socialism

T

theMAJORITY

MAJORITYrules-sorry
Equality of outcome or equality of condition is a form of egalitarianism which seeks to reduce or eliminate differences in material condition between individuals or households in a society. This usually means equalizing income and/or total wealth to a certain degree.

In theory, equality of outcome can be distinguished from equal opportunity. Outcomes can usually be measured with a great degree of precision, opportunities cannot. That is why many proponents of equal opportunity use measures of equality of outcome to judge success. To the extent that inequalities can be passed from one generation to another through substantial gifts and wealth inheritance, it is unclear that equality of opportunity for children can be achieved without greater equality of outcome for parents. Moreover, access and opportunity to various social institutions is partially dependent on equality of outcome. Proponents recognize that greater equality of outcome can be a force preventing co-optation of non-economic institutions important to social control and policy formation, such as the legal system, media or the electoral process, by individuals and coalitions of wealthy people.

A progressive taxation system is likely to increase equality of outcome, and so is a WELFARE STATE. However, these will tend only to reduce social inequality, not eliminate it entirely. A total elimination of social inequality is the goal of most forms of socialism. (this is not America)

Greater equality of outcome is likely to reduce relative poverty, purportedly leading to a more cohesive society. However, if taken to an extreme it may lead to greater absolute poverty if it negatively affects a country's GDP by damaging incentives to work harder. (read that several more times--then think about the extreem of irresponsivble global trade and the F&F failure that puts us in the path of poverty) Critics of equality of outcome argue that it is more important to raise the standard of living of the poorest in absolute terms. Some critics additionally disagree with the concept of equality of outcome on philosophical grounds (against the human spirit).

A related argument is often encountered in education and more specifically in the debates on the grammar school in the United Kingdom and in the debates on gifted education in various countries. According to that argument, people by nature have differing levels of ability and initiative which lead some to achieve better outcomes than others. Therefore, it is considered impossible to ensure equality of outcome without imposing inequality of opportunity. Advocates of equality of outcome usually respond with the argument that it is society which makes it easier for some individuals to surpass others, and that the natural differences between people are merely a matter of different people being better at different activities, rather than some being overall superior to others.

John Rawls, in his A Theory of Justice (1971), developed a "second principle of justice" that economic and social inequalities can only be justified if they benefit the most disadvantaged members of society. Furthermore, all economically and socially privileged positions must be open to all people equally. Rawls argues that the inequality between a doctor's salary and a grocery clerk's is only acceptable if this is the only way to encourage the training of sufficient numbers of doctors, preventing an unacceptable decline in the availability of medical care (which would therefore disadvantage everyone).



What Raws forgets is---I can bag my own grocerys and use the automated machine.
 
uscitizen said:
I wonder where he plagerized that ?
I will guarantee-damn-tee you he did not write it.
Click to expand...

I never said I wrote it.

And I did not write this either. Hell--I don't know what some of these ism's are that you support. But--that makes two of us.

In politics, left-wing, the political left, or the Left are positions that seek to reform or abolish the existing social order in favor of a more equal outcomes.[1] Often, left-wing movements have their roots in Marxism,[1] but this is not universally true, as some left-wing movements are anti-state in nature.

On economic issues, the left is anti-capitalist and advocates control by the people, usually through either elected leaders, as in representative democracy, or the people themselves, as in direct democracy. This can be achieved through state enterprises and nationalizations, labor unions, worker cooperatives, communes, taxation, regulation, bureaucracies, and politburos.

Socially, the left is divided. One strain of left-wing movements, common in Africa[2] and Asia[3], seeks to bring social life to strong political control, for instance, by condemning sexual liberation as "capitalist disorder" and homosexuals as class enemies.[4] Another strain, common in Western countries, usually accepts and supports social freedom. Here the left is more supportive of affirmative action, cultural pluralism and/or multiculturalism. They also tend to favor same-sex marriage[5] and are associated with environmentalism,[6] civil rights and feminist movements.

