Some questions about socialism (reject, choice, evolution, service, organization)

[Zephyr]

Pardon me for posting in here, but I really would like to learn a few things about socialism. I have always previously identified as a libertarian or a nationalist, but I'm really questioning the whole economic aspect of things. Basically, what I'm trying to ask is this:

Could you find socialism and nationalism compatible? Like, I have yet to meet with a socialist who has opposed an open-borders policy, but I greatly disagree with that. If say, me and an exclusive group of people worked together for the common good through common ownership of industries, would you consider that socialism even though we'd keep the borders locked up and have a generally very socially conservative (but fully democratic) government?

Also, are there any good links where I could get a good crash course in socialism? I'm not looking for anything super specific and in-depth really. Just something that if I read it, I could at least get the basic idea of things that I'd need to know for any higher reading.

Thanks for any help.

[Aqualung]

All the great socialists of the past have been nationalists. I think this socialist ideal that you speak of is relatively new, stemming from the (also relatively new) idea of globalism.

[Seyorni]

Common ownership of industries, ei: means of production, is a Marxist or Communist tenet. Most socialists do not advocate general government ownership of industry.

[GeneCosta]

The term socialist can be applied to scores of different views - but the common denominator is rejection of private property. Unfortunately, the term national socialism or Nationalsozialistische usually pertains to the fusion of nationalism and social liberalism - or, as we commonly deem it, Nazism.

Most socialists are anarchists, meaning that they believe in free associations of people based on democratic principles. Technocrats proclaim anarchism to be "rule over things, and not people." There wouldn't exist borders, but you would only be accountable to the group of your choice. Other socialists are called radical minarchists. They are usually split between nationalism and geography - technocrats in particular believe in establishing borders around regions most efficient in terms of production and resources.

Karl Marx said that socialists will engage in national struggles, but he saw there being global cooperation in the end when material abundance is achieved and all the fears of a class system whither away.

For a brief overview of different forms of socialism:

- Marxists.org is good for articles written by self-proclaimed socialists. The front page also has a link to a short description about Marxism.
- Mutualism.org is a good for articles about mutualism and socialist individualists (socialist free market)
- Libcom.org is good for anarcho-socialism

You'll have to research what best suites your ideology. My recommendation is wikipedia. There are various economic systems envisioned by socialists.

- Communism, a stateless, classless society where the means of production are owned in common. Communism is seen as a post-scarcity mode of production. To Marxists, it's the antithesis to primitive communism. Anarcho-communists reject the transition stage Marx envisioned.
- Mutualism, a stateless (free) market without private property (as we know it). Corporate subsidies, business personhood, copyrights, patents, and other elements viewed as being extensions of the capitalist state are abolished. It is seen as an extension of classical liberalism. Economic hierarchy is presumed to be purely voluntary under a free market since workers will be able to compete using cooperatives, mutual banks, credit unions, and other democratic institutions.
- ParEcon, a non-anarchist system where planning is done on a decentralized level, as opposed to the centralized, Soviet model. Anarcho-collectivism is a form of ParEcon without the state.
- Technocracy, essentially communism with the use of energy accounting and some different organization methods.
- Social Democracy, can be taken to mean two things. In its classical sense social democrats were Marxists who wanted to reform the state until a socialist party could transform society into socialism. Nowadays social democrats are mostly social liberals who only advocate welfare reforms.

From there people break themselves down even further to address what type of action they recommend:

- Marxists tend to favor revolution initiated by the working class
- Mutualists and communists favor agorism, or participation in the black market. They also favor using the gift economy (piracy, freeware).
- