What do Europeans think about socialism and communism?

I might be tempted to give an opinion on the subject matter if I could be sure the terms would be defined precisely and objectively. Both socialism and communism are defined similarly by dictionaries as a socio-economic system advocating that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned and/or regulated by the community as a whole.

If we are discussing simply the socio-economic effects of such a system, I find little to which to take exception. "To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability ..." appears a fairly sensible arrangement.

I am not well enough read to put the matter in terms of Marxian theory, or Austrian economics, but my unsophisticated opinion is that a degree of socialism (otherwise known as social justice) is necessary for any civilisation. And, while there is no utopian society on earth, I consider that the northern European societies (Sweden, Norway, Denmark, etc) have managed a very workable balance between personal ambition and social conscience.

 

And you confirm my point in spades.

 

I can see you use the old marxist method of manipulation in talking...It´s very easy and very goood system.. It is consisting It doesn´t answer to questions or statements and to divert attention to accesories or unrelated questions...

ALL what I SAY I can demostrate...

First: Benito Mussolini WAS A SOCIALIST..a Italian Socialist Party´s member (From 1900), in fact he was in Jail for being a socialist agitator (he was arrested by Police in June 18, 1903, in April, 9, 1904, on july 18, 1908, and expelled from Italy by socialist agitator...Benito Mussolini was a reporter in the socialist Newspaper, IL PROLETARIO.. He was several time in jail by death threat to an employer and by his anticlerical activities

One photo of the SOCIALIST Benitto Mussolini (Mugshot):



In 1911, the ITALIAN SOCIALIST PARTY (PSI) funded the Benito Mussolini Book: Il Trentino



Can you read? Benito Mussolini IL TRENTINO... Veduto da un SOCIALISTA...

Tomorrow I will teach to you where is the Origin of the differents French Fascist Movements... They came from the French Comunist Party!!!!!!!!

I have lived in socialist countries, I do know the many virtues of socialism ... but also its many faults in my opinion .. and all its virtues (social protection, dwelling, education, security, public transport, hospitals etc etc) are nothing .. before the brutal totalitarianism .. that set up distrust among people ...and the debased "aristocracy" (the members of the Party) produced by the system...Of course, there are honest and idealistic members .. but they are few and less powerfull...

Regards

 

Sounds like you didn't understand the point. Fair enough!

 

Hitler started as a communist too but so what ? people change.
Benito was hanged by communists at the end but since your brought it up do you know who elevated him in power? superstitious farmers who couldn't accept anarchists burning their churches . Yes he had a socialist phase but how this says anything about the man?

How "coming from" defines who you are ? it is like saying that all Americans are British , all men are women and all birds are lizards.
Being a communist requires a lot of reading and critical thought , after reading some think that Marxism is not the way to go and change sides like many christians jump to atheism after reading the bible .


A little background about the "Trentino as seen by a socialist" book. Trent is today an area (mostly) of Italy , back in Benito's days it was part of the Habsburg empire ( Austrian in the probable case you don't know) . According to the author Italian socialist party's activities in the area had mostly to do with the liberation of the Italians living under Germans, German (Habsburg) socialist party at the other hand believed that "true" socialism can only achieved through the elevation and betterment of ze Germans ( reminds you of something?) . The main party in the area were the progressive nationalists (or something close , i don't remember right now). Benito also notices that there is no proletariat in the area ! (lol so long for the revolution of the proletariat) .
As a conclusion : all political movements in the area were nationalist , "socialist" Mussolini was only interested in the "liberation" of his nationals, the bourgeoisie of the area was feudal and there was no proletariat to revolt . You can rape political theory all you want but communism is an internationalist movement not nationalist , it goes against capitalism not feudalism and it requires a freaking proletariat !


To sum it up Mussolini was a fascist , he did what he did because he was a fascist and he was executed for being a fascist.


Oh you lived in "socialist countries" !! HAHA yeah , maybe you want to correct this with something like "i lived in state capitalist fascist countries" ?

Please tell me how totalitarianism works after the abolition of the state and the establishment of direct democracy ? wait... you didn't had that? then you never experienced socialism .

This post will not be fun without some Benito's quotes

Quote from a funny guy

Quoting sites for mindless Yankees can only have some effect in mindless Yankees.

 

I agree with you that the northern European societies are the premier examples of socialism. My opinion as if this is utopian however quite differs, as they teeter quite close to communism which we fought against in Vietnam and Soviet Russia.

The societies are quite authoritarian and totalitarian, where there is no avenue for expression of individualism especially when such is in opposition to state interests. For example capitalism cannot thrive in such states, the people demand everyone be equal so there is no room for one to excel in their talents economically. This promotes a conformed society where everything is the same and the people do not or cannot dream.

 

Actually, I did not give the view that the northern European societies (such as Scandinavia) are prime examples of socialism. I consider them to be societies wherein a good balance between free enterprise capitalism, and a degree of socialism commonly known as social justice, has been struck.

