musicians, history professors, and so forth who earn a good living and contribute to the economy more so than many of those who have only limited education. The issue comes down to the purpose of education: Do we get a broad education that teaches us much about the world we live in, or is education merely for getting a job? Does history repeat itself? Do those in the media who have studied psychology and sociology use their knowledge to "control the herd"? Would studying psychology, history, and sociology make people more aware of the subtle techniques used to control how groups of people think?

 

Wouldn't that destruction come from corruption rather than socialism?

 

Interesting. Can you explain what you mean by "aggression principals"?

In that sense, can an individual really exist within a society?

If you own yourself, does that mean you are not beholden to any laws?
What is the purpose of laws?
Are laws not a type of socialism?

Capitalism is in part based on collecting the fruits of labor as a whole, then redistributing a part of those fruits. Isn't that the same as an "entity [taking] the fruits of another's labor"?

 

I asked about this previously, but is it possible for an individual to exist in a society? I think it's important to be clear about your definition of "free society" because the word society indicates a certain level of socialism. It may be a bit of hair splitting, but using the binary either/or definitions of something like individuality or socialism stops a good discussion in it's tracks.

If socialism can only be implemented through governmental force, then laws in a society can be classified as socialist. This all takes us down that old "social contract" path. In order to live within a society, the freedom to do certain things must be limited.

 

Could I not say the same thing about the business world? Do they not lust for the fruits of my labor? Do they not seek to control markets and my thoughts in order to get me to spend my money? Have I willfully surrendered my money so the government can hand huge, lucrative contracts to a military industrial group (or any other government contractor) that I don't want to pay for?

 

No, not confusing, just going back to the origins. Can any society exist without laws of some sort?

 

That's what I was referring to in the original post when I asked if there are degrees of socialism. One of the biggest reasons I asked about this was the fact that politicians and the media are using the term as a singularity.

 

Do they not have those goods and services because of those who work for them?

 

Are you thinking of that as an either/or kind of idea? I should have been more clear. Total individualism means you don't have to consider anyone else or follow any laws or rules.

 

No, not confusing. Like I said, if you live in a society, a group of people, there are some kind of rules or laws, and you surrender some amount of freedom. You, as the individual, are expected follow certain rules for behaviors. That means giving up a certain amount of your freedom to do as you please. I use this as a starting point for the idea that socialism is not an either/or thing.

And the fruits of that labor are skimmed for the profit of the business. In other words, the majority of us in a capitalist society surrender a portion of those fruit, and the assumption that we are entitled to them is not accurate.