Ideologies considered part of the left include Marxism, Communism, Maoism, Progressivism, Social liberalism, Socialism, Democratic socialism, Social democracy, Left-libertarianism, Syndicalism, Autonomism, Green Politics, and most forms of Anarchism.
 
Last edited:
If you did not write it you are supposed to provide a link to keep this board and Damo out of legal trouble.

You are violating one of the few rules on this board.
 
uscitizen said:
If you did not write it you are supposed to provide a link to keep this board and Damo out of legal trouble.
Click to expand...

Both are from wikipedia.

It is OK to plagerize a lie---if you have a link from the media though?

Legally, I believe,---I don't have to show where I got it (which does not lend to credibility)--I just can't take credit for writing it. That would be stealing.
 
Last edited:
wikipedia, the bastion of accuracy that it is.


This is just too easy. lol
 
theMAJORITY said:
Both are from wikipedia.

It is OK to plagerize a lie---if you have a link from the media though?

Legally, I believe,---I don't have to show where I got it--I just can't take credit for writing it.
Click to expand...
The fair use act allows you to use it, if you provide a link. Please provide links to other's copyrighted material.
 
theMAJORITY said:
Both are from wikipedia.

It is OK to plagerize a lie---if you have a link from the media though?

Legally, I believe,---I don't have to show where I got it--I just can't take credit for writing it.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. You are using someone else's work and property (copyright shows ownership).

So, even if you don't take credit for writing it, if you use it you must credit it.
 
Here is more---from wikipedia.

Definition
From the 18th to 20th Centuries the "Old Left" argued that differences in social class determined the nature of a society.

The modern socialist movement largely originated in the late–19th century working class movement. During this period, the term "socialism" was first used by European social critics, who spoke against capitalism and private property. Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, wrote that socialism would be achieved through class struggle and a proletarian revolution.[7] Marxism has had a lasting influence on most branches of socialism.

As the ideas of Marx and Engels took on flesh, particularly in central Europe, socialists sought to unite in an international organization. In 1889, on the centennial of the French Revolution of 1789, the Second International was founded, with 384 delegates from 20 countries representing about 300 labour and socialist organizations.[8] It was termed the "Socialist International" and Engels was elected honorary president at the third congress in 1893.


Vladimir Lenin, the founder of Marxism-Leninism.When World War I began in 1914, many European socialist leaders supported their respective governments' war aims. The social democratic parties in the UK, France, Belgium and Germany supported their respective state's wartime military and economic planning, discarding their commitment to internationalism and solidarity.

Lenin, however, denounced the war as an imperialist conflict, and urged workers worldwide to use it as an occasion for proletarian revolution. The Second International dissolved during the war, while Lenin, Trotsky, Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, together with a small number of other Marxists opposed to the war, came together in the Zimmerwald Conference in September 1915.


[edit] Socialists seize power in Russia
The Russian Revolution of October 1917 brought about the definitive ideological division between Communists as denoted with a capital "C" on the one hand and other communist and socialist trends such as anarcho-communists and social democrats, on the other. The Left Opposition in the Soviet Union gave rise to Trotskyism which was to remain isolated and insignificant for another fifty years, except in Sri Lanka where Trotskyism gained the majority and the pro-Moscow wing was expelled from the Communist Party.

In 1922, the fourth congress of the Communist International took up the policy of the United Front, urging Communists to work with rank and file Social Democrats while remaining critical of their leaders, who they criticized for "betraying" the working class by supporting the war efforts of their respective capitalist classes. For their part, the social democrats pointed to the dislocation caused by revolution, and later, the growing authoritarianism of the Communist Parties. When the Communist Party of Great Britain applied to affiliate to the Labour Party in 1920 it was turned down.


