Talk:Socialism: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Article is too long
Xerographica (talk | contribs)
Line 115: Line 115:
==Article is too long==
==Article is too long==
This article is still way too long, making it difficult to read and navigate comfortably, so I've re-added the tag; it definitely needs to be less than 100k and closer to 80k would be better. More use of [[WP:Summary style]], where material is split to sub-articles, leaving a summary here, would really help. [[User:Johnfos|Johnfos]] ([[User talk:Johnfos|talk]]) 19:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
This article is still way too long, making it difficult to read and navigate comfortably, so I've re-added the tag; it definitely needs to be less than 100k and closer to 80k would be better. More use of [[WP:Summary style]], where material is split to sub-articles, leaving a summary here, would really help. [[User:Johnfos|Johnfos]] ([[User talk:Johnfos|talk]]) 19:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

== Request For Comments – Political Ideologies Diagram ==

[[File:Political Ideology Interconnectedness Venn Diagram.jpg|thumb]]

On the libertarianism talk page we're having quite a bit of disagreement regarding where libertarianism ends and other ideologies begin. Given that a picture is worth a thousand words, I drew this diagram to illustrate the one defining tenet that two ideologies share.

When I posted it on the talk page I specifically noted that it was original research based on numerous reliable sources and was not intended for use in the article. However, the file has been proposed for deletion because editors that oppose my viewpoint feel that original research based on reliable sources should not be allowed on talk pages or even user pages.

From my perspective...it sets bad precedent if you can't draw a diagram to try and help simplify a complex and confusing topic. If this diagram is deleted it will be the equivalent of somebody deleting your comments from the talk page just because they disagree with what you have to say. So far, nobody has offered any evidence that the straightforward definitions contained within this diagram are not factual.

Here's where I posted the file on my user page...[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xerographica#Political_Ideology_Interconnectedness here] and here’s where the file is being proposed for deletion...[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_September_28#File:Political_Ideology_Interconnectedness_Venn_Diagram.jpg here]. I spent a bit of time working on this diagram and would really appreciate some outside feedback on whether the file should be kept or deleted. If it turns out that my diagram is in clear violation of Wikipedia policy then my other two diagrams will have to be deleted as well...[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xerographica#Survey Scope of Government Diagrams]. --[[User:Xerographica|Xerographica]] ([[User talk:Xerographica|talk]]) 19:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:10, 30 September 2010

What is Socialism?

This should define the difference between Communism and Socialism.--86.29.135.94 (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rambling list of countries and stuff

The USSR

Thier Marxist-Leninist beliefs typify socialist communism! They also used 'Socialist' in thier national name!--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cuba

Thier Marxist-Leninist-Castroist beliefs also typify socialist communism! They also used 'Socialist' in thier national name! most Communist states folowed the Soviet Union's verient.-- --86.29.140.96 (talk) 19:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red China

It was originally a Maoist state, but the PRC ditched this deviant form of communism for Marxism-Leninism, despite using the term "people‘s republic" in there national name! The term was also used by Mongolia, East Germany, The Congo-Brazzaville and Vietnam at various points in their socialist eras.--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clement Attlee

Clem, as he was known at the time, was a socialist, but not a communist. He created the British NHS system. Labour used to sing the Red Flag song and wave there red flags back then with pride and joy as the party AGM closed in Blackpool every year!--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nepal

Nepal elected a Maoist government in 1996, which was removed in 1997 by the king, and has had one since 2008, which exiled the king. --86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The IRA

I believe the IRA clamed to be a ‘Socialist’ movement in the late 1970’s!--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ANC

I believe the ANC clamed to be a ‘Socialist’ movement in the 1960's and 1970’s.--86.29.130.210 (talk) 18:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Blair and Gerhard Schroeder

Both Tony Blair and Gerhard Schroeder have both described them selves and their parties as reformed socialists from time to time in the early 2000’s.--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:20, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Algeria, Libya, Iraq and Syria

Algeria, Libya, Iraq and Syria been accused of being Islamic Socialist states in the late 1970’s and most of the 1980's by various Western sources, such as the CIA, MI5 and Mossad!--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:21, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden

