Is Socialism is a political system or an economic system?

CDR Michael Goldschmidt — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:30:53 -0500

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Feb 10 at 2016 2:33 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:33:16 -0500

It is primarily an economic system CDR Michael Goldschmidt. However like Islam, Socialism can only be fulfilled when the government adopts it as a ruling philosophy.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2016 2:34 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:34:46 -0500

It can only survive longer if there is political structure with it. :)

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Feb 10 at 2016 2:46 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:46:22 -0500

It's a belief system, which attempts to affect the economy.

I was listening to the Adam & Drew Podcast yesterday, and one of the quotes was "The Right attempts to control Behavior, while the Left attempts to control Belief."

We can look at it like an Economic System, however without the underlying Belief System, it just falls apart. It can't "scale" if the People who are inside it don't believe in it.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2016 2:58 PM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 14:58:23 -0500

I don't believe you can have any economic system without a corresponding and supporting political one...so yes.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2016 3:10 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:10:53 -0500

It is an economic system that is controlled by the political state. Socialism has to be enforced through legislation and execution of economic controlling laws. Socialism without the political laws is called capitalism.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Feb 10 at 2016 3:12 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:12:01 -0500

Don't all governments facilitate the transfer of wealth?

Response by Capt Walter Miller made Feb 10 at 2016 3:26 PM

Capt Walter Miller — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:26:46 -0500

It can be both. It is certainly failed as an economic system.

Response by SFC Justin Scott made Feb 10 at 2016 3:36 PM

SFC Justin Scott — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:36:25 -0500

Socialism originated as an economic system (i.e. the polar opposite of capitalism); however, in today's political era, it is both a political ideology and an economic theory.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Feb 10 at 2016 3:45 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:45:59 -0500

Just a really bad one as an economic or political system.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Feb 10 at 2016 3:59 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:59:28 -0500

Which version of socialism? There are many, and there are relevant differences...

Response by SSgt Christopher Brose made Feb 10 at 2016 4:11 PM

SSgt Christopher Brose — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:11:46 -0500

"Scam" wasn't listed in the poll options, so I'll include it here.

Social Security is just the biggest Ponzi scheme in American history. It only got its start after Roosevelt (the dumb one) lied to the Supreme Court about its nature. It was a system based on demographics, and it was intended to rarely pay out, because the age of eligibility was greater than life expectancy at the time.

For political reasons, the age of eligibility didn't advance with modern life expectancy, and people have fewer children, so the demographics the system was based on have gone from something like an 18:1 ratio of people paying in to people receiving then, to something like 3:1 now.

Just like any Ponzi scheme, the later you get to the party, the less likely you are to get your money back out, and the more likely you are to be left holding the bag.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2016 5:13 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:13:17 -0500

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Feb 10 at 2016 6:44 PM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:44:12 -0500

Response by SPC Darren Koele made Feb 10 at 2016 8:35 PM

SPC Darren Koele — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 20:35:36 -0500

Socialism is both a political and economic system under the umbrella of collectivist ideology. Under socialism, the individual is irrelevant in the manner that the needs of the collective always outweigh yours. Want to go from rags to riches? Too bad, as long as there are poor people, your dream to be wealthy must be crushed for the greater good. In essence, the individual is a slave to the collective. Individual rights, individual liberty, the individual as a whole is regarded as an anachronism, a hindrance to progress. Think about it, under socialist societies, the collective sets the moral standard; your personal nor religious morals are once again regarded as anachronistic and harmful to a progressive nation. How many have heard the arguments against Christians, "don't force your morals on us" and "you can't legislate morality? Well, under the very notion of morality, we now have obamacare, gay marriage, welfare, and much more. The hypocrisy is glaring. Charities to help the sick, the poor, the disadvantaged, etch, are scrutinized to within an inch of their existence and those that give to charity are "only doing it for the tax write off"; however, give your money to a wasteful government program run by incompetent boobs and you are regarded as a patriot. Yet again, your individual choice is bad, the strong arm government allegedly working on behalf of the collective is good.
Socialism is tyranny because it oppress individualism. I make no apologies when I say my needs will always come first. After all, if I am happy, if I have an uninhibited path (free of government constraint) to my dreams and goals, I will most likely aspire to bring others up with me; one person's success can provide opportunities for others but in a socialist society this is regarded as creating a society of haves and have note which "just isn't fair".
Okay, I'm getting pissed off now. Y'all got my point. It is obvious socialism and individualism cannot coexist. I also wager that socialism and liberty cannot coexist.

Response by LTC Eric Coger made Feb 11 at 2016 4:22 AM

LTC Eric Coger — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 04:22:01 -0500

It is both; Marx coined Socialism as a transitory system towards Communism. Different roads to the same place; and a failure in all examples across the globe that results in more poverty and extremes between the ruling class and the rest. Don't be led down the lie that all government programs are socialist, the Social Contract that we have as a part of society allows that some things are best done by the government at the behest of the people. We the people have rights, we cede some authority to the government, but have the right to change the contract. The reverse is not true.

Response by 1LT Aaron Barr made Feb 11 at 2016 8:00 AM

1LT Aaron Barr — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:00:31 -0500

It claims to be an economic system but as it relies on the compulsive power of the state, it is a political system.