-
Why Are Sonic Fans Warning Moviegoers Not To Cheer When Maria Dies In 'Sonic The Hedgehog 3?' The Viral Memes Explained -
What Is The 'Sharon's Burnt Marie Callender Pie' Meme? The Thanksgiving Burned Pie Meme Explained -
Is Chis-Chan Having A Kid And Who Is 'Flutter?' The Rumor About The Lolcow's Potential Child Explained -
What Does 'Ningning Is The Maknae' Mean? The Viral Memes About The 'Aespa' K-Pop Idol Explained -
What Is The '2006 Volleyball Incident' And Is It Real? The Viral Conspiracy Theory Explained
I swear these people are the worst | /r/PoliticalCompassMemes
Uploaded by Reddit Moments Dec 22, 2019 at 08:13PM EST
reddit political compass memes /r/politicalcompassmemes text line font
Origin Entry: Political Compass
File type: png
Resolution: (493px x 528px)
File size: 86.9 KB
Moar:
0
Political Compass - I swear these people are the worst | /r/PoliticalCompassMemes
| ◄ Previous | View Gallery Random Image | Next ► |
![Authoritarian socialism is when socialism is when the government the government does stuff does stuff Economic- Economic- Left Right NO000!!!!! SOCIALISM IS WHEN To answer this question, it is necessary to first define what we meanby capitalism and socialism. While there is a tendency for supportersof capitalism (and a few socialists!) to equate it with the market andprivate property, this is not the case. It is possible to have both andnot have capitalism (as we discuss in section G.1.1 and section G.1.2,respectively). Similarly, the notion that "socialism" means, by definition,state ownership and/or control, or that being employed by the staterather than by private capital is "socialism" is distinctly wrong. Whilesome socialists have, undoubtedly, defined socialism in precisely such terms, socialism as a historic movement is much wider than that. AsProudhon put it, "Im Jodem Socialism was not founded as a sect or church;it has seen a numberof different schools." [Selected Writings of PieIrreJoseph Proudhon, p. 177JAS Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin and Tucker all stressed, anarchismis one of those schools. For Kropotkin, anarchism was "the no-govemmentsystem of socialism." [Anarchism, p. 46] Likewise, for Tucker, "two schools of socialistic thought", one of which represented authority and the other liberty, namely "State Socialism and Anarchism." [TheIndividualist Anarchists, pp. 78-9] It was "not Socialist Anarchismagainst Individualist Anarchism, but of Communist Socialism againstīndividualist Socialism." [Tucker, Liberty, no. 129, p. 2] As one expert on Individualist Anarchism noted, Tucker "looked upon anarchismas a branch of the general socialist movement." [James J. Martin, MenAgainst the State, pp. 226-7] Thus we find Individualist anarchistVictor Yarros, like Tucker, talking about "the position and teachings ofthe Anarchistic Socialists" when refening to his ideas. [Liberty, no. 98,p. 5]Part of problem is that in the 20th century, the statist school of socialism prevailed both within the labour movement (at least in Englishspeaking counties or until fascism destroyed it in mainland Europeand elsewhere) and within the revolutionary movement (first as socialdemocracy, then as Communism after the Russian Revolution). Thislead, it should be noted, to anarchists not using the tem "socialist" todescribe their ideas as they did not want to be confused with eitherreformed capitalism (social democracy) or state capitalism anarchism was understood as being inherently anti-1378capitalist, this did not become an issue until certain right-wing liberalsstarted calling themselves Cemmanu nitalists (comewhat ironically these liberals ioined with the state socialists in trving to limit anarchismto anti-statism and denying their socialist credentials). Another partof the problem is that many, particularly those in America, derive theirmotion of what socialism is from right-wing sources who are more thanhappy to agree with the Stalinists that socialism is state ownership. This is case with right-"libertarians", who rarely study the history orideas of socialism and instead take their lead from such fanatical antisocialists as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard. Thus they equatesocialism with social democracy or Leninism/Stalinism, i.e. with stateownership of the means of life, the turming of part or the whole workingpopulation into employees of the govermment or state regulation andthe welfare state. In this they are often joined by social democrats andwho seek to excommunicate all other kinds of socialism fromthe anti-capitalist movement.of which leads to some strange contradictions. If "socialism" isequated to state ownership then, clearly, the individualist anarchistsare not socialists but, then, neither are the social anarchists! Thusif we assume that the prevailing socialism of the 20th century defineswhat socialism is, then quite a few self-proclaimed socialists are not, infact, socialists. This suggests that socialism cannot be limited to statesocialism. Perhaps it would be easier to define "socialism" as restictionson private property? If so, then, clearly, social anarchists are socialistsbut then, as we will prove, so are the individualist anarchists!0f course, not all the individualist anarchists used the tem "socialist"or "socialism" to describe their ideas although many did. Some calledtheir ideas Mutualism and explicitly opposed socialism (William Greenebeing the most obvious example). However, at root the ideas were partof the wider socialist movement and, in fact, they followed Proudhonin this as he both proclaimed himself a socialist while also attacking it. The apparent contradiction is easily explained by noting there are twoschools of socialism, state and libertarian. Thus it is possible to be botha (libertarian) socialist and condemn (state) socialist in the harshestterms.So what, then, is socialism? Tucker stated that "the bottom claim ofSocialism" vwas "that labour should be Dut in m---nccier -L- -yn," that"the natural wage of labour is its product" and "interest, rent, and profit. .. constitute the trinity of usury." [The v also found favour with Kropotkin whostated that socialism "in its wide, generic, and true sense" was an "effort1379to abolish 169]For Kropotkin, anarchism was "brought forth by the same critical andrevolutionary protest which gave rise to Socialism in lism and of society based on thesubjection of labour to capital." Anarchism, unlike other socialists, extended this to oppose tate and its principle supports." [Environment and Evolution, p.19] Tucker, similarly, argued that Individualist anarchism was a of the workingmanfrom his present slavery to capital." [Instead of a Book, p. 323]The various schools of socialism present therewere" anarcho"-capitalists socialism is when Individualist Anarchi the exploitatin general", sor "what constitun formof socialism a different libertariancon domination and e enjoyable(whi replacing capi StateSocialisn ction. From the nationalisation of capitalist propertyby the state socialists, to the socialisation of property by the lism, to the free market of theindividualist anarchists, all are seeking, in one way or the other, to ensure the end of the reements between them all rest in whether their solutions achievethis aim and whether they will make life worth living and al anarchists disagree somuch!), For anarchists, state socialism is little more than state capitalism, with a state monopoly ted by one boss (the state) rather than many. So all anarchists would agree with YaTows when he argued that "[w]hile , no-State Socialismoffers him the means of recovering strength, health, and vigour." [Liberty,no. 98, p. 5]So, vwhy are the a reasons.Firstly, the Individualist Anarchists opposed profits, interest and rentas forms of exploitation (they termed these y was "but another name for the exploitationof labour." [Liberty, no. 122, p. 4]). To use the words of Ezra Heywood, the . 28- use of the government does stuff individualist an non-labour Individuali 43, Benja. obbery, andProfit Only Another Name for Plunder." [quoted by Martin Blatt, "EzraHeywood & n, Hamilton and Sullivan (eds.), p.29] Non-labour incomes are merely "different methods of levving triutefor ti capital." Their vision of the good society was one in which 1ot exist andLabour woud continue in receiptof dividends were it not for the support of monopoly, it follows that ." [Tucker, Liberty,no. 282, p. 2]In addition, as a means of social change, the individualists suggestedthat activists start ts and taxes." [Instead of a Book pp. 299-300] These are hardlystatements with which capitalists would agree. Tucker, as itation and a "crime") pureand simple and one of the means by which workers were denied thefull fruits of their labour. who charges more than cost for any product [will]... beregarded very much as we now regard a pickpocket." This "attitude .e capitalist mentalityor belief system. [Op. Cit, p. 155] Similarly, Ezra Heywood consideredprofit-taking "an injustice which wnership of land or raw-materials." [James J. Martin, Op.Cit, p. 111] Opposition to profits, rent or interest is hardly capitalistic- chists, like the social anarchists, opposedthe exploitation of labour and desired to see the end of capitalism byensuring that labour A societyin which there would no longer be capitalists and workers, only workers.The worker would receive the full product of his/her by capital. In Tucker's words, a free society wouldsee "each man reaping the fruits of his labour and no man able to live inidleness on an d "become a greathive of Anarchistic workers, prosperous and free individuals" combining"to cany on their production and distibution on hists, p. 276 ſSecondly, the Individualist Anarchists favoured a new system of landownership based on "occupancy and use." So, as well as y in land).J.K. Ingalls, for example, proper a demination excludes or deprive "the usure "secure its natural wage, its entire product." [Tucker, TheIndividualist Anarchists, p. 80, p. 82 and thesediv "inducing noted, Indeed, ofhos ranked inde ce no idle shareholders See the lat lividualist anarchists also expressedopposition to capitalist ideas o eland" originated in "usurpation only, whether of the camp, H n perty (particularly market. Whenever tis a violation, not only of thepublic right, and of the social duty, but of the very principle of law andmorals upon which property itself Libertarian](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/list/001/836/792/213.png "what is a socialism? | /r/PoliticalCompassMemes")
Comments (0)
Add a Comment
Image Details
144 views (8 from today)
Uploaded Dec 22, 2019 at 08:13PM EST
Origin Entry
Source
About the Uploader
Reddit Moments
Treasurer & Media Maid
There are no comments currently available.
Display Comments