What is socialist politics?

Answer 1

To make plunder legal. To take wealth from one person and grant to another and to call this fair and just. How dare you ! The above is a travesty ! Socialism is all about all people of society benefitting from the good of the society. Unfortunately we are not all going to be Leaders & people of power. Some of us in society are going to be at the bottom of the heap looking up. That does not mean that all tha ills of the world should be perpetratred on the poor. Some people in this life need help, especially in times of need. I don't live in the US: I live in Britain: In Britain when you need to go to hospital you are supported by the NHS within the Welfare State. And quite right too. There is a Private sector where you get good treatment, but most use the NHS. There is also in UK the Public School system, which is Private ! And the contentious point is this: Being a Socialist I wouldn't even allow people the choice. You will have the NHS because it is for the benefit of all. Your children will go to a State School because it is for the benefit of all of us. Yes, I admire the standards which the private sector sets. Yes, I admire the wealth thast some people have. I aspire that we all, sorry, I'll retype that, ALL, have such riches. Socialism is all about the greatest good for the greatest number. Not stuff you I am wealthy & you are not. In Australia we have both a Public and private health system as well as a PBS system (drugs). We don't believe in having somone die on the streets because they have no money. We don't treat dogs like that so why should we do it with our fellow humans - or - would you impose a death sentence by putting someone down because they can't afford health care. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- How dare I? How dare those who would justify plunder in the name of social justice! There lies the travesty!! Socialism is an ism and people are entitled to their beliefs but that this particular ism actually benefits the good of society is debatable to be sure. It is the greater good for each and every individual that matters and society is nothing more than the sum total of those individuals. Society did not bring us Wikianswers, some enterprising individual did and society is better for it. Society did not bring us the internet nor computers individuals did and society is better for it. Society does not nor can it ease the suffering of the poor, nor can it heal the sick nor will it ever educate the ignorant. Individuals have done this and will continue to do so in spite of the continual intrusions and interferences made in the name of society.

Who ever it is that owns this site has not endeavored to intrude and interfere with our debate on this page, that person simply recognized the great good that would come from such a vigorous and healthy debate. Those who own and operate Wikianswers have done very little to limit choice, nay my brother, they have facilitated and encouraged even more choice! Yet the zealous socialist openly and proudly declares that certain choices should not be allowed. The choice to freely operate in the market place would be denied to those of us who would do so in the name of social justice. But where is the justice in that? I live in the U.S. and if I needed to I could rely upon social services for health and education but I choose not to! I prefer, nay sir, I insist on paying my own way. I shall accept responsibility for my own actions and will endeavor to accept responsibilities for as many others as I can. Where is the travesty in this? There is no travesty in this, and yet both my British brother and my Australian brother ignore this and instead rely upon emotive language suggesting because I would pay my own way rather than rely upon a socialist tax scheme, that I am condemning the poor to die on the streets. Both of these men are smarter than that and know better. There is no shame or guilt in paying ones own way yet plenty of shame and guilt in disingenuous language just to win an argument. If socialism is such a good idea then all this disingenuous emotional outburst wouldn't be necessary.

I am as much a proponent as you claim to be that we ALL know such riches as the rich do. I believe with all my heart that each and everyone of us are more than capable of flourishing and prospering as is our right to do so. If socialism is truly about the greater good then what good are you aiming for? Limiting the choice and freedoms of humanity in the name of the greater good? Hitler was a socialist! Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin all justified their tyrannical actions in the name of the greater good. It is the socialist that endeavors to divide by observing the rich and with great envy declaring their wealth not justified. If certain rich people have gained their wealth through plunder then they have plundered and that is a travesty! To justify the plunder of ALL people because a very limited amount of wealthy people gained that wealth through plunder is a travesty!! If it is the greater good you aim for, and my brother, I know it is, then consider your words, consider how by limiting the choice and freedom of others to act in their own best interest will not at all lead us down the path of the greater good. To act in ones own best interest is a right and should not ever be denied any individual. If an individual acts in ways not according to their best interest, then justice will prevail and the natural laws of the universe will encourage this individual to correct the errors of their ways.