Joseph Stalin advocated Stalinist policies.
[edit] After the World War II
Eurocommunism was a new trend in the 1970s and 1980s within various Western European communist parties to develop a theory and practice of social transformation that was more relevant in a Western European democracy and less aligned to the partyline of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Some Communist parties with strong popular support, notably the Italian Communist Party (PCI) and the Spanish Communist Party (PCE) adopted Eurocommunism most enthusiastically. On the contrary, at least one mass party, the French Communist Party (PCF) and many smaller parties strongly opposed to it and stayed aligned to the positions of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union until the end of USSR (although the PCF did make a brief turn toward Eurocommunism in the mid-to-late 1970s).

The politics of détente also played a part. With war less likely, Western communists were under less pressure to follow Soviet orthodoxy yet also wanted to engage with a rise in western proletarian militancy such as Italy's Hot Autumn and Britain's shop steward's movement.

Eurocommunist ideas won at least partial acceptance outside of Western Europe. Prominent parties influenced by it outside of Europe were the Movement for Socialism (Venezuela), the Japanese Communist Party, the Mexican Communist Party and the Communist Party of Australia. Mikhail Gorbachev also refers to Eurocommunism as a key influence on the ideas of glasnost and perestroika in his memoirs.

The Anti-Rightist Movement of the People's Republic of China in the 1950s and early 1960s consisted of a series of campaigns to purge alleged "rightists" within the Communist Party of China and abroad. The campaigns were instigated by the Chairman, Mao Zedong.

The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in the People’s Republic of China was a struggle for power within the Communist Party of China that manifested into wide-scale social, political, and economic violence and chaos, which grew to include large sections of Chinese society and eventually brought the entire country to the brink of civil war. It was launched by Mao Zedong, the chairman of the Communist Party of China, on May 16, 1966, officially as a campaign to rid China of its “liberal bourgeoisie” elements and to continue revolutionary class struggle by mobilizing the thoughts and actions of China’s youth, who formed Red Guards groups around the country.


Mao Zedong, the founder of Maoism.During the 1960s this perspective was broadened by the "New Left" to include an egalitarian approach to cultural politics, including "New Social Movements" based on anti-racism, feminism, environmentalism and LGBT rights. This turn to so-called "identity politics" has been decried by organizations of the Old Left[9] as being partially responsible, together with other failures to focus on the class structure of society as the essential issue, for the co-optation of leftist elements into establishment ones as in the neo-conservative, neo-liberals, and greens.


Yasser Arafat, a famous leader of Arab Socialism, speaking at the World Economic Forum in 2001The last quarter of the twentieth century marked a period of major crisis for Communists in the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc, where the growing shortages of housing and consumer goods, combined with the lack of individual rights to assembly and speech, began to disillusion more and more Communist party members. With the rapid collapse of Communist party rule in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991, the Soviet version of socialism has almost disappeared as a worldwide political force.


[edit] Today
African socialism is an African left-wing movement. Many African politicians of the 1950s and 1960s professed their support for African socialism, although definitions and interpretations of this term varied considerably.

African identity and socialism were often intertwined. Some leaders claimed that Africa had always been “socialist,” and appealed to socialism as a unifying cultural element for Africans. This was not by any means the only form of African identity that they appealed to, but the combination of socialism and African identity was doubly effective in ending the era of old imperial regimes. Social revolution usually went hand-in-hand with socialism.

However, most regimes following African socialist programmes did not deliver on the promises of self-sufficiency, prosperity, and equality (partly as a result of the empowerment of the governments at the expense of the people), and as a result many have grown disillusioned with African socialism.

Center left refers to the left side of mainstream politics in liberal democracies. These support liberal democracy, representative democracy, and private property rights in combination with tax funded spending on social welfare, active regulation of the economy, and some public ownership. "Center" is generally defined relative to a particular national or regional norm rather than the global state of affairs.

