Viewing 40 posts - 21,161 through 21,200 (of 21,869 total)
  • Sir! Keir! Starmer!
  • tjagain
    Full Member

    Errmmm – do you know who first outlined socialism?  do you know how it is defined?

    jam-bo
    Full Member

    Errmmm – do you know who first outlined socialism?  do you know how it is defined?

    was it jeremy corbyn?

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Bingo!  You understand the game 🙂

    ransos
    Free Member

    Errmmm – do you know who first outlined socialism?  do you know how it is defined?

    You do know that there are multiple strands of socialism, right? And that its origins go back to antiquity? It’s nowhere near as simple as you make out.

    Tom-B
    Free Member

    What political philosophy should people be reading then TJ to be able to define socialism?

    To clarify, are you saying that you’re a dark green or a socialist? (They’re very different things)

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Errm – Marx and Engels defined socialism and communism as far as I am aware.  Of course there were various forms of communitarian setups prior to that but as far as I am aware Marx and Engels are the creators of socialism as a political philosophy and it was a step on the way to true communism.  got any references otherwise?  I am allways prepared to learn

    Socialism means state or community control of all means of production and a command economy.  Thats why I laugh at folk saying ” I’m a socialist but don’t believe in nationalisation or state control of the whole economy, I believe in free enterprise”

    they have just defined social democracy which is where the state controls some key parts of the economy and manages the market for the rest of the economy

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Im a dark green.  We reach some of the same places as socialism but from a different direction.  Much of the outcomes are the same but for different reasons.  One key difference is I believe in a zero growth economy

    tjagain
    Full Member

    What political philosophy should people be reading then TJ to be able to define socialism?

    Pretty much any basic text on political philosophies I guess.  “Das kapital” is pretty hard going

    Tom-B
    Free Member

    Interesting…..just for a bit of clarity, I’m not a dark green but do lean towards a zero/post growth economy.  I’ve actually written on these very clashes, and will be starting a PhD in the area in October.

    I’m not going to start arguing online with you, but suffice to say, the notion of socialism has evolved a bit since Engels and Marx!

    Raymond Williams wrote extensively around these issues, his writing is absolutely brilliant and very ‘accessible’ by academic standards. His essays around ‘the new left’ and ‘socialism and ecology’ should be of interest.

    More recently Matthew Huber has written about Eco-socialism. I can never quite decide whether or not Kate Raworth and doughnut economics should be considered socialist…. probably not, but as noted by others ‘socialism’ especially in 2024 is an inherently contested term.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    No worries Tom – I am taking the piss really

    Socialism and social democracy are not the same thing.  One can always of course call yourself a democratic socialist like Saunders in the US I guess 🙂

    Tom-B
    Free Member

    Is this the Edinburgh defense? 😁

    tjagain
    Full Member

    I need some reading material.  Ill have a look at those authors you mention

    ransos
    Free Member

    Errm – Marx and Engels defined socialism and communism as far as I am aware.  

    They really didn’t. Modern socialism has its origins in the enlightenment and French revolution.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Of course everything is built on what went before – but socialism was defined by Marx and Engels

    dazh
    Full Member

    I need some reading material. Ill have a look at those authors you mention

    While you’re at it look up Murray Bookchin.

    dissonance
    Full Member

    but socialism was defined by Marx and Engels

    If you are using their definition of socialism because they were “first” (lets leave aside the question around that) then shouldnt you be using John Locke’s definition of liberalism.

    Which very definitively isnt the one you have been using so far.

    ransos
    Free Member

    Of course everything is built on what went before – but socialism was defined by Marx and Engels

    They gave a definition but they certainly weren’t the first.

    Tom-B
    Free Member

    Wasn’t the ‘first’ (I mean how do you say who was the actual first!) a French guy, surname begining with L? His name escapes me.

    ransos
    Free Member

    Wasn’t the ‘first’ (I mean how do you say who was the actual first!) a French guy, surname begining with L? His name escapes me.

    I would argue there was no “first” as there are competing views on what it means. As far as I’m aware, Saint-Simon was the first to use the word and describe it. But there were numerous French philosophers of that time, as well as Robert Owen who could be considered socialists.

    kerley
    Free Member

    I’m not going to start arguing online with you, but suffice to say, the notion of socialism has evolved a bit since Engels and Marx!

    Exactly.  Things change/evolve and form into different approaches (social democracy) but are still inherently socialist in their nature with the same desired outcomes for society.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    FFS – social democracy and socialism are very different things

    socialism requires full state or community ownership of the means of production and a command economy.

