I can't help but wonder what the model is for all the change that the left is trying to hammerlock us into as a nation. Would someone please enlighten me as to where these policies have produced the desired result.
Not just health care mind you but the whole range of Socialist desires on the wish list.
Hi, I'm the person who trolls this forum and directs peoples' attention to the Nordic Model and its success:
I have issues with Wikipedia in that anyone can post anything they like there.
I have children whose teachers will no allow them to use it for their projects. There's a reason for that.
What I am looking for is not half-hearted. It must be strong and resonating.
Basically you have to sell me that it's better than the U.S. and you have a long row to hoe.
Hi I am the person that turns u and says South America is pretty much universally controlled by democratically elected socialist governments and all their economies are growing and flourishing. I also back the other hubber who pointed out the success of the Nordic model and suggest that if you are too lazy to read through the references clearly linked at the bottom of Wikipedia articles you don't really want to learn.
Then I will remind you that the Cuban economy has grown by almost 600 percent since the revolution and In 2007 the Cuban economy grew by 7.5%, below the expected 10%, but higher than the Latin American average rate of growth. Accordingly, the cumulative growth in GDP since 2004 stood at 42.5 %.
See that too is from Wikipedia but see how there are reference numbers at the end of these sentences? Learn to use them.
lastly I will tell you that if you think Obama's policies are socialism you don't have any idea what the word means, real socialists wouldn't spit on him.
Wikipedia link btw: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Cuba
Let me ask you a very important question about Cuba.
Are those people free?
Having lived in Cuba for 6 years I never felt less free there than I do here (in the US), most people get their info about Cuba through the biased US media (they are still listed as a hostile nation after all). Besides your question seemed economic, their freedom has nothing to do with their undoubted economic success they are different subjects.
My impression is that Wikipedia is pretty accurate, but not perfect.
check the references
^ Durlauf, Steven and Blume, Lawrence. Social Democracy. New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition (2008): http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/ar … 08_S000168
^ O'Hara, Phillip (September 2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 538. ISBN 0-415-24187-1. "Social democracy is a political ideology focusing on an evolutionary road to socialism or the humanization of capitalism. It includes parliamentary process of reform, the provision of state benefits to the population, agreements between labor and the state, and the revisionist movement away from revolutionary socialism."
^ a b Kornai, János and Qian, Yingi (eds.) 2009. Market and Socialism – In the Light of Experiences of China and Vietnam. “Socialism and the Market: Conceptual Clarification”. pp. 11-24. New York: Palgrave Macmillan in association with the International Economic Association. ISBN 978-0-230-55354-5. "Being a social democrat means unconditional acceptance of the idea of parliamentary democracy." -- "Summing up the remarks on ownership and coordination, we arrive at the following conclusion. Social democrats do not want to create a new "socialist system", fundamentally different from capitalism. What they want is a profound reform of the existing capitalist system. In other words, they would like to see a variation of the capitalist system, closer to their own political and ethical ideals."
^ Meyer, Thomas & Hinchman, Lewis. 2007. The Theory of Social Democracy. Polity Press. Pg. 112. ISBN 978-0-7456-4113-3. "...that would become definitive for the modern theory of social democracy. They concluded that the coordinating role played by markets could not be effective unless a capital function based on private property in the means of production were at work in them."
^ O'Hara, Phillip (September 2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 539. ISBN 0-415-24187-1. "During the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, the welfare state, Keynesian economic policies and industrial agreements to balance the power of capital and labor were the defining features of social democracy."
^ Richard T. Ely, French and German Socialism in Modern Times. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1883; pg. 204.
^ Ely, French and German Socialism in Modern Times, pp. 204-205.
^ Berman, Sheri. "Understanding Social Democracy". Retrieved 2007-08-11.
^ Berman, Sheri. Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pp. 38-39.
^ a b c d Manfred B. Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism: Eduard Bernstein and Social Democracy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1997; pg. 133.
