When does working with the community become communism?

[ThinkingSapien]

In the “God Bless America” thread some one said something about the USA president having socialistic/communistic views. For any one that shares that opinion could you further elaborate on that? Is there a criteria or condition that separates attempts to take care of our fellow human beings from socialism?

 

[InJesusItrust]

When it becomes involuntary

 

[ThinkingSapien]

When it becomes involuntary

Does that mean you would also classify the other instances of money being involuntarily subtracted from my income for community purposes (through taxes) as being instances of socialism?

 

[empther]

Originally Posted by InJesusItrust
When it becomes involuntary
_

Does that mean you would also classify the other instances of money being involuntarily subtracted from my income for community purposes (through taxes) as being instances of socialism?

---

Yes because the money is used by agencies and organizations controlled by the government.
That’s socialism.

For example: if the government pays for health insurance as we see in some countries,
your doctor works for the government,
and your doctor will only do for you what he gets paid for.

 

[inocente]

Yes because the money is used by agencies and organizations controlled by the government.
That’s socialism.

For example: if the government pays for health insurance as we see in some countries,
your doctor works for the government,
and your doctor will only do for you what he gets paid for.

According to that definition the US Army is socialist because it’s an organization paid for and controlled by government.

Outside of Fox, socialism means the social ownership of property and means of production.

 

[DarkLight]

Yes because the money is used by agencies and organizations controlled by the government.
That’s socialism.

For example: if the government pays for health insurance as we see in some countries,
your doctor works for the government,
and your doctor will only do for you what he gets paid for.

Trouble is this logic could be applied to anything we pay taxes for. Publicly funded roads? Socialism. Schools? Socialism. A standing professional arm? Socialism.

 

[JDaniel]

In the “God Bless America” thread some one said something about the USA president having socialistic/communistic views. For any one that shares that opinion could you further elaborate on that? Is there a criteria or condition that separates attempts to take care of our fellow human beings from socialism?

TS:

That’s a tough call. There’s no solid line. We are also called to be caretakers of our resources. The mis-use of our resources may run us afoul of our resource’s capacities. All we have to go on is our understandings from history. If, in our understandings from history, we see that socialistic/communistic mechanisms have only resulted in more pain and suffering for those who are supposed to benefit from them, then we need to either abort their institution, or modify them - on the hoof - such that they achieve their intended goals. Serious mis-use seems to result in dramatic increases in pain and suffering. There’s probably no once-communist civilization that has remained purely communistic - except under the ever-present threat of greater pain and suffering.

From our awareness of socialistic/communistic governance, we notice that production suffers. It seems that human beings, if we are to expend a great deal of our energies and resources, do so, for the most part, only when two things are present: (1) a reward system of some kind or other, and (2) the continuous capability of replenishing our expended resources. Both of these seem to degrade steadily in socialistic/communistic enterprises - except for the top echelon. And, this phenomenon begs questions.

God bless,
jd

 

[JDaniel]

Yes because the money is used by agencies and organizations controlled by the government.
That’s socialism.

For example: if the government pays for health insurance as we see in some countries,
your doctor works for the government,
and your doctor will only do for you what he gets paid for.

Empther:

I think all of us enter into a social contract with the state. In this sense then, they are not, IMHO, precisely socialistic/communistic. It is a modification that seems to work.

God bless,
jd

 

[philial]

Yes because the money is used by agencies and organizations controlled by the government.
That’s socialism.

For example: if the government pays for health insurance as we see in some countries,
your doctor works for the government,
and your doctor will only do for you what he gets paid for.

Exactly. Other examples : the armed forces, inter-state highways, international airports, federal aid after hurricanes, social services, the FBI… the list is endless. Oh, the creeping menace of it all

 

[bquinnan]

I would say that it becomes socialism when the government assumes the responsibility of providing for individual needs, rather than just the general needs of society. For example, the military is clearly a general need that is expected to benefit everyone collectively. The soldiers are not there to provide for my personal protection (unless my personal safety is some how directly tied to national security and interests, as with a diplomat). The court system is intended to apply a universal system of laws, benefiting everyone by ensuring that those laws can be enforced and have meaning.