Socialism has not eradicated poverty nor will it ever and yet it purports to work towards that end. Capitalism or free market principles makes no such pretense. It is merely an economic system that offers freedom of choice as the best and surest way to obtaining the greater good. How dare I? How dare I advocate freedom? How dare I advocate respect for other peoples property? It was Proudhomme who declared all property theft and ironically was proudly an anarchist. You, my brother, have no regard for anarchy as I have read your answers in other pages. Any time I debate the issue with a socialist on the notion that property is theft, I don't hesitate to claim my writing as my property and the socialist never hesitates to declare that is not property. Not property? The what is it. Then they say they mean real property. Ah, then all real estate is theft! But then I say convince the bear in hibernation inside a warm cave that it is really just community property. They roll their eyes and explain they are talking about civilization about society, talking to me as if I am too slow on the uptake and yet they seem wholly unaware that they have had to redefine their own notion of property each step of the way. The great contradictions and confusions of socialists across the world abound. There has to be a better way than enslaving people in order to free them. Let people be free! Let them be free to act in their own best interest and who are you or who am I to tell them what is in their best interest? Let people be free. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, I am not saying that property is theft. Neither is taxation. Whether we like it or we do not like it we live in countries, all of us, who demand certain things and these things cost money. The only money that any government or society has is generated by its inhabitants & the taxation that they contribute. It seems there is a clear difference here in the willingness to contribute to the society in which we live. Taxation provides for society, it is not stolen from it. The money which we have to pay for the benefits that society provides for is not stolen fron us. It is the tarriff for living the sphisticated lives we do. We cannot live without defence forces, we cannot live without police or emergency services. I do not accept the idea of someone being ill and needing thousands of pounds of treatment in hospital and if the individual hasn't got it then that is tough. Go & die somewhere else. I do not live in a country which says that & would never want to. It is not the responsibility of the individual to supply their own health insurance, it is for the state to do that. That is what Socialism is. That is what the 'Welfare State' of the post WW2 Labour government established in Britain. It is not to the detriment of anyones Freedom that they are asked to contribute. As many have to that can, because all are needed to share the responsibility. Yes, of course there are exceptions: but people who try to avoid their responsibilities in this are either the very, very rich or parasites such as 'New Age Travellers'.... I believe we all have a duty to support those in our communities who are less well off, and less able to support themselves as we might like. That is not Plunder. Paying the Policemans wages is not Plunder. Paying the banker a pension which is out of all proportion to the work he has done & the money he has squandered in the current financial crisis, paying that bastards pension while he should be in jail & his possessions repossessed, in my personal view, now that is what I call Plunder. That is what I call theft on the grand scale. But no doubt that person can afford a lawyer to justify what he has done & make it silver tongued ok. Not in my world he doesn't. That simply is not what social justice is or ever has been. And the problem this engenders is that this is exactly what the 'free market' provides for. It cannot be justified. Right is right: Wrong is no mans right. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Policing and providing for the common defense of a nation is not socialism nor is taxation. Taxation should be paid to keep the grinding wheels of government moving but to declare that justice and providing for the common defense are actions that belong to socialists alone is disingenuous at best. Providing for indigent care by using tax dollars to pay hospital bills is a form of socialism and I have no problem with this. What I hope I made clear is I most certainly do have a problem with those who would advocate my choice to pay my own way and buy my own medical services as a freedom "not allowed". What is wrong with the socialist that they would dismiss the obvious reality that I do pay taxes that contribute to the cost of indigent care and in spite of my own poverty endeavor to pay my own way? How could one so callously disregard this effort? When taxation is used to pay for the necessary costs of government then taxation is not only necessary it is just. When taxation is used to redistribute wealth it is plunder. Right is right and wrong is wrong. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No, I do not accept disingenuousness is here. The 'Free Market' would be fine if only it existed in practice. I am not suggesting all people who are rich are dishonest or do not deserve a decent standard of living. I am suggesting that rates of taxation, contributions to the fabric of society (Bearing in mind Mrs Thatcher notably said there is no such thing as society) have to be disproportionate between the wealthy & the poor. The simple difference being one group can afford it and one simply cannot. This is going to become more & more obvious in the days to come: The current economic situation is going to be evident that the world is becoming poorer, in Britain its effects are breginning to be felt. Poverty is going to be noticable and there will be casualties. Let them eat cake anyone ?

Answer 2

Some variation of the materialist conception of history (historical materialism) or positivism. Marxism was a major influence on socialist thought, and was based on a synthesis of historical materialism with dialectical reasoning, termed "dialectical materialism".

Early, pre-Marxian socialists were heavily influenced by democracy and classical liberalism.

Answer 3

Socialist politics means a politician who is doing work for the citizen of people, for betterment and improving their condition. In my Mr. Brijmohan Agrawal is one of the socialist politician - he interacts with people, discuss his plans openly with the people ans appreciates their views or opinion on his plans.

Even he encourages training and education for the development of nation.

To know more check the link twitter.com/brijmohan_cg