^ a b Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 141.
^ Roger Eatwell, Anthony Wright. Contemporary political ideologies. 2nd edition. Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000. Pp. 86.
^ Roger Eatwell, Anthony Wright. Contemporary political ideologies. 2nd edition. Continuum International Publishing Group, 2000. Pp. 88.
^ Berman, Sheri. Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press, 2006. Pp. 2.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 137.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 80.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 146.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 146.
^ Christopher Pierson. Hard choices: social democracy in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, England, UK; Oxford, England, UK; Malden, Massaschusetts, USA: Polity Press, 2001. Pp. 25.
^ a b c Preston T. King. Socialism and the Common Good: New Fabian Essays. London, England, UK; Portland, Oregon, USA: Frank Cass, 1996. Pp. 44.
^ Preston T. King. Socialism and the Common Good: New Fabian Essays. London, England, UK; Portland, Oregon, USA: Frank Cass, 1996. Pp. 44-45.
^ Tament Library: About Our Logo
^ a b c David Robertson. A dictionary of modern politics. 3rd edition. London, England, UK: Europa Publications, 2004. Pp. 212.
^ a b c d e Socialist International. "Aims and Tasks of Democratic Socialism: Declaration of the Socialist International", Socialist International, First Congress, Frankfurt-am-Main, Federal Republic of Germany, 1951.
^ George Ritzer. Encyclopedia of social theory, Volumes 1-2. Thousand Oaks, California, USA: Sage Publications, Inc., 2005. Pp. 479.
^ a b c Christopher Pierson. Socialism after communism: the new market socialism. Pennsylvania State Press, 1995. Pp. 204.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 36.
^ Socialist International. "Aims and Tasks of Democratic Socialism: Declaration of the Socialist International". Socialist International, First Congress. Frankfurt-am-Main, Federal Republic of Germany: Socialist International, 1951. http://www.socialistinternational.org/v … icleID=39.
^ Dorrien, Gary. 2009. A Case for Economic Democracy. Tikkun 24(3): 34.
^ Steger, The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism, pg. 140.
^ History of Medicare (United States)
^ Brief History of Medicare and Medicaid (United States)
^ a b BBC News: Sacrifices in the scramble for power
^ BBC News: South America's leftward sweep, 2005
^ The Guardian: Rich-poor gap 'has widened under Blair' Monday August 2, 2004
^ O'Hara, Phillip Anthony (ed.). Encyclopedia of political economy, Volume 2. London, England, UK: Routledge, 1999 Pp. 539.
^ PES Member Parties
^ EU facts: Party Politics in the EU
^ Members of the Socialist International.
^ In Canada, the CCF/NDP have been or are the government at the provincial level of governance, and as of 2011 form the Official Opposition.
^ The Trouble With Barack, Newsweek, 21 January 2011
^ Obama is Distressingly Centrist, Nick Grier, July 18 2010,New West
^ Democrats Unhappy With Obama's Centrist Shift, Huffington Post, 5 February 2010
^ Labour policies
^ a b Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists, by Schweickart, David; Lawler, James; Ticktin, Hillel; Ollman, Bertell. 1998. (P.60-61): "The Marxist answers that market socialism cannot exist because it involves limiting the incentive system of the market through providing minimum wages, high levels of unemployment insurance, reducing the size of the reserve army of labour, taxing profits, and taxing the wealthy. As a result, capitalists will have little incentive to invest and the workers will have little incentive to work. Capitalism works because, as Marx remarked, it is a system of economic force (coercion)."
^ a b Socialism or Social democracy? Anarchism WebSite.
^ Commission for Racial Equality: Clement Attlee Lecture: Trevor Phillips's speech, 21 April 2005
^ Nuevo impulso conservador - La República
^ Eduard Bernstein Reference Archive
^ Encyclopædia Britannica: Willy Brandt
^ Hjalmar Branting: The Nobel Peace Prize 1921
^ Encyclopædia Britannica: Wilhelm Liebknecht
^ (Portuguese) "Em 28 anos, Lula troca Marx pela social democracia" ("In 28 years, Lula trades Marx for social democracy"). Diário do Nordeste. June 30, 2006.