Sweden has been a Nordic Socialist state since the 1970's, yet it's all about a no smack policy in it's schools, environmentalism and good public transport, not nationalization or foaming at the mouth Bolsheviks as some British and American radicals have claimed in recent years!--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

India

The Indian Constitution says that India is Secular Socialist and Hindu Socialist.--86.29.140.96 (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Farm investigated

Both socialism and communism were put under the spotlight by George Orwell's book Animal Farm and the later 1954 cartoon film. Boxer the horse was a socialist worker, if not a full blown Commy, while Napoleon the pig was a corrupt datcha communist that would have felt at home during Leonid Breznev's later years as Soviet premier.--86.29.130.210 (talk) 17:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin the donkey had socialist tenancies and was probably a social democrat, but definitely not a Red. Snowball the pig had ideas similar to Trotsky's idea of Permanent Revolution and was probably a full blown communist and not a socialist. Their idealistic little ditty Beasts of England was a freedom song that had no political colours to it, but the ideology of Animalism was a piss take on the failure of both communism, socialism and lefties in general! --86.29.141.168 (talk) 20:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

George Orwell

George Orwell, a democratic socialist[1] and a member of the Independent Labour Party for many years, was a critic of Joseph Stalin and was suspicious of Moscow-directed Stalinism after his experiences with the NKVD during the Spanish Civil War.--86.29.130.210 (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity and Judaism

Both Christian values and Rabbinical Jewish values are also morally leaning towards socialism to.--86.29.130.210 (talk) 18:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The SLP and SDP

The UK's Socialist Labour Party is an example of a socialist communist party. Germany's Social Democratic Party is an example of reformed socialist party.--86.29.130.210 (talk) 18:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lark Rise to Candleford investigated

Both Lark Rise to Candleford and the modern Lark Rise to Candleford (TV series) mentions situations and ideas that can be considered to be relevant to socialism in late Victorian rual England.

  • 1 Episode- The young country girl Laura Timmins leaves her friends and family in the hamlet of Lark Rise to start her first job at the post office in nearby town Candleford. Postmistress Dorcas Lane gives Laura a warm welcome but other residents of Candleford aren't so generous. When Lark Rise residents challenge the post office's 'eight mile rule' that forces them to pay for delivery of telegrams, Laura finds herself torn between communities.
  • Episode 6- Robert takes pity on a homeless family and brings them to stay at his house for the night. In the morning the family have departed, leaving their little daughter Polly behind. Lady Adelaide meets the girl and falls in love with her, wanting to adopt her, but Sir Tim thinks that adopting Polly would be inappropriate. Tim takes Polly to the Post Office where everyone struggles to think of a solution to the problem. Twister's delusions grow worse as he sees visions of his dead sister, and Queenie worries about his health.
  • Episode 31- When the Lark Rise school loses its teacher, Emma steps in and discovers a talent she never knew she had. But Margaret also covets the role of teacher, and the two women become rivals for the job. Over in Candleford, Thomas and Dorcas are at odds. The postman is agitating for better working conditions, and Dorcas isn't taking it well.
  • Episode 34- When the postmaster at Inglestone, with an old score to settle, tries to force Dorcas into selling up, she is faced with the heartbreaking prospect of losing her home and denying Sydney his dream of running the post office one day. --86.29.141.168 (talk) 20:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Like this gem I found on a socalist related page!--86.29.135.94 (talk) 21:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The definition in the article does not cover all forms of socialism. For example, market socialism or social democracy. It should be said that there are various forms of socialism. Doctor Procedure (talk) 05:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No it shouldn't because that would be OR, making clear what each is is sufficient. Collapsing this long list of ... stuff rather than deleting it, although the latter would be justified. See also Archive 11. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just one thing clear, In your talk, you mentioned, that Algeria, Libya, Iraq and Syria are socialist because of claims by CIA, MI5 and Mossad. By that, the CIA and MI5, also the Mossad should have no contributing effect on the economic ideal of these countries. There is no word of a Libyan, Algerian, Iraqi or Assyrian source that these countries are socialist. And with all due respect, already the 3 digits, C I A, clarify that most of these claims are unsourced, unreliable and false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.156.247.203 (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for Libertarian Marxist

the tag has been removed twice. I was unable to find a source for the term in my research. Darkstar1st (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pray tell ... how did you search, and what search terms did you use? BigK HeX (talk) 20:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
if you have found a citation, please improve the article:) Darkstar1st (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please ... by all means, reinforce my suspicion that your "search for sources" was disingenuous. Are you going to describe your search, or not? BigK HeX (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vocabulary

