Mediaboss Marketing

Since the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s, young people have played a critical role in American politics. They have been a tremendous force for both political and cultural change in this country: in limiting the USs options in the war in Vietnam, in forcing corporations to divest from the racist South African regime, in reforming universities, and in bringing issues of sexual orientation and gender discrimination to public attention. Though none of these struggles were fought by young people alone, they all featured youth as leaders in multi-generational progressive coalitions. Young people are needed in todays struggles as well: for universal health care and stronger unions, against welfare cuts and predatory multinational corporations.

Schools, colleges and universities are important to American political culture. They are the places where ideas are formulated and policy discussed and developed. Being an active part of that discussion is a critical job for young socialists. We have to work hard to change peoples misconceptions about socialism, to broaden political debate, and to overcome many students lack of interest in engaging in political action. Off-campus, too, in our daily cultural lives, young people can be turning the tide against racism, sexism and homophobia, as well as the conservative myth of the virtue of free markets.

Join our student section, Youth Democratic Socialists!

Read more from the original source:
What is Democratic Socialism? Q & A - Democratic Socialists ...

Stalins gulag, impoverished North Korea, collapsing Cuba...its hard to name a dogma that has failed as spectacularly as socialism. And yet leaders around the world continue to subject millions of people to this dysfunctional, violence-prone ideology.

In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism, Kevin Williamson reveals the fatal flaw of socialismthat efficient, complex economies simply cant be centrally planned. But even in America, that hasnt stopped politicians and bureaucrats from planning, to various extents, the most vital sectors of our economy: public education, energy, and the most arrogant centralplanning effort of them all, Obamas healthcare plan.

In this provocative book, Williamson unfolds the grim history of socialism, showing how the ideology has spawned crushing poverty, devastating famines, and horrific wars. Lumbering from one crisis to the next, leaving a trail of economic devastation and environmental catastrophe, socialism has wreaked more havoc, caused more deaths, and impoverished more people than any other ideology in historyespecially when you include the victims of fascism, which Williamson notes is simply a variant of socialism.

Williamson further demonstrates:

Why, contrary to popular belief, socialism in theory is no better than socialism in practiceWhy socialism cant exist without capitalismHow the energy powerhouse of Venezuela, under socialism, has become an economic basket case subject to rationing and blackoutsHow socialism, not British colonialism, plunged the bountiful economy of India into stagnation and dysfunctionand how capitalism is rescuing itWhy socialism is inextricably linked to communism

If you thought socialism went into the dustbin of history with the collapse of the Soviet Union, think again. Socialism is alive and kicking, and its already spread further than you know.

Read this article:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism (The ...

The birth of the first modern socialist thought brought not only the changes in our modern politics but also new forms of art that promoted the views of the utopian socialism movement. Although any modern socialist movement can technically be called utopian, this term is today most often applied to the earliest socialists who lived during the early 19th century, where the name "utopian" negatively described their unrealistic ideas. Examples of that can be found in the initial works of socialist founders such as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels whose visions of the future were mostly focused on the expansion of the principles of French revolution which did not always aligned with a modern depiction of peaceful utopia. Their views of utopian society were not always peaceful and consisted from rigidly conforming to the scientific method of creation of balanced society.

The root of modern utopian socialism can be found in Ancient Greece and the works of the famous philosophers Plato and Aristotle who both described in their works perfect societies. Those old ideas were forged into utopian socialism movement by philosophers who started opposing the appalling consequences of industrial revolution. Tremendous increase in the manufacturing capabilities and the creation of new class of oppressed workforce pushed some of the best minds of the 19th century into open opposition to capitalism. The works of the utopiansocialism authors reflect their wishes for more just humanitarian world, where inhumanities of their age would be eliminated, and the future in which modern society will finally found balance between men, work, education, progress, and nature, with open opposition to the indifference of the rulers, rigid laws, selfishness and acquisitive individualism. Utopian socialist also very muchpromoted their futuristic views of the world with strong morals, hope, happiness and faith, which caused strong reactions of both inspiration and ridicule in the population who came in contact with their works. Almost all socialists authors adopted these ideals, but where utopian socialism movement differed from general socialism was in the means of how mankind could reach this better state (the ways in which current power would be taken from a government for example). Influential Marxs socialism movement was based on the grounds of strict scientific approach, while utopian socialism ideas were much looser and based on looser ideas, rhetoric and pure belief that modern societies can organize themselves better using consensus and peaceful public discussion.

