As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Help me SE++, you're my only hope: Historical Arguments for Socialism

Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet:Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
edited April 2011 in Social Entropy++
Alright so here's the schtick. Today, in like 10 hours, I am going to be part of a class debate on the benefits of socialism vs capitalism in history, and I am on the socialist side. I have been looking on google, in academic databases, you name it. I am finding jack and also squat that is really helpful. Does SE++ have any helpful articles, essays, etc. on the subject?

Also you can debate about Socialism and it's benefits in History, or whether it or Capitalism are better. I guess.

Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
Lord_Asmodeus on
«13

Posts

  • FirmSkaterFirmSkater Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Oscar Wilde wrote some shit about socialism.

    http://struggle.ws/hist_texts/wilde_soul.html

    FirmSkater on
    sig2.jpg
  • CrashmoCrashmo Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Not in my America, buddy

    Crashmo on
    polar-bearsig.jpg
  • ThreadbareSockThreadbareSock Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    How long were you supposed to be working on this? A month, wasn't it?

    ThreadbareSock on
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    How long were you supposed to be working on this? A month, wasn't it?

    No, we decided on the topic like a couple days ago. I got started a day ago. I have not had much luck. I dunno if I'm dumb or if people really don't like talking about the history of socialism or it's benefits or what it's done well.

    Lord_Asmodeus on
    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Depends on what qualifies as "Socialism" actually. Some people seem to think that any sort of tax money that doesn't go to 1) tax returns or 2) the military is socialism. So if that's the case, the interstate highway system would be a good argument for it?

    Henroid on
  • Blake TBlake T Do you have enemies then? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Well I mean the word socialism has the word social in it so I suppose it sounds friendly.

    Blake T on
  • Blake TBlake T Do you have enemies then? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    But I mean with capitalism you have the word capital which, I just kinda like.

    It's fun to say capital idea.

    Blake T on
  • mensch-o-maticmensch-o-matic Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Call me back when you need a paper on socialites

    mensch-o-matic on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Bust out the Bible and talk about how Jesus was pro-Socialism. Way ahead of his time!

    Henroid on
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    Lord_Asmodeus on
    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    Edit - If he threatens anything against you, tell him he could step in for Libya and nobody would notice a difference.

    Henroid on
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    Lord_Asmodeus on
    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    Henroid on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    You could always just take polls in the class, by raising of hands, how many people have benefited or are benefiting from social programs. If you wanted to be like your professor, federal aid for college could qualify. (though now that I wrote it, I actually wonder, does it?)

    Henroid on
  • MaceraMacera UGH GODDAMMIT STOP ENJOYING THINGSRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    you could take a different tack and not so much argue for socialism as against capitalism

    bring up the Triangle Fire and similar tragedies

    Macera on
    xet8c.gif
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Well the debate is half the room vs half the room, so there are people looking up specifically arguments against capitalism, whereas I'm trying to find arguments for socialism as beneficial. And not a lot of people apparently like to write about examples of socialism working, or at least from what I can find.

    Lord_Asmodeus on
    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Aneurhythmia on
  • The Otaku SuppositoryThe Otaku Suppository Bawstan New EnglandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Well the debate is half the room vs half the room, so there are people looking up specifically arguments against capitalism, whereas I'm trying to find arguments for socialism as beneficial. And not a lot of people apparently like to write about examples of socialism working, or at least from what I can find.

    You could talk about how the socialists won the Spanish Civil War...

    Or how socialists and the Popular Front helped France defeat Germany in 1940...

    dammit
    Actually, you could mention quite a bit about the social reforms of France in the 1930s and the nationalization of industries and the social reforms and wealth redistribution undertaken by the UK post WWII.

    The Otaku Suppository on
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Communism is a political theory, socialism is an economic theory. They are often conflated because people are dumb. Marx actually argued that true socialism was just a stepping stone towards the glorious Communist revolution. Socialism is especially not Communism mostly because Socialism is central control of the means of production, and Communism is when the people own those means in collectives. Marx argued that socialism was a stepping stone because people, after being beaten down under the oppressive yoke of capitalism, would need a strong, wise central government to help retrain them to take up the means of production themselves, and then Communism.

    Narbus on
  • The Otaku SuppositoryThe Otaku Suppository Bawstan New EnglandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    The Otaku Suppository on
  • QorzmQorzm Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    hey teefs

    Qorzm on
  • George Fornby GrillGeorge Fornby Grill ...Like Clockwork Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    well if you look at the Obama administration it's very obvious that Socialist Fuhrer Barry Sotero has gotten us very far in life

    9/11
    never
    forget

    George Fornby Grill on
  • Blake TBlake T Do you have enemies then? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    The other neat thing is that if you go to a communist country they will flip the if shit if you offer them a real currency in exchange for anything.

    Booze, drugs, women, you can buy it all for like eight dollars.

    Blake T on
  • AneurhythmiaAneurhythmia Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    I... Hmm. Just. Okay.

    Sure. Let's do that. Yeah. I can go.

    Aneurhythmia on
  • The Otaku SuppositoryThe Otaku Suppository Bawstan New EnglandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    How much did you have to pay for Viv?

    The Otaku Suppository on
  • Blake TBlake T Do you have enemies then? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    An old shoe that I was going to throw away anyway.

    Blake T on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    I've always thought of Fascism as being very militaristic driven. I'm not saying I'm right about that, just that it somehow got into my head.

