You have probably noticed as you read my blog that I am not the most avid supporter of socialism. That’s right. I am against socialism in government.
For those of you who missed my definition of socialism in a comment I wrote, here it is:
Socialism is a system of government and economics similar, but not identical to communism. Marx said that socialism is the step in between capitalism and communism. Socialism says that the state must take care of everyone’s needs and provide all services (e.g. welfare, education, medicare) In the extreme; it means that all goods produced are shared with everyone else (e.g. Jamestown, in 1607).
Here’s Webster’s definition: “(1) Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. (2) A system of society or group living in which there is no private property. (3) A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state. (4) A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
However there is one case when socialism can be beneficial: Emergencies.
In WWII, the aircraft companies of America joined together in a union. They shared ideas and concepts, plans and blueprints, and leaders and workers. This corporation worked well. It accomplished the needs of the country for combat aircraft during the war. European countries also nationalized industries during the war.
There have been other instances of governmental and corporational socialism in times of extreme need.
These provisions work well in the short term. However in the long run, they are not efficient and can sometimes bring ruin.
Recent Comments