Guide to creating a socialist utopia

Lol, you never shot it down the first time.

 

Oh, but I did...you just stuck your head in the sand after tossing out a convenient anecdotal "answer"

 

Socialism can work in a small scale or a small nation. I have long had this theory that there is an "immigrant" DNA that is tied to perhaps even the daredevil gene, and this is why Americans are always so dissatisfied and why socialism would not work here.

Needless to say, I would not prefer it because what socialist measures we have implemented in the US tend to absorb freedom and replace it with a level of groupthink that is distasteful to me.

I no more wish to contribute my money to failed and failing programs because "its better than nothing" or "life's not fair". When communities have more money, when communities have more resources, they do better with managing the poor, sick, etc. They are able to know and understand the individuals and how best to help.

Socialism is not a utopia for me because it comes with intolerable authoritarian design.

I'd rather have less government and more freedom. I cannot have this in socialism.

 

What about doing it without the government funding? That seems to be a serious sticking point for lots of people, and I'm not sure it's necessary. It might take longer without it, but it should meet less resistance as well.

I'm with you except for the last part. There shouldn't be any need to outlaw the non-democratic model.

 

Oh, yeah, 'cause capitalism is generating SO much freedom for SO many people. Just look out your window at all the freedom. And clean air.

 

True, but I'm aware of no models that don't.

 

What if the democratic business model produces better products and the consumers choose those? That seems more likely to me. Consolidation of power doesn't really lead to a lot of innovation, because innovation is stifled by those with power in order to protect that power.

 

Are you saying that authoritarianism is inevitable?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing. I'm just looking for a clarification.

 

I was reading Frank Fools Crow's book (excellent read) and I think this started me on my belief system that tribalism is the way to go, and that you cannot have an idyll without spirituality (note: I'm not saying religion).

When you believe that the sun, the moon, the earth, the animals, fellow humans are all distant kinsmen and intricately tied to your spirit--truly believe this--you live your life with more care and "humanity". The native peoples of the Americas, especially North America, worked "collectively" through their own endowment and free will. They had tribal elders, with "elder" as the key point. Older equals wiser.

If...we could go back, if we could have this system of communal living, of living off of less and with more purpose, of sharing because it serves both yourself and your "family", I would gladly join a collective.

 

Yes. All "organized" social constructs require some form of governance...
and all forms of governance require some level of authoritarianism...
and the primary, inherent quality of authoritarianism is to expand "its" scope and authority.

Which is why it's paramount to severely limit the "responsibilities" of "good intentioned", government-centric bureaucrats from the onset, and to never give them an inch...for they will always "frog boil" you into relinquishing a mile.

 

I totally agree.

I think it's really just a matter of finding a way to let people experience that familial bond, where they're willing to work and sacrifice for each other as a matter of course, but for a larger and more inclusive population. It just has to be letting them feel that way, without trying to make them feel that way. It's pretty easy for smaller groups of people, and very difficult for large groups of people. But I think that communication technology, especially (but not limited to) the internet will make it a lot easier.

 

All true. But should we also severely limit the good-intentioned responsibilities of government in regards to capitalism?

Let people defend their own property rights?

'Cause rampant capitalism doesn't seem to be setting people free from authority.

 

Guide to creating a socialist utopia

Therein lies the fallacy of socialists. Belief that a utopia can be created with man as a supreme ruler. Nothing could be more misguided or unrealistic.

 

Translation, the more socialist we become, the more freedoms we lose. Look over there, it is capitalism's fault.

 

What we have now is corporatism moving towards financial oligopoly and it is inherently authoritarian as its tentacles are in all branches of government all across the world. Now, we have "choices", soon we will be limited in choice because this form of corporatism has been unrestrained.

Individual liberty is important. The right to do with your own person what you wish is vital to freedom. Corporations are not "people", but their CEO's and owners have made the case that they should be considered people with all due rights associated. This has created a runaway system of bribery, strong-arming, etc that always happens when unchecked greed has access to power.

 

Corporations have had many of the same rights as individuals for over 100 years in the US. If they didn't they could not enter into contract or be sued. The problem isn't capitalism but like you say, crony capitalism which is a direct result of government being too big for it's britches. The call for more regulation usually means larger and more intrusive government and it's corresponding crony capitalism where it picks winners and losers outside of natural choice.

 

No, more like:

Translation: the more socialist we become, the more freedoms we lose, and the more embedded coporatism is with government the more oppressive, stifling, and authoritarian government becomes.

It's not either or in this case. Both are oppressive. Do you think the FDA is regulating small farms out of business while leaving Montesanto alone because they just hate small farms?

Come on...take the rose colored glasses off and accept that money and power both corrupt.

 

Read my post above this one and tell me if you agree or not.

 

No, the owners of these businesses found a way around being sued themselves. Now their corporate front can be sued while they continue smoking cigars and drinking 100 year old scotch.

 

I have no problem with small scale capitalism. I just know what happens when we let go of the reigns of government to bribery.

 

The only way they can find a way around being sued is if the law is such that they can. Government makes the law.

 

And they have made government.

You think that they're donating money to political candidates because they like to let go of money? No, its an investment.

 

This is one of the outcomes of a permanent political class that does not move in and out of government but makes it their career. When people realize that it is government of the people and quit thinking that the only ones that can work in Congress are those that have been in it forever, things would have a better chance of changing.

 

We are not going to expect the political class to change things so it would be good if a movement could be started and instead of complaining about the other party, would just vote out each incumbent after two terms, the change would be made without changing any laws.

 

We've been very unsuccessful...
look at the expansion, expense, scope and authority of America's central government since FDR rammed through socialized retirement....

LBJ institutionalizing the confiscation of wealth from one individual and directly redistributing it to another individual (endowed with the identical rights as the first individual)...

and, just this week, the USSC is going to reveal whether or not central government can force you to purchase a product offered by private industry...

We've had our liberty and economic freedoms eroded.... "frog boiled".... away by an increasingly authoritarian entity that has deemed the "collective"...the "common good"... far more important than the individual...and manipulates...bastardizes... free market capitalism and the Constitution to that end.