    Social democracy is state control of key assets and a managed mixed economy

    Social democracy and socialism have very different aims as well.

    Just accept you are not socialists but social democrats

    theotherjonv
    Full Member

    Ernie is the only real leftie on here.

    On here? How can you possibly think that? Maybe the only really visible one, in this thread, right now.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    OK – the only public lefty on here as in someone who actually believes in socialism

    ransos
    Free Member

    FFS – social democracy and socialism are very different things

    Market socialism? Utopian? Scientific? Communism?

    I agree that social democracy is different to those, but they are all different to each other.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Market socialism is an oxymoron ( I think thats the term – when two opposing words appear together).  If there is a market there is not socialism, in socialism there is no market.  I guess its another way of saying social democracy

    communism is not the same as socialism. Thats very basic stuff

    kerley
    Free Member

    I am going to say I don’t really care that much about pure definitions and am more interested in the form/variant of socialism that I think can work in 2024 so will leave you to your ‘debate’

    BikePawl
    Free Member

    @tjagain

    How many dark greens are flying around the globe? 😈

    tjagain
    Full Member

    in the form/variant of socialism that I think can work in 2024

    Are you in favour of full state control of the means of production and a command economy?  You need both those things for socialism

    What you seem to want is social democracy.  A fine aim.  Thats where you have a mixed economy, a full welfare state and redistibutive taxation.  Its not a form of socialism however.  Its a a different political philosophy

    Like the Scandi countries or Germany or indeed much of europe

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Nobody is perfect bikepawl – not even me. 🙂  Porritt was once asked in a TV interview what his biggest environmental crime was.  he replied flying to here for this interview 🙂

    ransos
    Free Member

    communism is not the same as socialism. Thats very basic stuff

    Your problem there is that Marx used the terms interchangeably. Are you still prepared to reduce socialism to a Marxist definition?

    Market socialism is an oxymoron 

    Yeah, no. A cooperative operating in a market economy, for example.

    kelvin
    Full Member

    There is no purely socialist state in the world. Not even China.

    There is no pure unfettered market economy in the world. Not even the USA.

    These ideas are in practise together, in all countries. We’re all living in mixed economies, and the arguments and political “battle” is all about what that mix is, and how much is state owned, or controlled, or regulated.

    tjagain
    Full Member

    Your problem there is that Marx used the terms interchangeably.

    No – he was very clear on the difference from my reading.  Communism is the end point, socialism is a step on the way.

    dissonance
    Full Member

    Are you in favour of full state control of the means of production and a command economy? You need both those things for socialism

    No, you dont. You are simpifying socialism down to a single version and/or reading a lot into something Marx left rather vague. The problem with your approach is social ownership doesnt simply mean state ownership.

    BikePawl
    Free Member

    @tjagain

    you could argue that there is a difference between flying for work and flying for pleasure.
    However if you’re going to call yourself a dark green then flying for pleasure does seem to be hypocritical

    tjagain
    Full Member

    correct – as above it could be community ownership

    Socialism is clearly state or community owned means of product5ion and a command economy – what you guys keep on describing is social democracy – a different beast

    Nowt5 wrong with social democracy but it is not socialism

    ransos
    Free Member

    No – he was very clear on the difference from my reading.  Communism is the end point, socialism is a step on the way.

    I’m pretty sure it was Lenin who popularised that view.

    Communism is socialist but not all socialism is communist.

    dissonance
    Full Member

    Socialism is clearly state or community owned means of product5ion and a command economy

    It really isnt unless you are the sort of yank you uses “liberal” as an insult.

    Now you could argue about the relative usefulness of the various definitions and at which point they blur into something else but honestly I leave that to the fanatics. So enjoy.

    ditch_jockey
    Full Member

    I’m going to guess TJ has never seen Life of Brian…

    DrJ
    Full Member

    I’m amazed to see that Starmer fully supports Sunak’s rambling waffle about extremism. I’m sure nobody saw that coming !!

    somafunk
    Full Member

    Such a shock, given the lack of authoritarianism in the way Starmer has governed the Labour Party up to now it’s an absolute head scratcher. Lots of good comments on Twitter from various political pundits but they all mention the thing that shall not be mentioned so won’t post them, but they’re there if you know where to look, nudge-nudge…wink-wink.

Viewing 40 posts - 21,161 through 21,200 (of 21,869 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.