Nick Fitz. I would still like to know

[VectraMan]

The purest form of capitalsm today is Africa surely, where people with guns take what they can off the people without guns.

How is that different to Britain? The people with guns (the government) take money off the people without guns (the population).

[dang65]

There is a massive gap between rich and poor in scandi. For example, you can usually tell if someone is a boss just from their surname.

Mr Aerosol, for example.

[NickFitz]

Hi DA

Sorry I didn't have time to address your question earlier - I tend to spend most of the day dealing with ClientOrg's needs, and any spare time is spent in the green and sunlit uplands of TPD rather than the sewer-lined alleyways of General.

Firstly, let me say that my espousal of Socialism is not an ideological one: I have frequently stated my abhorrence of ideologies. To subscribe to an ideology is to circumscribe one's own freedom of thought, and to do that is to admit that one is unable to think for oneself. That I do not do.

Rather, I regard Socialism as a matter of morality. I believe that, if our presence on this Earth is to have any meaning whatsoever, it is necessary that we be good and kind to each other. Socialism is based on such principles. Capitalism is not.

Given the limited space available to me, I would suggest that you read Robert Tressell's The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists (out of copyright, so you can get it free from Project Gutenberg) to gain some idea of the way Socialism can be seen as a guiding set of moral principles whereas Capitalism can only be seen as an ideology based on selfishness and greed.

However, to take just one example of how your current beliefs of "What Socialism Is":

So you believe that everyone should earn the same amount of money no matter what job they do.
Every service should only be provided by the state
That the economy and our lives in general should be planned by central government.

appear to be incorrect, I shall take just one principle: From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.

You will notice that there is nothing in there to suggest that everybody should "earn the same amount of money no matter what job they do". It seems only reasonable that those with more should help those with less. You are doubtless aware that even Capitalists insist on taxation for the provision of services that are for the greater public good; that those suffering from deprivation should be assisted is clearly for the greater public good, as otherwise they just rob you.

Furthermore, there is nothing in there to suggest that the workshy should be mollycoddled. In the spirit of reminding people that rights involve responsibilities (a mainstay of Socialist moral philosophy that has recently been hijacked by Capitalist politicians), I merely need to point to the phrase "From each according to their abilities": I believe it's the Tories who choose to interpret this as "If you're fit to work then no Dole for you" but it nonetheless suggests that a society organised on Socialist principles would expect people to do what they are able to do to contribute to the common good, assuming there was anything left for them to do once the Capitalists have finished shipping all the money to yachts in Bermuda.

There is also nothing in there to suggest that "every service should only be provided by the State". That is an interpretation that is used by politicians who seek power and control for themselves, and has nothing to do with the moral principles upon which we build our Society: once again, ideology takes precedence over morality.

Nor is there anything to suggest that "the economy and our lives in general should be planned by central government": again, you have fallen into the error of believing that, because some bunch of ideologues chose to filch the label from a set of principles and use it to describe themselves, that their ideology is somehow identical with those principles.

To illustrate just how fallacious such a belief is: I could call myself a Recruitment Consultant and start trafficking women for prostitution. The fact that I had chosen a comparatively respectable label to adorn what I did would not excuse it. Nor would my use of that label mean that you, in your work, had suddenly become a slavemaster.

In the same way, you should not allow yourself to be fooled, by those who have abused the name of Socialism, into believing that it represents a set of political and governmental practices underpinned by a narrow ideology. In fact Socialism represents a set of moral principles that could, if used to guide the political and economic structures and practices we create, help to build a better world.

But that won't happen as long as people insist on embracing ideologies rather than thinking for themselves, and then labelling ideas that don't fit in with those ideologies as The Work of the Devil, But Worse.

Ho hum

Have a nice Thursday - soon be the weekend

[threaded]

You do come out with some tulip.
You can tell the rich by their names in most countries.
It's nothing to do with the level of gap between the rich and poor.

HTH

You really don't want to believe the propaganda that comes out from scandi. There're a few others on this board who've worked here or come from here. They'll also tell you not to believe the propaganda.

The gap between rich and poor is much the same, just better hidden.

[TinTrump]

To subscribe to an ideology is to circumscribe one's own freedom of thought, and to do that is to admit that one is unable to think for oneself. That I do not do.

Interesting point with merit.

I believe that, if our presence on this Earth is to have any meaning whatsoever, it is necessary that we be good and kind to each other.

Hard to argue with that.
I enjoyed reading your post Nick. Well reasoned without recourse to dogma.

[sweetandsour]

Dont they have very high rates of suicide in Scandinavia?

It is a bit mischevious to use that in your argument when it is caused by the lack of daylight during the winter months.

I am not claiming to be an expert on Scandinavia by any means but the impression that I picked up when I have been there is that although people do not have loads of cash to splash about it is still achievable for families to have a summer house by a lake or the sea in addition to their main home and also a boat.

[threaded]

It is a bit mischevious to use that in your argument when it is caused by the lack of daylight during the winter months.

I am not claiming to be an expert on Scandinavia by any means but the impression that I picked up when I have been there is that although people do not have loads of cash to splash about it is still achievable for families to have a summer house by a lake or the sea in addition to their main home and also a boat.

It seems that the Norwegian government publishes everybody's tax details and I am not sure that I would be happy with that.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8319054.stm

Ho ho ho ho. That is certainly only the wealthy that can do that. Those below: the extended family time shares, lower still: wider timeshare, and lower down use something like folkeferie, which is a co-op run by the unions, with the funding coming from the holiday money of workers who didn't take up all their holiday entitlement.

There are some I know with quite horrid poky apartments in the town, not even their own toilet, never mind bathroom, but have a lovely summerhouse just outside town, or a boat to live on at the weekends. Most summerhouses though are more like what we'd call allotments in England. The ones you see on TV, is well, aspirational TV. Not too many can afford them. They can cost more than a house, and not many can afford a house, never mind two.

There are several tent and caravan cities around Copenhagen of people who live there in the week and then travel back home at the weekends.

Then there're a good few who try to live in their summerhouses all year round. When the tax people find out, it is big trouble.

Being a contractor, if you just dip into a local culture, you'd only see the people you work with, and in most regards that'd be companies at the top end of the pay scales too. In the wider work environment, things aren't so different between countries really.

[DimPrawn]

Population of Denmark = 5M
Target population of UK = 70+M

Multicultural aspect of Denmark = close to zero
Multicultural aspect of UK = one of the highest in Europe.


Denmark is a like a clan rather than a country. Of course the idea of Socialism works for a tiny, cloesly nit community with shared values and backgrounds.

It does not work here.

[sasguru]

To all those espousing capitalism, Have you bought your lube?
You'll need it for the rogering the bankers are going to give you in the coming years.

HTH

PS We don't have capitalism here, just reverse socialism - the poor and middle class pay for the rich. You couldn't make it up.

[sasguru]

PS Well said NickFitz.
You'll have to forgive DA - he's a typical brain-washed public school type.