The first utopian socialist was without the doubt the English philosopherand author Thomas Moore (1478-1535). His 1516 novel "Utopia" (which popularized word "utopia" in modern times) described the need for the creation of a state that practiced religious toleration, freedom of marriage, simpler communal life, free education and health care. He wrote this highly influential book guided by his frustration with the current political state in late 15th and early 16th century England, where he directly served English King Henry VIII as councilor, and for three years as Lord High Chancellor of England. The book Utopia (whose title was a pun on two Greek words ou-topos (no place) and eu-topos (good place)) followed the fictional narrator who compared the struggles of modern life in the city of Antwerp to the situation in the imaginary Greek island where life was made simpler by the much simple laws, promotion of public social gatherings, communal ownership, equal education for everyone and almost complete religious tolerance.

After the release of Utopia, many authors across England and Europe took its ideas and used them to create the new literary genre that managed to survive all up to modern time. This genre was not closely connected to socialist movement but was instead used to explore various thoughts. Francis Bacons utopian novel New Atlantis from 1624 explored future society where discovery, knowledge, and generosity were highly praised. This book served as the direct inspiration for the creation of the British Royal Society in 1660, which promoted education, exploration of new modern sciences, sharing of knowledge, and fueled the creation of first modern universities.

Moore's utopian vision gained additional popularity in the 19th century with the publication of several highly influential socialist works. Although they did not call themselves "utopian", ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels talked about visions and goals for the creation of utopian societies where people lived like equals. The distinction between utopian socialists and other modern movements were made in the Friedrich Engels' 1892 book called "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", in which he described them as ones who want to transform France into country with rational society, economy and their willingness to make those changes without struggle between classes or political revolutions. To him, utopian socialists claimed that they could achieve their goals with the help of like-minded people within existing society.

The popularity of utopian socialism gave birth to one of the biggest waves in utopian literature. During the 19th century, many utopian philosophers and writers tried to describe their ideas either in written form or by trying to realize their dreams in reality. Successful Welsh businessman Robert Owen (1771-1858) with help from philosopher Jeremy Bentham managed to reform the way of life for the workers that were employed by them. They created the lifestyle for them that included fewer work hours, distributed work, schools for children and renovated housing. Own was also responsible for creating few of the first utopian settlements in the United States. His new found commune called "New Harmony" collapsed after Own lost substantial wealth in a robbery, but this village greatly contributed the rise of future socialist movement by showing the entire world that human social behavior is not fixed and that it can be organized into any kind of society.

In addition to Robert Owen and Jeremy Bentham, some of the other notable utopian socialist philosophers and authors were: Erewhon (1872) by Samuel Butler (utopian satire of 19th century Victorian society), Candide by Voltaire, Charles Fourier (1772-1837, who influenced many other authors), Etienne Cabet (1788-1856, who created Icarian movement of utopiancommunities), Edward Bellamy(1850-1898, whose Christian socialist book " Looking Backward" became worldwide bestseller), William Morris(1834-1896, who disagreed with Bellamy's views in book " News from Nowhere"), Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865), Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921), Augustin Souchy (1892-1984), B.F. Skinner (1904-1990) and Ursula K. Le Guin (1929-present).

Read the original post:
Utopian Socialism - The Utopian Socialism Movement

A rising up "from the depths" threatens to disturb a gilded party in the above cartoon published in 1906 byThe Appeal to Reason, the most popular revolutionary socialist newspaper in US history. The tuxedoed and bejeweled rich, enjoying a grand ball in what looks like the Metropolitan Museum, recoil in horror as a clenched fist smashes up through the dance floor. Below, in an allegorical view offered by scientific socialism, we see the suffering and resistance of the working class. In squalid darkness, women and children strain to hold up the roof - or is it the floor - while their kind are crushed by exhaustion, age and injustice. One among them however has put his burden down and leads the fight upward. This is what Socialism in America looked like in the Age of Monopoly.

