Talk politics.

Ok , lets have a look at the dictionary definition of Socialism.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Socialism

Go to the first entry and read. You will notice that it isn't just about the public ownership of the means of production, but distribution also. Now how did this change from the one widely quoted on this forum come about? Notice that it says 'etc', but does not define it, explain it or elaborate upon it. How about publicly owned Schools and Hospitals? Is that Socialism or not?

Now look at the other 3 entries, note how they differ from the first. So, what is Ssocialism ?Lets look here at what one American blogger thinks that Socialism is


Of course- I completely agree with this woman, but then, I am a Socialist myself.
No, she is not my sock puppet, but let me quote her in case the link goes down . Such wisdom as this deserves to be widely distributed and recorded for posterity. here is what she says:-

The United States is a yin-yang balance between Capitalism and Socialism. The primary effect of our many socialist programs and policies is to provide consumer protections and a system of checks and balances (i.e., oversight or regulations) that prevent bottomless-pit GREED from becoming the norm.

Some of America's most cherished socialist systems include, but are not limited to, the following: the U.S. Post Office, our military, the VA medical system, police and firefighters, our public schools and colleges, highways and roadways, national parks, our libraries, bridges and tunnels, etc. We also have agencies within our government, such as the FDA (food and drug safety); OSHA (worker safety while on the job), FAA (flight safety); the Department of Education, which established national standards that keep our school curriculae competitive with other nations' schools around the world as well as across state lines; etc.

Hope this helps you with your project. The general rule of thumb is that Capitalism without the balance of Socialism causes downfall due to rampant greed and corruption. Socialism without the impetus of Capitalism can lead to downfall through stagnation. The two work hand-in-hand to maintain a balanced and civilized society. Republican right-wingers and Libertarians tend to push too hard for ALL CAPITALISM; Democratic left-wingers (i.e., "bleeding heart" Liberals) tend to push too hard for social programs that may produce dependency. The CENTRIST or PROGRESSIVE or MODERATE stances have historically worked the BEST for our nation's strength, safety, and prosperity.

Emphasis added on the last bit by me. Note that, on the original site, she was chosen as giving the best answer on what Socialism is about. So what I have said about Socialism on this isn't just something I made up or pulled out of the air - it is what most informed people on the International internet Community consider Socialism to be about.

Here is the original link if you want to check it.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100927082146AAMtQd4

So, there we have it. Socialism can be thought of as the Community force, the Group focus, if you like, that balances the Individual focus and force at work in Society. According to Margaret Thatcher, " There is no such thing as 'society', we are all individuals". Yet according to David Cameron, who made reference to Mrs Thatcher's famous speech, "There is such a thing as society - it's just not the same thing as the State".
So, you see, In England, both Socialism and even Conservatism are changing, developing and evolving as the respective parties work through their own experiences and issues. British Conservatives like David Cameron are currently focussing on the idea of a ' Big Society', in which they see corporations offering training, the use of premises, and other forms of service to the community for free, as well as individuals acting as volunteers in the community.

It is not true that Conservatives in the Uk are ~all~ about individualism, Contemporary UK Conservatives also have some form of focus on the community, and recognise the role of Communities at all levels in Public life. theey juust would not call it ' Socialism', though.


So, let us look at the history of Socialism then, and try to understand what is is and where it came from. Stand by for some industrial strength heavy duty links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_socialism

You will note that Socialism is not Marxism marx came later. marx did not even ' invent' Communism - he simply presented an analysis of economics from a Socialist perspective, and of course he argues that ~his# form of Socialism is the only ~real~ Socialism that you can buy , or buy into.

But he is wrong. there are many different types of Socialism. the word originated in the France, around the time of the french Revolution "Socialisme", but Robert Owen, an Englishman, introduced the word into the English Language as "Socialism".

And for him , Socialism was this 'community focus', not an economic or political analysis that said that the workers were inevitably going to rise up one day and overthrow the Capitalist owners and install a Workers State.

No, he was a visionary and pioneering mill owner who recognised the value and contribution of his workers and sought to build co operatives. His mill was visited by many who heard about his pioneering ideas and practices. He was a land owner and businessman , but he invested in his workers welfare, providing them not just with jobs but with well built homes, sanitation and even schools for their children. This was how he saw his Socialist Ideals being fulfilled, and to be honest, I go more with Owen than I do with Marx when it come s to Socialist theory. Karl Marx never even ' invented' Communism. It was already there when Marx came along and started writing about it.Ok, I am not sure of a better word, but 'invented' will do for now.
Go on , have another link - you know you want to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_socialism
See, there are many types of Socialism.
there are all sorts of people , with different ideas that contributed to it over the years apart from Karl Marx.

There was Robert Owen, Frederick Engels, George Orwell, as well as Karl Marx, and you may want to look them all up on Wikipedia and compare and contrast their views and how they went and applied their theories.

There are Christian Socialists, Islamic Socialists, Communists and Free Market Socialists, and if you want fries with their version of Socialism, you can have some. So, please, lets not have any more about " Socialism = the public ownership of the means of production". Socialists did think that way once, but soon branched out into wanting the ownership of shops and transport facilities as well. some dropped the idea of the State owning and running them , but stuck out for state run schools and hospitals , with public regulation of private enterprise as the way to go.

Yes, they mostly believe in having a State that raises the money to do Public works, but then , it also covers Co operatives, and other economic matters as well as being philosophical as well as political in nature.

This is what Socialism actually IS, according to the actual people who espouse it, and believed in it and even developed it.

Socialism was not buried by Thatcher, it came before her and will still be around when she has passed away.
it came before Marx, even , and whereas many of his predictions have proven to be wrong, socialism still lives on , evolving and developing around the world. Socialism does not inevitably lead to Communism, even though Marx said flatly that it did. Marx was never right on all occasions.

Socialism isn't eveil - it is wonderful stuff - you can even find some in America, if you know where to look.