Exposure to socialism increases the proclivity to cheat?

[dismal]

A nice little archive here:

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/gdrmain.htm

I particularly recommend these:

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/ddrposters.htm

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sbk.htm

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/sedprop.htm

One notes that they sure spent a lot of effort talking about how great socialism was for a non-socialist country.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

dismal, you'd probably do better to look at actual policies, not propaganda. After all, if this was the point of Socialism, why won't you find these policies as part of Deb's platform?

And you would be wrong.

East Germany wasn't under a leftist ideology, so no.

Of course they were. East Germany was ruled by SED or Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands or Socialist Unity Party of Germany which was formed by merging of SPD (social democrats) and KPD (communists). It's motto was Proletarier aller Länder, vereinigt Euch! (Proletarians of all countries, unite). If all that isn't a "leftist ideology" I wonder what you would consider as such.

And they sell fruit punch in the stores and it doesn't contain any fruit in it whatsoever. You'd need to actually show that the policies of the Government were leftist.

 

[dismal]

dismal, you'd probably do better to look at actual policies, not propaganda. After all, if this was the point of Socialism, why won't you find these policies as part of Deb's platform?

So now Eugene Debs it the One True Socialist(tm)?

Here's a problem I have with that:

In prison, Debs read the works of Karl Marx and learned about socialism.

At the time of his arrest for mail obstruction, Debs was not yet a socialist. While serving his six-month term in the jail at Woodstock, Illinois, Debs and his ARU comrades received a steady stream of letters, books, and pamphlets in the mail from socialists around the country.[10]

Additionally, Debs was visited in jail by Milwaukee socialist newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, who, in Debs' words, "came to Woodstock, as if a providential instrument, and delivered the first impassioned message of Socialism I had ever heard."[10]

Socialism seems to have been around before Eugene Debs!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

 

[barbos]

In other study exposure to capitalism was found to cause higher number of useless studies.

 

[The Paul]

Or it means that what the East Germans were exposed to wasn't socialism, but a foreign occupation following a lost war, which left behind immense damage and loss of productivity, and the rulers imposed on - not elected by - them was discriminative, incompetent, brutal and dishonest, so that the only way anyone could get anything done was by deception.

No no, it was the robust social safety net, universal health-care, and easy access to post-secondary education the East Germans were subjected to that corrupted them. I'm sure of it.

 

[Blahface]

I really, really hate this re-branding of socialism as having a strong welfare state. The right uses this to demonize the the left and left is embracing this to destigmatize the word. Socialism is the community ownership of means of production. Europe is not socialist. If we deviate from the standard definition of socialism, what word do we use to describe the community ownership of the means of production? We can't necessarily call it a command economy because not all socialism is a command economy.

I myself am an actual socialist, but I don't think we should attempt socialism (or at least on any large scale) until we can reorganize the state to be competent, accountable and transparent. The state needs to prove itself competent before it starts attempting to take over the business industry and fucking things up.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So now Eugene Debs it the One True Socialist(tm)?

Here's a problem I have with that:

In prison, Debs read the works of Karl Marx and learned about socialism.

At the time of his arrest for mail obstruction, Debs was not yet a socialist. While serving his six-month term in the jail at Woodstock, Illinois, Debs and his ARU comrades received a steady stream of letters, books, and pamphlets in the mail from socialists around the country.[10]

Additionally, Debs was visited in jail by Milwaukee socialist newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, who, in Debs' words, "came to Woodstock, as if a providential instrument, and delivered the first impassioned message of Socialism I had ever heard."[10]

Socialism seems to have been around before Eugene Debs!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

I'm sorry, your point is what exactly? Debs ran for President a few times for the Socialist Party. Was a major force in developing the Party's platform. If he isn't a source of high standing to consider what Socialism in practice actually is, I'm not certain who is.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

A study:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2457000

Seems plausible. Other variables may be at play.

Just a word of caution, the source is not peer reviewed. I have an open account at the SSRN. It only takes a working email and you can publish all sorts of drivel like "Communists have larger penis than Capitalists", "Joos are Super Reptilian DNA".

 

[dismal]

So now Eugene Debs it the One True Socialist(tm)?

Here's a problem I have with that:

At the time of his arrest for mail obstruction, Debs was not yet a socialist. While serving his six-month term in the jail at Woodstock, Illinois, Debs and his ARU comrades received a steady stream of letters, books, and pamphlets in the mail from socialists around the country.[10]

Additionally, Debs was visited in jail by Milwaukee socialist newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, who, in Debs' words, "came to Woodstock, as if a providential instrument, and delivered the first impassioned message of Socialism I had ever heard."[10]

Socialism seems to have been around before Eugene Debs!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

I'm sorry, your point is what exactly? Debs ran for President a few times for the Socialist Party. Was a major force in developing the Party's platform. If he isn't a source of high standing to consider what Socialism in practice actually is, I'm not certain who is.

The East German Socialists had a Socialist party too. They also ran for President a few times. I guess by your test this makes them an authority on what socialism is.

And apparently they were better at it because Debs got like 2% of the vote and the East German socialists got like 50 times that.

 

[Trausti]

A study:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2457000

Seems plausible. Other variables may be at play.

Just a word of caution, the source is not peer reviewed. I have an open account at the SSRN. It only takes a working email and you can publish all sorts of drivel like "Communists have larger penis than Capitalists", "Joos are Super Reptilian DNA".

Thanks. Though, the lack of peer review for a study does not seem to be a bar to posting here: http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?1559-Study-Shows-White-Privilege-Among-Poor&highlight=study

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Just a word of caution, the source is not peer reviewed. I have an open account at the SSRN. It only takes a working email and you can publish all sorts of drivel like "Communists have larger penis than Capitalists", "Joos are Super Reptilian DNA".