The Age of Monopoly begins with the end of Reconstruction and the Great Uprising of 1877. Subject to waves of violent conflict, a second Civil War seemed ready to break out, whether on the frontier or in urban America as with the Haymarket bombing of 1886 or Homestead strike of 1892. In 1901 the US Steel became the biggest corporation in history, the Socialist Party is founded in Chicago, and a anarchist assassinated President McKinley, the man who three years earlier invaded the Philippines. The struggles of the Age of Monopoly reach a kind of peak with World War I (1916-1918) and the Red Scare (1919-1922) that followed. Victorious in the class struggle, monopoly capitalism and Wall Street reign uncontested until the age comes to a cataclysmic end with the Great Crash of 1929.

Throughout the era, in all parts of country, the American people rose to challenge the power of capitalism under the banner of building the "cooperative commonwealth." Denouncing the unaccountable power of Robber Barons and Plutocrats, a generation of industrial workers, midwestern farmers, urban immigrants, civil rights activist and feminists, as well as a progressive middle class, built Socialism into a mass movement. Rising and falling between the 1880s and 1920s, American Socialism was many things to many different groups, but through the lens of radical cartoonists we can see that at its root, Socialism encouraged people to challenge the sanctity of the free market, to demand the expansion of democratic rights and civil liberties, and to consider the real possibility of progressive, even revolutionary, change.

Original post:
Cartoons for Socialism Cartooning Capitalism

Essentially, capitalism allows for anyone (that has sufficient capital) to create a business and produce anything they want, however they want, with no regard for democracy in the workplace, equal work participation (the owner does not have to work, just own the workplace), or indeed how the rest of society is doing. A capitalist (an owner of means of generating capital and a member of the bourgeois, or "upper", class) does not have to care about whether or not what their business is producing is necessary for society. All a capitalist has to worry about is making a profit. This is why socialists view capitalism as, among other things, ecologically unsustainable; because the Earth has limited resources, and each country has limited space for a limited amount of factories. Under capitalism, these factories are used for anything and everything that can generate profit, not for necessities that society actually needs. This leads to people who live in poverty to be able to afford a smartphone, but not always be able to put food on the table. Capitalist society produces too much of what we don't need, and too litte of what we do need, because the capitalist system is based on profit for capitalists, not human needs.

But capitalists don't decide it's time to stop making money once they reach a certain net worth. On the contrary, capitalists are never happy and continually seek to make as much money as possible. The problem with this is that money is merely a social construct with no inherent value. Money in itself is not worth anything, but instead it represents a value that exists somewhere. But this value is not infinite. Capitalists cannot keep making money forever, because eventually they will have taken all the value from the world and would have to start taking money from the poor. And yet this is exactly what has happened: The rich have become richer, and the poor have become poorer. The world's capital, the world's value, has accumulated among the 100-or-so richest individuals in the world, and this accumulation is still occurring. And this accumulation of capital will not simply seize, it will have to be stopped.

One of capitalism's most famous critics, as well as one of socialism's founders, was Karl Marx. Through the years, Marx described various problems with capitalism. Below are just a few examples.

Workers are paid little, whilst capitalists get rich.Probably the most obvious problem that Marx had with capitalism is that the labourers, who do all the work, are paid very little, whereas the capitalists get rich. The method the capitalists use and have used since the dawn of capitalism is the method of primitive accumulation ("Urspngliche Akkumulation"). The workers produce something for one price, and the capitalists sell it for a much higher one, whilst simultaneously shrinking the wages of the workers as much as possible, in order to maximise profits. The profit that capitalists make using the method of primitive accumulation is called the surplus value. According to Marx, this "profit" is simply theft, stolen by the capitalists from the hard-working labourers. Marx firmly believed that the workers have a right to the value that they produce, and that those who work with means of production should, alone, own those means of production. In other words, Marx believed that those who work in a workplace should collectively own and democratically decide how that workplace should be run. The only people allowed to be owners of something that can generate capital are those who actually generate that capital.