I don't like the use of vocabulary in the current version of the article. It seems divorced from the rest of Wikipedia (and my knowledge of economics). If you click on some of the first unusual terms - "Means of Production", "Use-value", "Exchange-value", "Free Association" - they all go Marxist Theory pages. I don't think I should have to learn all of Marxist Theory in order to understand Socialism. Just because it's not the Capitalist page, doesn't mean you can't use the word "capital".

Also, I see "post-monetary system" as a biased term.

On a non-vocabulary related note, the introduction includes a Socialist's criticism of Capitalism. Rather than saying "A socialist sees capitalism as doing X which is bad because of Y", I think a more even way of phrasing it is "A socialist wants Y and capitalism doesn't achieve that because of X". This second way of phrasing it allows people to evaluate if Y is important to them and whether or not X does or doesn't encourage Y. The first way of phrasing it allows criticism of the social's view of capitalism and whether or not there are offsetting things besides Y that might make capitalism redeemable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.38.131.202 (talk) 14:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The terms use-value and exchange-value are classical economic terminology that are not exclusive to Marxian economics. Neoclassical economics ("mainstream") lacks equivalent terminology because it ignores these concepts entirely and focuses on the analysis of price as its starting point. "Means of production" is simply the factors of production minus labor and land; I have seen the term used universally in the definitions of both capitalism and socialism (see the capitalism article). The term capital has different meanings; socialists generally consider socialism as a system where capital is neutralized, so I don't see how a concept with different meanings can be easily injected into the lead without adding a lengthy definition of what capital means in this specific context. Free association is admittedly a strictly Marxist and Anarchist phrase; however I do not know what phrase it can be adequately substituted with while maintaining its original meaning (Free association =/= government control). Post-monetary might be confusing for some, but moneyless calculation for the factors of production is a crucial element of socialism as characterized by its proponents.
As for your second concern, I think the whole criticism of capitalism section in the lead should be moved to its own category in the article titled "Socialist perspective" or "Socialist critique of capitalism". The focus of the lead should be a brief overview of socialism as a socioeconomic system, political movement and ideology devoid of socialist perspectives on other social systems. Battlecry (talk) 22:10, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article is too long

This article is still way too long, making it difficult to read and navigate comfortably, so I've re-added the tag; it definitely needs to be less than 100k and closer to 80k would be better. More use of WP:Summary style, where material is split to sub-articles, leaving a summary here, would really help. Johnfos (talk) 19:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request For Comments – Political Ideologies Diagram

File:Political Ideology Interconnectedness Venn Diagram.jpg

On the libertarianism talk page we're having quite a bit of disagreement regarding where libertarianism ends and other ideologies begin. Given that a picture is worth a thousand words, I drew this diagram to illustrate the one defining tenet that two ideologies share.

When I posted it on the talk page I specifically noted that it was original research based on numerous reliable sources and was not intended for use in the article. However, the file has been proposed for deletion because editors that oppose my viewpoint feel that original research based on reliable sources should not be allowed on talk pages or even user pages.

From my perspective...it sets bad precedent if you can't draw a diagram to try and help simplify a complex and confusing topic. If this diagram is deleted it will be the equivalent of somebody deleting your comments from the talk page just because they disagree with what you have to say. So far, nobody has offered any evidence that the straightforward definitions contained within this diagram are not factual.

Here's where I posted the file on my user page...here and here’s where the file is being proposed for deletion...here. I spent a bit of time working on this diagram and would really appreciate some outside feedback on whether the file should be kept or deleted. If it turns out that my diagram is in clear violation of Wikipedia policy then my other two diagrams will have to be deleted as well...Scope of Government Diagrams. --Xerographica (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Why I Write" (1936) (The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell Volume 1 – An Age Like This 1945-1950 p.23 (Penguin))