Thanks. Though, the lack of peer review for a study does not seem to be a bar to posting here: http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?1559-Study-Shows-White-Privilege-Among-Poor&highlight=study

And this means we shouldn't be cautious about sources?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So now Eugene Debs it the One True Socialist(tm)?

Here's a problem I have with that:

At the time of his arrest for mail obstruction, Debs was not yet a socialist. While serving his six-month term in the jail at Woodstock, Illinois, Debs and his ARU comrades received a steady stream of letters, books, and pamphlets in the mail from socialists around the country.[10]

Additionally, Debs was visited in jail by Milwaukee socialist newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, who, in Debs' words, "came to Woodstock, as if a providential instrument, and delivered the first impassioned message of Socialism I had ever heard."[10]

Socialism seems to have been around before Eugene Debs!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs

I'm sorry, your point is what exactly? Debs ran for President a few times for the Socialist Party. Was a major force in developing the Party's platform. If he isn't a source of high standing to consider what Socialism in practice actually is, I'm not certain who is.

The East German Socialists had a Socialist party too. They also ran for President a few times. I guess by your test this makes them an authority on what socialism is.

I suppose there is some logic to that. Though, at what point did the people actually get any part of production in East German rule? Additionally, why does any of this exclude anything from the Socialist Party platform in the US which had principles pretty similar to elements from The New Deal?

And apparently they were better at it because Debs got like 2% of the vote and the East German socialists got like 50 times that.

Nearly 6% in 1912, which wasn't very typical for a third party Candidate.

 

[Bomb#20]

False. You are using Bill O'Reilly's definition of socialism. Socialism is where the means of production are owned by the workers (or the state during transition). Europe is better described as "social democrats". They have a system that attempts to capture the good parts of capitalism but mitigates the bad parts higher safety nets, programs for the poor, taxes on the rich, and etc.

I believe socialism is about the workers having a larger piece of the production. It wasn't about removing management entirely.

Who ever said it was? It's about removing private owners entirely. As far as socialist theory goes, managing is just another job some workers specialize in, same as in capitalist practice.

Needed both cogs for a company to work, but only one of the cogs didn't have to worry about dying during production. Hence the desire to change the system, make it safer and offer the workers a larger share of the production.

That's not socialism. That's trade unionism. Trade unionists often imagine socialists are their friends because of the enemy-of-my-enemy principle; but this is delusional. Countries where the means of production are privately owned have independent trade unions; countries where they're collectively owned don't. When the means of production are collectively owned, the people who collectivized them suppress trade unions, for the same reason that a government of snake oil salesmen would suppress real doctors.

 

[dystopian]

And the explicitly state that they're not testing 'socialism' but rather 'actual socialism' (i.e. totalitarian communism), on page 2.

That... is a bizarre bit of terminology there.

 

[Bomb#20]

Socialism doesn't have to equal Stalinism or Maoism.

What is your definition of "socialism"?

<crickets>

Socialism is an economic system where the state controls (almost) all means of production.

No.

What is your definition of "socialism"?

 

[The Paul]

What is your definition of "socialism"?

<crickets>

Socialism is an economic system where the state controls (almost) all means of production.

No.

What is your definition of "socialism"?

Look, it's very simple. When you're trying to establish what a scary word socialism is it's the government controls everything and no individuals are allowed to own anything, and government inefficiency therefore results in widespread unemployment, economic downturn and even starvation.

When you're trying to tar someone as a "socialist" so that they're associated with all that scariness socialism is any desire for things like welfare, foodstamps, educational subsidies, healthcare, or similar to be provided by the government.

What's the confusion all about?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I believe socialism is about the workers having a larger piece of the production. It wasn't about removing management entirely.

Who ever said it was? It's about removing private owners entirely. As far as socialist theory goes, managing is just another job some workers specialize in, same as in capitalist practice.

Needed both cogs for a company to work, but only one of the cogs didn't have to worry about dying during production. Hence the desire to change the system, make it safer and offer the workers a larger share of the production.

That's not socialism. That's trade unionism. Trade unionists often imagine socialists are their friends because of the enemy-of-my-enemy principle; but this is delusional. Countries where the means of production are privately owned have independent trade unions; countries where they're collectively owned don't. When the means of production are collectively owned, the people who collectivized them suppress trade unions, for the same reason that a government of snake oil salesmen would suppress real doctors.

You are most likely correct. I do confuse, sometimes, the emergent socialism/capitalism mixture that was more present in American history than flat out socialism. From my research, the best system is most likely a combination of both, ie what we have developed these days. Of course, times change, and sometimes economic models need to as well.

 

[dismal]

That's not socialism. That's trade unionism. Trade unionists often imagine socialists are their friends because of the enemy-of-my-enemy principle; but this is delusional. Countries where the means of production are privately owned have independent trade unions; countries where they're collectively owned don't. When the means of production are collectively owned, the people who collectivized them suppress trade unions, for the same reason that a government of snake oil salesmen would suppress real doctors.

Oh, c'mon Fidel pays workers a very fair $17 per month. Why would they want to form a union?

 

[ZiprHead]

I think cheating became the norm in E. Germany pre unification. Higher party officials used their positions to extract extra benefits. Lower officials used their positions to extract bribes from workers. Both of those are capitalistic practices. They had commodities and used their access to those commodities to sell them to extract remuneration from those wanting/needing those commodities. Lack of ethical controls in the socialistic systems allowed these things to happen. I think they would happen again if such a system was tried. As someone else said, a lack of government transparency gave rise to these practices. I'm not sure such a level of transparency required for true socialism on a large scale is even possible in the modern world.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Socialism is an economic system where the state controls (almost) all means of production.

No.

How about "the means of production are collectively owned, said collective ownership usually expressed by state ownership".