Prominent examples of center-left parties include the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party, UK Labour Party, the US Democratic Party[10], and the Social Democratic Party of Germany. There are also many nationalist parties who describe themselves as being on the left. For example in the United Kingdom in Scotland there is the Scottish National Party (SNP), in Wales there is Plaid Cymru (Party of Wales).

Totalitarian communism continues to be a major left-wing ideology. By the beginning of the 21st century, states controlled by Communist parties under a single-party system include the People's Republic of China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. Communist parties, or their descendant parties, remain politically important in many countries. President Vladimir Voronin of Moldova is a member of the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova, and President Dimitris Christofias of Cyprus is a member of the Progressive Party of Working People, but the countries are not run under single-party rule. In South Africa, the Communist Party is a partner in the ANC-led government. In India, communists lead the governments of three states, with a combined population of more than 115 million. In Nepal, communists hold a majority in the parliament.[11]

In some countries (especially the UK), "soft left" refers to reformist, democratic and/or parliamentary forms of socialism, whereas "hard left" refers to socialists who advocate more radical change in society. Organizations described as far left are rooted in the politics of the "Old Left." Ultra-left organizations are those on the extreme left of the political spectrum, such as autonomism and anarchism.

As with "center" the term 'left-wing' is relative to the politics of individual countries and regions. In an article on the 2001 general election in the United Kingdom, the American Washington Post newspaper observed that the British Conservative party's policies on healthcare and welfare would be on "the far left-wing fringe of American politics", and that the British election had been conducted way to the left of America's political dialogue.[12]


Yousaf Raza Gillani, the leader of Pakistan (islamic socialist Pakistan Peoples Party).Arab Socialism (Arabic: الاشتراكية العربية‎, al-ishtirākīya al-‘arabīya) is a political ideology based on an amalgamation of Pan-Arabism and Socialism. Arab Socialism is distinct from the much broader tradition of socialist thought in the Arab World, which predates Arab Socialism by as much as 50 years. Saddam Hussein's regime was a major champion of this left-wing movement.

In some Roman Catholic countries there is a tradition of liberation theology which focuses upon "social justice", and in some Protestant countries there is a tradition of Christian Socialism. Some philosophers and historians, such as Eric Voegelin[13] and Jacob Talmon[14], argue that the left is a utopian secular political religion.

Leftists themselves are divided among those who emphasize individual well-being (modern liberals) and communitarians (radicals and socialists).[citation needed]

So there you have it folks---all the philosophoes you desire--but the USA was never mentioned as a socialist mation. You drank the kool-aid.
 
Last edited:
Just for you, Maj.


"Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by governments, giving the creator of an original work of authorship exclusive rights to control its distribution, usually for a limited time, after which the work enters the public domain. Generally, it is "the right to copy", but usually provides the author with other rights as well, such as the right to be credited for the work, to determine who may adapt the work to other forms, who may perform the work, who may financially benefit from it, and other, related rights. It is an intellectual property form (like the patent, the trademark, and the trade secret) applicable to any expressible form of an idea or information that is substantive and discrete. Copyright was initially conceived as a way for governments in Europe to restrict printing; the contemporary intent of copyright is to promote the creation of new works by giving authors control of and profit from them.

Copyright has been internationally standardized, lasting between fifty to a hundred years from the author's death, or a finite period for anonymous or corporate authorship; some jurisdictions have required formalities to establishing copyright, most recognize copyright in any completed work, without formal registration. Generally, copyright is enforced as a civil matter, though some jurisdictions do apply criminal sanctions.

Most jurisdictions recognize copyright limitations, allowing "fair" exceptions to the author's exclusivity of copyright, and giving users certain rights. The development of the Internet, digital media, computer network technologies, such as peer-to-peer filesharing, have prompted reinterpretation of these exceptions, introduced new difficulties in enforcing copyright, and inspired additional challenges to copyright law's philosophic basis. Simultaneously, businesses with great economic dependence upon copyright have advocated the extension and expansion of their copy rights, and sought additional legal and technological enforcement."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyrights
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top