Wikipedia articles themselves should not be cited in academic papers because, as you say, anybody can write anything there. However, the good ones provide an excellent general overview of the topic and include extensive reference lists linking to more reliable sources of information. The social democracy article Peelander linked is clearly one of these, so dismissing it out of hand suggests that you don't really want to understand anything and just want to pick a fight.
I find it telling that you immediately pounced on Cuba - a country most socialists agree is troubled - while ignoring the Nordic countries and Canada, which enjoy a higher standard of living and arguably more freedom than the US, and the growing economies of the young South American social democracies.
No I don't want to pick a fight. I just have a hard time seeing how that region compares to our nation in terms of culture and their government. Basically I have some Finnish relations and love them very much but I disagree with that system compared to ours.
Let's add to that us living in a nation with a press that is known to be sympathetic to the Socialists and we haven't heard massive glowing reports? Curious. Also am I given to believe that Hugo Chavez is just a round mound of fun?
I have someone here extolling the virtues of Cuba and I recall all that mess about people fleeing the place on whatever kind of life raft they could contrive trying to get to Florida.
Also "Democratic" societies have a great reputation for monitoring thier PR pretty heavy .
in your question you said socialist philosophies, socialism is a purely economic system so I answered your question on an economic basis.
Cuba has one tenth of the people living under the poverty line that Cuba does, one thirtieth of the debt that the US does (per person) it's economy has grown 650% since the revolution and 47% since just 2004 etc etc. I will be publishing a Hub on this soon, anyway the point was from an economic perspective and its socialist philosophies have been successful.
If you had half the intelligence of Hugo Chavez you would understand how cheap your personal remarks are about him.
As has been stated, Wiki is very accurate and constantly updated and moderated. There are sources for every argument I've ever made about Scandinavia (and Germany). If you choose to disagree with systems in which citizens are happier, better educated, better taken care of and better paid then I bid you adieu and good luck as I look for a superior place to live.
Great program. But the Democratic Party is quite a bit to the right of the movement described as social democracy and nowhere near socialism. The Democratic Party is about where the GOP was fifty years ago. Both parties have moved toward the right.
Absolutely agree that the Nordic countries have got it right. Norway, Denmark, Finland & Sweden also always come on top of the polls for happiness as well.
Also Peru the fastest growing economy in the world (averaging 7% GDP growth yearly) was run by socialists during this whole period, that party was just replaced by election by... another socialist party.
We are doing okay in Canada, and we are certainly not socialist. We have lots of social programs that you would probably consider socialist. Health care is not perfect but it works and we live longer than Americans... Our economy is also doing better.
Exposing myth of Scandinavian socialist success:
Scandinavian Socialist Failure
It's true, not a myth. However, capitalism is alive and well in the Scandinavian countries. They can be properly called welfare capitalist or mixed economies.
by My Esoteric15 months ago
In both the Federalist Papers AND the Constitutional Convention, it is extremely clear the distaste most of those involved in creating today's America had for democracy, which they saw as mob rule which allows...
by Scott Bateman2 years ago
Does capitalism encourage greed? Does socialism punish merit and efficiency? Or do both philosophies have good and bad aspects?
by Charles James5 years ago
Rarely do I get involved with Politics -especially American. However, recently, I came across several photos depicted the US President with the likeness of one A. Hitler. I really do not see the comparison. Good and...
by Peter V4 years ago
What do you think about Socialism? Good or Bad for America?I have my own opinion but what do you think of the current direction America is heading (towards socialism)? Do you think this is very bad and goes against what...
by SportsBetter14 months ago
Is social security a socialist program?
by Josh Ratzburg2 years ago
Why are we so afraid of Democratic Socialism?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.