On the other hand, my medical treatment benefits me personally, as does my education. Some would argue that the availability of a hospital that is open to all benefits everyone, but whatever treatments I receive there benefit only me. In contrast, while the court system may punish a criminal for a crime primarily directed at one individual, in doing so, it promotes a law that all members of that community are expected to follow, and equally importantly, that members of the community may expect others to follow. If a thief goes to jail for stealing from you, I also benefit, because the system that put him in jail will presumably discourage others from stealing from me and punish them if they do. If individuals are allowed to steal from on another without consequence, none of us may be secure with our own property.

There are circumstances, of course, in which society might well be impacted by one individual’s medical problems, such as a contagious disease, in which case governmental action would not be considered socialism.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

In the “God Bless America” thread some one said something about the USA president having socialistic/communistic views. For any one that shares that opinion could you further elaborate on that? Is there a criteria or condition that separates attempts to take care of our fellow human beings from socialism?

:whackadoo::whackadoo::whackadoo:

 

[mytruepower2]

In the “God Bless America” thread some one said something about the USA president having socialistic/communistic views. For any one that shares that opinion could you further elaborate on that? Is there a criteria or condition that separates attempts to take care of our fellow human beings from socialism?

It becomes Communism at the moment that the focus becomes on prioritizing the wellbeing of the community over one’s religious or moral obligations, or indeed, over everything else.

 

[hieroglyph]

Working with the community voluntarily is communalism. Volunteer work with charities is a communal virtue. As a government system, look at the kibutzim, which were voluntary socialist communities. While the idea was executed well, issues came up such as the community paying for medical school for an individual, providing for retirement, or dealing with luxury items such as television. All of the communes either fell apart from voluntary resignations or adapted to incorporate capitalism to resolve these issues.

A communal system in the USA would be implemented as a voluntary association sharing costs and risks. This is not obamacare.

Communism is the coercion of the state towards social ends, in violation of the rights of the individual. Communism represses religion, assigns people jobs and housing, sets pay limits, and slowly takes over private industry until there is little or none left. It also often involves central planning in regards to the provision of food and healthcare. The Soviet Union was the largest communist experiment and utterly fell apart. It failed in regards to mass starvation from poor food distribution planning. The healthcare system struggled with unstocked hospitals and untrained doctors due to central planning that did not reflect demand or reward specialization. There was a loss of freedom of speech and political assembly to secret police, and the persecution of religion, particularly the Orthodox church. It also developed an aristocracy in the form of senior party officials who enjoyed luxury.

The condemnation of Obama is that his takeover of auto and bank industries, socializing private corporation’s debts, enacting a health plan based on fines and mandates, as well as White House czars wielding influence beyond the law is more akin to the failed Soviet system.

 

[pig]

The reason for having government, and the purpose of government, is to protect ‘the people’, its people.
So ‘the people’ have sovereignty. The people want defence. The people want roads. The people want private healthcare. Or, the people want a mixture of public/private healthcare.
The people decide by ballot or by other means of consensus what they want.
Socialism appears to be an agreement in advance to adapt an ideology without any particular opt-out clause, and you can only hope that everything is being done for the best.

 

[austenbosten]

In the “God Bless America” thread some one said something about the USA president having socialistic/communistic views. For any one that shares that opinion could you further elaborate on that? Is there a criteria or condition that separates attempts to take care of our fellow human beings from socialism?

Video

From the mouth of the man himself, he admits raising taxes in NOT about increasing Revenues to fund the government, but “Fairness”

No further explanation, but if still confused; please read The Communist Manifesto.

 

[PropertyDualist]

Anyone who says that the US is “socialist” has no clue what actual socialism is.

Anyone who says that the US is “communist”… head desk another head desk yet another head desk

Seriously, just look this stuff up online… our country is actual further right than the “center” or perfect balance point between left and right.

 

[mytruepower2]

Anyone who says that the US is “socialist” has no clue what actual socialism is.

Anyone who says that the US is “communist”… head desk another head desk yet another head desk

Seriously, just look this stuff up online… our country is actual further right than the “center” or perfect balance point between left and right.

These words have definitions, you know. They’re not decided on a grade curve.

If your country’s government seeks to own or regulate the means of exchange, distribution and/or production, that’s socialism, regardless of what other governments are doing.