    Henroid on
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    What? No it hasn't. They are two totally incompatible ideologies.

    Narbus on
  • The Otaku SuppositoryThe Otaku Suppository Bawstan New EnglandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    I... Hmm. Just. Okay.

    Sure. Let's do that. Yeah. I can go.

    In theory it's supposed to be common ownership of production, but communist countries have still retained a central government which has controlled the means of production.

    The Otaku Suppository on
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    I... Hmm. Just. Okay.

    Sure. Let's do that. Yeah. I can go.

    In theory it's supposed to be common ownership of production, but communist countries have still retained a central government which has controlled the means of production.

    I gathered that for the assignment he had to debate what socialism actually was, not what a bunch of dumbbutts thought it was sometimes because they are dumbbutts.

    Narbus on
  • HamurabiHamurabi MiamiRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Koshian wrote: »
    these are good examples of anarchist socialism (a tautology to people In the Know...

    Could you elaborate on this, please?

    Hamurabi on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Wait now I remember how I got the idea that Fascism = military. It's because of that stupid browser game Earth20-something.

    Henroid on
  • The Otaku SuppositoryThe Otaku Suppository Bawstan New EnglandRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Wait now I remember how I got the idea that Fascism = military. It's because of that stupid browser game Earth20-something.

    Or y'know...historical example.

    The Otaku Suppository on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Henroid wrote: »
    Wait now I remember how I got the idea that Fascism = military. It's because of that stupid browser game Earth20-something.

    Or y'know...historical example.

    Yes but it's funnier if I say I learn everything in life from video games.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I have to write a blog post about how offshore drilling is causing the planet to cry out in agony and how the working class on Mars is revolting.

    Henroid on
  • Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Narbus wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Like, social programs would probably work, like the government stepping up and taking ownership of things would probably fit into my professors admittedly quite vague parameters.

    If your professor is defining socialism as "government takeover" I would gear all arguments toward showing him to be the silly goose he is.

    He'd probably flunk your ass, but hey.

    It's a debate, and I don't know if we're being graded. But he's not defining socialism as government takeover so much as governmental control of the means of production and social programs. When the government runs thing and provides for the people, where capitalism is the privatization and private ownership of those things.

    If the government controls the means of production, it steps closer toward Communism and isn't really Socialism.

    No, that's fascism.

    Where it's been put into practice it's both.

    I... Hmm. Just. Okay.

    Sure. Let's do that. Yeah. I can go.

    In theory it's supposed to be common ownership of production, but communist countries have still retained a central government which has controlled the means of production.

    I gathered that for the assignment he had to debate what socialism actually was, not what a bunch of dumbbutts thought it was sometimes because they are dumbbutts.

    The debate is properly about the benefits of socialism throughout history versus the benefits of capitalism throughout history, for example government run programs versus privatized programs (like professorial firefighters, when they were run by insurance companies and when they were a government run program)

    Lord_Asmodeus on
    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Koshian wrote: »
    these are good examples of anarchist socialism (a tautology to people In the Know...

    Could you elaborate on this, please?

    In socialism (some strains, anyway) the community owns everything directly, so there is no need for a government to protect property rights, since there is no property. The people all decide together what to do, instead of relying on a government.

    This only applies to some strains and notably does not apply to socialism as Marx defined it, which is the big guy everyone always thinks of.

    Narbus on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    I like how Marx is supposed to be some big evil dude but everyone listens to him anyway.

    Henroid on
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    The debate is properly about the benefits of socialism throughout history versus the benefits of capitalism throughout history, for example government run programs versus privatized programs (like professorial firefighters, when they were run by insurance companies and when they were a government run program)

    Oh, then focus on the Triangle building fire, the Jungle by Upton Sinclair (really), and some of the ways that capitalism fails. A good one is how under capitalism, if you have no capital you have no say in the economy. So we have drugs to make old guys get boners, but there's no widespread malaria vaccines for use in Africa. There's no market for those vaccines, so they don't get made.

    Narbus on
  • NarbusNarbus Registered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Koshian wrote: »
    government run =/ socialism. you need to get this out of your head forever right now

    Wrooooooooooooooong wrooooong wroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong.

    Narbus on
  • HamurabiHamurabi MiamiRegistered User regular
    edited April 2011
    Koshian wrote: »
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Koshian wrote: »
    these are good examples of anarchist socialism (a tautology to people In the Know...

    Could you elaborate on this, please?

    if you're working towards socialism, the State is absolutely one of the biggest roadblocks there could possibly be. it acts as an organ of the bourgeois in late capitalism.
    Narbus wrote: »
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Koshian wrote: »
    these are good examples of anarchist socialism (a tautology to people In the Know...

    Could you elaborate on this, please?

    In socialism (some strains, anyway) the community owns everything directly, so there is no need for a government to protect property rights, since there is no property. The people all decide together what to do, instead of relying on a government.

    This only applies to some strains and notably does not apply to socialism as Marx defined it, which is the big guy everyone always thinks of.

    This is... completely contrary to what I understand "socialism" to mean. But then, I also haven't read Das Kapital, so I don't purport to be The Resident Socialist™ or anything.

    And no one thinks Karl Marx is "some evil dude" except for people who are uneducated, or deliberately trying to scare people. Marx was actually a noted sociologist, and made a lot of substantive contributions to several social science disciplines.

    Hamurabi on
Sign In or Register to comment.