email: Is there any place that is 'doing socialism right?'
The following is a reply to an email forwarding the above question.
Nik: Do you think there is any place that is doing socialism right?
If you ever come to the States, my husband and I invite you to dinner. I would love to sit and talk with you someday. He's a grumpy conservative, but loves me enough to let me broaden his horizons a bit.
ed:
Hi Nicole,
So nice to hear from you
Um, the only place that i personally know of that is 'doing socialism right' is in my personal circle..haha. I enforce socialism in my personal circle with an iron hand behind a red spandex curtain. In other words, I expect everyone within my group to increase their knowledge and intelligence, to share what they have with all others within, and to not sink to a dependency that sees them just taking what the other has to give without becoming as good as the other so as to give as much back.
the bourgeois-cracies out there - mistakenly called ‘democracies’ - with the aid of the media, tend to use the consequences of western economic sabotage as the logical corollary of the socialist ethos. That is pure BS of course.
China and the USSR were never socialist. Cuba is not socialist either. The former two may be known as 'state capitalist' societies - just imagine Donald Trump running a country and sucking up all competition into his departments. (btw, ever heard of 'Immortal Technique' - a kickass intelligent Latino who speaks, or raps/sings, very insightfully on parts of this subject.) As for Cuba, it started off positively, but with western embargoes intended to destabilise the socialist government there, it is to be expected that they turned oppressive. No system can be maintained in the face of economic sabotage. Not the socialist one, nor the capitalist one. But the bourgeois-cracies out there - mistakenly called ‘democracies’ - with the aid of the media, tend to use the consequences of western economic sabotage as the logical corollary of the socialist ethos. That is pure BS of course.
Socialism actually requires democracy to work. Socialism values the individual and all that s/he can contribute to the elevation of all. But that means that s/he has to be developed maximally through the freedom of expression and thought, and access to the cultural and economic resources required to pursue both. However, socialism cannot allow itself to be undone and hence cannot put up with capitalist/bourgeois competition for the hearts and minds of the populace. When people are given the choice between being empathetic or selfish, they would usually choose the latter.
Socialism values the individual and all that s/he can contribute to the elevation of all. But that means that s/he has to be developed maximally through the freedom of expression and thought, and access to the cultural and economic resources required to pursue both.
So, in my vision of a socialist society, capitalist parties would be outlawed. We adopt the same approach in our current 'democratic' society in terms of not allowing democracy to be undone by arbitrary or/and unilateral change of the constitution right? Same thing with socialism. In a nutshell, socialism is a higher form of democracy in that everyone will have access to the resources required to exercise one's freedom of opportunity. In the current bourgeois-cratic - mistakenly known as ‘democratic’ - society, the only freedom we have is to ascend whilst using the heads of others as the rungs comprising our ladder to success. In a socialist society, well, let's say we adopt the 'leap-frog' style where the ascent of another is just a prelude to us jumping over her/is back to move forward, whilst allowing her/im to do the same thereafter. Unlike the current system, nobody’s hands are tied behind their backs through variance in economic/motivational/educational circumstance, and everyone gets into ‘first class’.
Yes, if i ever go over to the states, I will be honoured to take up your invite. Strange, but whilst i have a ton and a half of hang-ups with the U.S., i do like the down-to-earth sensibilities of the people and their vibrancy. I need that in order to lengthen my youth by a few decades. Singapore just dehumanises a person, whilst i find the Brits a bit sedate, though generally intelligent and creative.
ed
Nik: Do you think there is any place that is doing socialism right?
If you ever come to the States, my husband and I invite you to dinner. I would love to sit and talk with you someday. He's a grumpy conservative, but loves me enough to let me broaden his horizons a bit.
ed:
Hi Nicole,
So nice to hear from you
Um, the only place that i personally know of that is 'doing socialism right' is in my personal circle..haha. I enforce socialism in my personal circle with an iron hand behind a red spandex curtain. In other words, I expect everyone within my group to increase their knowledge and intelligence, to share what they have with all others within, and to not sink to a dependency that sees them just taking what the other has to give without becoming as good as the other so as to give as much back.
the bourgeois-cracies out there - mistakenly called ‘democracies’ - with the aid of the media, tend to use the consequences of western economic sabotage as the logical corollary of the socialist ethos. That is pure BS of course.
China and the USSR were never socialist. Cuba is not socialist either. The former two may be known as 'state capitalist' societies - just imagine Donald Trump running a country and sucking up all competition into his departments. (btw, ever heard of 'Immortal Technique' - a kickass intelligent Latino who speaks, or raps/sings, very insightfully on parts of this subject.) As for Cuba, it started off positively, but with western embargoes intended to destabilise the socialist government there, it is to be expected that they turned oppressive. No system can be maintained in the face of economic sabotage. Not the socialist one, nor the capitalist one. But the bourgeois-cracies out there - mistakenly called ‘democracies’ - with the aid of the media, tend to use the consequences of western economic sabotage as the logical corollary of the socialist ethos. That is pure BS of course.
Socialism actually requires democracy to work. Socialism values the individual and all that s/he can contribute to the elevation of all. But that means that s/he has to be developed maximally through the freedom of expression and thought, and access to the cultural and economic resources required to pursue both. However, socialism cannot allow itself to be undone and hence cannot put up with capitalist/bourgeois competition for the hearts and minds of the populace. When people are given the choice between being empathetic or selfish, they would usually choose the latter.
Socialism values the individual and all that s/he can contribute to the elevation of all. But that means that s/he has to be developed maximally through the freedom of expression and thought, and access to the cultural and economic resources required to pursue both.
So, in my vision of a socialist society, capitalist parties would be outlawed. We adopt the same approach in our current 'democratic' society in terms of not allowing democracy to be undone by arbitrary or/and unilateral change of the constitution right? Same thing with socialism. In a nutshell, socialism is a higher form of democracy in that everyone will have access to the resources required to exercise one's freedom of opportunity. In the current bourgeois-cratic - mistakenly known as ‘democratic’ - society, the only freedom we have is to ascend whilst using the heads of others as the rungs comprising our ladder to success. In a socialist society, well, let's say we adopt the 'leap-frog' style where the ascent of another is just a prelude to us jumping over her/is back to move forward, whilst allowing her/im to do the same thereafter. Unlike the current system, nobody’s hands are tied behind their backs through variance in economic/motivational/educational circumstance, and everyone gets into ‘first class’.
Yes, if i ever go over to the states, I will be honoured to take up your invite. Strange, but whilst i have a ton and a half of hang-ups with the U.S., i do like the down-to-earth sensibilities of the people and their vibrancy. I need that in order to lengthen my youth by a few decades. Singapore just dehumanises a person, whilst i find the Brits a bit sedate, though generally intelligent and creative.
ed
Comments
Post a Comment
The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.
Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.