You will need to specify to which nations you are referring, before I can address the points you are making. You will also need to give examples of the authoritarian and totalitarian practices to which you refer.

If you are referring to the now defunct Soviet Union, Mao's China, or Pol Pot's Cambodia, I cannot but agree that those were far from ideal, or even desirable societies. However, they have little relevance to the subject we are discussing. So, if you can identify the current authoritarian and totalitarian western European societies - I would be happy to discuss this further.

 

big deal and so what? - Castro was a fan of Hitler before he saw the light..........

 

Norway for example is the biggest welfare state in the world per capita, and that is because of socialism. You consider it to be a society "wherein a good balance between free enterprise capitalism, and a degree of socialism commonly known as social justice, has been struck". But the individual tax rate is almost a 50 percent burden on its citizenry, that means half of the product of ones labors go directly back to the state for the welfare payments of others.

How could there be free enterprise capitalism when the state imposes such a high business and individual tax. That is quite authoritarian in terms of economic liberty for the individual entrepreneur.

Soviet union was communism, but socialism is very similar in nature.

 

50% - for who;

all earners or just the rich??

how much do low paid workers get taxed etc..

 

A generous safety net, given risk aversity, can encourage entrepreneurial activity. Note that the US, which has one of the least effective welfare states in the developed world, has underclass and social immobility problems.

 

i am generally happy with immigration from the EU. All in all I think it is positive. Certainly don;t want any Marxist ideology

 

For once I agree. When people know their basic needs are covered then they can afford to take more risks. The US is ,contrarywise, an incredibly entrepreneurial country. Its underclass problems would probably not be ameliorated by more welfare but actually exacerbated .

 

Much, what much.... it means one has to have a totalitarian vital philosophical and conceptual basis .. it is very easy to move from socialism to fascism, from fascism to communism and from communist to fascism, because they are the same ideologies ...It is very strange to move from liberalism point of view to fascism or from capitalism to socialism...

By the way, I do´t think Castro was a Hitler supporter... Who was Nazi is Salvador Allende... he wrote a book in support to Hitler, National -SOCIALISMUS,... but of course, It is logic... To be Socialist or communism is so similar than to be nazi.. that is very easy and very fast to move from one to another similar and TOTALITARIAN ideology...

 

Why you are posting the same nonsense again ?
If you don't know something ask , copypastas from google search will never stand against a minimum informed forum user (not even a drunk one).
If you have an opinion present it with supportive evidence , incoherent rants can only produce laughter .

Take the following as a lesson :

UK officially is a constitutional monarchy , when was the last time their queen took some serious decision about the state?
The label is just that, a label.

KKE never left Greece since 1918 when it was established , some members did lived abroad but the party never left.
Greek CP was banned by the fascist Metaxas , another nail in the coffin of you claims

Trotsky was never the a decision maker in USSR , it is like saying that Mike Leavitt bombed Iraq .

 

Effective tax rates between Norway and say, Massachusetts are 44% and 33% respectively (ref:http://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/comparing-tax-rates-in-the-us-and-norway.html) but Florida has a 28% effective tax rate (it is difficult to make a straight comparison because of the variation between the states in the US). Nowhere in Norway is there a 50% effective taxation rate.

But I rather think this contribution (on that site) sums it up rather neatly -

Free enterprise capitalism is not dependent upon nor restricted by taxation rates.It is a form of entrepreneurship entered into freely after evaluating the potential risks and rewards involved. Many highly developed countries, with a high level of taxation (and commensurate infrastructure and social services) have a high level of extremely effective corporate enterprise. Germany is a good example thereof.

However, you have yet to supply the examples of authoritarian and totalitarian current European societal practices which you condemned as typical of socialism. I need to know that before I can engage in constructive discussion of such practices.

 

I don't agree. The US's successes can be traced back to its investments in a mangerial class (see the business history stuff from Alfred Chandler). An entrepreneurial country would not display such low social mobility and such severe distinction between desired and actual self-employment rates

 

Well, then you tell me what other types of socialism you know of apart from socialism and national socialism...

Actually I'm not sure if I'm a socialist. Not sure if I'm more to the right or more to the left... At certain levels I agree with principles of both. But I think societies nowadays blend the two together very much. I don't say that in a centrist way. Classes are universally informed now as opposed to the past and things have become much more complex than just left and right.

Prisons is just one of many examples.

 

Not with socialism! Socialism and capitalism are mutually exclusive

 

Am I the only one who thinks that we have reached a point in history where the boundaries between left and right ideologies have become blurred?

 

There is a difference between "left vs right" and "socialism vs capitalism". The former refers to history specific politics, the latter to political economic reality

With politics we can expect 'unholy alliance'. Europhobing is an example

 

Socialism has been generally associated with the left while capitalism with the right.

I guess you will see plenty of 'unholy' alliances from now on.

What exactly do you mean by Europhobing?

 

I'd see it as socialism amongst the enlightened and capitalism amongst the sheep.

Anti-European integration comment. The left will moan about anti-democracy coupled with concerns about labour rights. The right will wave a little flag