"Formal Socialism" vs "People's Socialism"
62"Look at the real situations which lie beneath the conceptual and verbal symbols."
This is just what I read on a social media network:
"Socialism always leads to the same predictable ruin for nations ignorant of history. Yet for some reason, the ideology that enslaved millions throughout the 20th century still appeals to wide-eyed leftists throughout academia and around the globe."
As usual People talk about Symbol and Mantras without refering to the underlying Semantics.
When leftist people refer to Socialism, they mean social welfware, when rightist people refer to Socialism, they mean fascism; so they just don't talk about the same fruit Apple and Orange. Who wants social welfware ? Everybody. Who wants fascism ? Nobody. So they both agree on concepts but they superficially oppose on symbols.
To make things clear, one should know that historically Socialism as formalized by the political class is just a social rehearsal that was meant to hide the true purpose of Communism / Marxism crafted by Clinton Roosevelt in "Science of Government founded on natural law", that this formal socialism is just an invention from the super elites which is indeed Fascism - continuing with softer form exposed in Phippe Dru, Administrator - that people should break with by denouncing it and invent a true people's socialism (Salvador Allende was surely killed for not wanting Formal Socialism of the Global Elites but People's Socialism).
Share it! — Rate it: up down [flag this hub]
Comments
A boost of knowledge, good work friend
J.T
The quote may be based on an observation, but it's extremely ignorant. Socialism is an economic system, fascism is a system of government. Furthermore, every democracy adheres to socialist practices, especially western democracies. And, to say " Socialism always leads to the same predictable ruin for nations..." is not only a fallacy in many degrees, but misleading. The only absolute is that there are no absolutes, so to say "socialism always leads..." is a fallacy. To say that it is predictable is another fallacy, because in political science there are patterns but no true predictabilities. Finally the "ruin for nations..." statement is misleading tunnel-vision; all nations that have ever existed have eventually ruined regardless of government type, economy, culture, etc. Ours will too. Also on that note, there are several very successful socialist, fascist, communist, monarchal, and dictatorial governments.
Hey William sorry for the Library but I try you to keep you busy during your retirement ;)
Kane, "Socialism is an economic system, fascism is a system of government" yes it is true but a system of government is tightly linked to an economic system because it is the concrete tool to implement things. I just wrote this article and maybe you will perceive that economics IS the way things are done:
http://hubpages.com/hub/The-Managerial-Revolution-
And as long that most people do not understand that Socialism and Environment are being used and abused to build the opposite of what people think of the result there's no hope things will change. I already said it, if you want to preserve Democracy, Social Welfare etc. you must not only concentrate on Politics but above all on Economics and Finance as I already claimed here:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Why_Democracy_does_not_mat
Do not let those ones who disagree , they travel in other scenes.
I liked it
working
William F. Torpey says:
7 months ago
Always great hubs, thecounterpunch! Decades after the fall of the Soviet Union, right wingers still get all fired up about "Commies" whenever a "liberal" catches them talking nonsense. I've found that the minute they get stumped they try to change the subject by saying something stupid about Bill Clinton or Nancy Pelosi (their latest target.) I'm trying to catch up on your hubs, but it'll take a while -- you've written enough to fill a library! Thanks.