Capitalism is alienating - "Entfremdung."Marx understood that work can be the source of our greatest joy, but that capitalism has turned it into something we all detest. Everyone hates Mondays. Monday is the day we lose the freedom of the weekend to start working. But why do people hate Mondays? Why don't people enjoy their work? Essentially, modern work has us do one thing all day, but alienates us from what we believe we could ideally contribute to society. Someone who might want to write symphonies may have to work in a factory, because they need to earn money in order to afford food and housing. And on the other hand, some people who do work with what they feel contributes to society (teachers, for example) are paid very little to do so. Another problem that contributes to alienation is that modern work has become extremely specialised. Capitalists and factory owners don't want master craftsmen to produce the chairs in their furniture factory, they want to be able to hire almost anyone to produce one leg of one chair, and three other people to produce the other three legs, because then it's easy to fire and replace someone if there's a profit to be made, or production can increase with technological advancement. Ten people could be replaced by a computer and one engineer to maintain the computer, leaving 9 people unemployed, all for the sake of profit.

Capitalism is very unstable.From its very beginning, Capitalism is full of economic crises. Capitalists may dress up as these crises as "freakish" and "rare" and "soon to be the last one," but this is far from the truth, argued Marx, because capitalism is unstable by its very nature. Capitalism suffers from a crisis of abundance, rather than, as in the past, a crisis of shortage. Modern production is simply too effective. We produce too much: Much more than we could possibly consume. Modern work is so productive that we could give everyone on Earth a house, a car, enough food and water, as well as free access to a good school and a hospital. But, according to calculations by the World Food Program, there are over 795 million people in the world do not have enough food to lead a healthy active life. And according to the Global Campaign for Education, over 70 million people don't have access to education. If we were to only produce things we need, rather than, for example, 24 different brands of soap, very few of us would actually have to work, and we could ensure that the common person has what they need to survive. Once people have enough food and a place to live, we can start worrying about producing less essential things.

When most people (in the western world, including North America and Europe) hear the word "socialism" they think of Scandinavian and Central European welfare states that have high taxes and different forms of social security nets. It is a common misconception that these countries are socialistic. The correct term to describe these countries is "social democracy", which is a revisionist form of socialism that does not advocate for a transition to the socialistic mode of production. These countries are by all accounts still capitalistic; they advocate for a reform of the current status quo, not a complete transition from capitalism to socialism.

What socialism is, actually, is a political and economic theory of social organisation which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned and regulated by the community as a whole, rather than by private individuals.

Socialists believe that workers have a right to "reap what they sow", i.e. that they have a right to the value that they produce, and that capitalists who do nothing but own businesses, factories, corporations, etc., do not have any right to steal value from the hard-working labourers. Socialism is inherently an anti-capitalistic ideology, and socialists believe that capitalism is an outdated system that has to be replaced, in order for the working class to achieve true freedom from oppression and exploitation.

"Socialism" can also be used as an umbrella term, describing a collection of ideologies that advocate for the socialist mode of production. This includes but is not limited to:

Most forms of socialism are based on, or are at least inspired by, Marxism.

Simply put, democratic socialism advocates for a transition (whether revolutionary or reformistic) from the capitalist mode of production to the socialist mode of production accompanied by a democratic system, whereas social democracy advocates for a "better" version of capitalism achieved through reform of the current status quo that allows for government ownership of (mostly) non-profitable parts of society as well as social security nets and welfare paid for by raised taxes.What's wrong with social security nets and welfare?

There is nothing inherently wrong with these things. In fact, socialists want more welfare and social security for the people. Socialists want to ensure that everyone has a place to live, enough food and water to lead a healthy life, as well as free access to good schools and hospitals, among other things (parental leave, work safety laws, paid sick leave, paid vacation, etc.). The problem most socialists have with social democracies (which are famous for providing their citizens with these luxuries) is that they firstly only provide some of these things for their citizens (social democracies don't provide free housing, for example), and that those things are paid for mostly through taxes. High income taxes goes directly against the socialistic idea of letting workers reap what they sow. By taking hard-earned wages from the proletariat (the working- and middle-class), the social democratic state becomes no better than the capitalist class, which uses the method of primitive accumulation to leech profit from their workers. More on this further down on this page.

