d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > User Blogs > Socialism > The History Of
Add Reply New Topic
Member
Posts: 1,210
Joined: Dec 14 2017
Gold: 0.00
Aug 1 2018 10:48pm
Greetings Reader,

World history has been my favorite topic of study, in particular 19th and 20th century history. I find human intellectual renovation and trans-formative thinking that shapes how the world as we see it as simply and utterly amazing. This blog will be on the topic of Socialism; the blueprint for social efficiency, maximum prosperity and happiness, and equality of outcome.

The following excerpts will be quoted from intellectuals, journalists, statisticians, historians, etc. This personal blog is open to all criticisms and comments as the reader sees fit. I am simply putting forth the opinion of professionals(?), my opinion and the reason(s) why I came to the conclusion(s) that decide my position. I see conflict in 2018 as a clash of thoughts and it's becoming more polarized as each partisan attempts to drown each other out with reasonably fair arguments on both sides. Instead of questioning motives or scrutinizing personal characters we should exchange ideas and simply parley with their argument to presumably come to some sort of "middle ground" if that exists anymore. The exchange of ideas without scrutiny of personal character or motivations with the possibility of offense is what our Founding Father's demanded and revolutionized our country.

Thank you for reading,

Scoobz
Member
Posts: 1,210
Joined: Dec 14 2017
Gold: 0.00
Aug 1 2018 10:49pm
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism

Quote (WRITTEN BY: Richard Dagger Terence Ball)
Socialism, social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources. According to the socialist view, individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as a whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members.

This conviction puts socialism in opposition to capitalism, which is based on private ownership of the means of production and allows individual choices in a free market to determine how goods and services are distributed. Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society. Because such people are rich, they may choose where and how to live, and their choices in turn limit the options of the poor. As a result, terms such as individual freedom and equality of opportunity may be meaningful for capitalists but can only ring hollow for working people, who must do the capitalists’ bidding if they are to survive. As socialists see it, true freedom and true equality require social control of the resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development of all.”

This fundamental conviction nevertheless leaves room for socialists to disagree among themselves with regard to two key points. The first concerns the extent and the kind of property that society should own or control. Some socialists have thought that almost everything except personal items such as clothing should be public property; this is true, for example, of the society envisioned by the English humanist Sir Thomas More in his Utopia (1516). Other socialists, however, have been willing to accept or even welcome private ownership of farms, shops, and other small or medium-sized businesses.

The second disagreement concerns the way in which society is to exercise its control of property and other resources. In this case the main camps consist of loosely defined groups of centralists and decentralists. On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state—or the state under the guidance of a political party, as was the case in the Soviet Union. Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement.
Go Back To User Blogs Topic List
Add Reply New Topic