TED Conversations

Drew Sowersby

graduate school-biochemistry,

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Is Socialism a societal phenomenon or just a trait of the old world?

I'm interested in opinions about the fate of growing nations when it comes to stigmas such as Socialism.

The most Socialistic countries have freedom. Is the end product of freedom ENTANGLEMENT, where everyone's interest get tied up in a vast social superstructure?

Socialism is the greatest fear for many in the U.S. It is tantamount to a loss of liberty. Make no mistake about it, the U.S. is already gnarled pretty badly and it does seem that the harder we fight to stop it, the more the hook sinks into our lip.

Besides hope, is there anything we can really do?

Topics: United States capitalism entanglement interconnectivity politics socialism
0
Share:

Closing Statement from Drew Sowersby

Socialism has a permanent home in our brains, but is often sacrificed for the sake of personal triumph. These diametrically opposed forces are in constant tug of war. One should be able to visualize several of the nodes in a social system and see how they interconnect. The gnarled up ball of goop is Socialism.

progress indicator

  • account removed

    • 0
    Feb 21 2011: About liberty in the US:
    There are two political parties in the US - Democrats (something like the Conservative Party in Britain) and Republicans (something like the Conservative Party in Britain).

    Free market is free for those who have power (wealth). For the rest of people it is a tyrany of the economy.

  • Eric Clyne

    • 0
    Feb 21 2011: Socialism is red.
    Red has many shades.
  • thumb

    Krisztián Pintér 200+

    • 0
    TED Translator
    Feb 20 2011: in the US, when rightists say socialism, they mean central decision making as opposed to free markets. if free individuals' desires get somehow entangled, whatever would that mean, it is not socialism by this definition. one problem with the above kind of socialism is that it is grossly suboptimal in total performance to the free market approach. the other of course is the loss of freedom. the former is arguable, the latter is not.
  • thumb

    Harald Jezek 50+

    • 0
    Associate
    Feb 19 2011: Drew, I think there are many different shads of socialism, so one probably should first define socialism.
    If you define socialism in the sense as Marx and Engels did, then socialism doesn't even exist.
    What we see today in "socialist" countries is actually only a softer form of capitalism. It certainly is no socialism that strips people of their liberties (discounting countries such as Cuba and N-Corea).
    I think the fear of socialism in the US is still a relic from the McCarthy era.
Showing all 4 comments