Marxism is a world view and a method of societal analysis, as well as a collection of political and economic theories that were developed by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxism focuses on class relations and societal conflict, and uses a materialistic interpretation of historical development, and a dialectical view of social transformation. Marxist methodology uses economic and socio-political inquiry and applies that to the critique and analysis of the development of capitalism and the role of class struggle in systemic economic change.

Whilst socialism and communism existed before Marx, he and Engels were the ones who turned the utopian dream of a perfect society into a practical science. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels are alone responsible for popularising socialism and communism throughout the world, and it is safe to say that socialism would have remained an impractical, utopian, near impossible-to-implement ideology without Marxist analyses.

Communism is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society. Communist society is the last stage of socialism (from a materialistic perspective of history, see: Marxism). It is defined as a socio-economic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and a state. The term "communist society" should be distinguished from the Western concept of the "communist state", the latter referring to a state ruled by a party which professes a variation of Marxism-Leninism.What is the difference between socialism and communism?

In Marxist theory, socialism is the transitional state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realisation of communism. Communism is a higher stage of socialism, and socialism is a lower stage of communism.

"Communist" countries such as China, Cuba, Laos, Nepal, and Vietnam have never claimed to have achieved communism, but are communistic in the sense that their goal is the establishment of communist society.

Yes, all communists are by definition also socialists, but not all socialists are communists. Most socialists agree that, theoretically, communism should be the next mode of production after socialism, but different socialistic ideologies have their own ideas for how this society should be reached and what it would look like (and if it can even be reached at all). In addition, many socialistic organisations and political parties no longer want to be associated with the word communism, after the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc essentially changed the meaning of the word communism from "a stateless, moneyless, global society without private ownership of the means of production" into "a state governed by a Marxist-Leninist political party".

Democracy. During no stage of socialism is a dictatorship necessary. Socialists do, however, advocate for a so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat," which should not be confused with an actual dictatorship. In Marxist theory, all societies which have economic classes also have a dictatorship of one of those classes. In capitalist society, the bourgeois class holds political power over the proletariat, and so capitalist society can be called a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. On the other hand, socialist society is supposed to be ruled by the working class, so it is called the dictatorship of the proletariat, as in "rule of the working class." The dictatorship of the proletariat only exists in socialist society, however. In communist society, which is classless, there is not a dictatorship of any particular class.

That said, many socialists believe that it is impossible to achieve socialism through bourgeois (liberal, parliamentary) democracy, because those systems were designed by the rich in order to keep the rich in power. But it is not true that socialists don't want democracy. In fact, socialists want more democracy than there already is: Socialists want true democracy where every individual's vote and opinion truly matters. Socialists don't just want more direct democracy (i.e. allowing for the population to directly control how their country is run, rather than just letting them vote for a "representative" that super-promises to vote in their interests, but is under no real obligation to actually do so), but also allow for democratic control of the means of production. That is, allow all workers to democratically decide how their place of work is run, what is produced, how much it should sell for, and so on.

Although the Nazi Party was called "National Socialist", it was not socialistic. The Nazis promoted a corporatist, class collaborationist ideology which they termed "socialist" in an attempt to gain working class support (socialism was a hugely popular idea in Germany at the time). In practice, Nazi Germany privatised most of the economy, made independent labour unions illegal, and placed communists, socialists, and social democrats in concentration camps along with other "undesirable" citizens such as Jews, people of colour, handicapped people, etc.

If you're afraid the communists are going to break into your home and take your Xbox because private property has been abolished, you can sleep easy knowing that "private property" is not the same as "personal property." Private property refers to means of production (factories, machinery, etc.), whereas personal property refers to the things you the common person own. Your house, your car, and your Xbox are all personal property, and belong to you.

No. Firstly, because unimportant positions such as "janitor" probably would not exist, and the duty of cleaning up would be shared among the people within a certain community (a workplace, a neighbourhood, etc.) Secondly, because money would not exist in communist society in the same sense that it does today.

The rest is here:
Socialism101.com: Basic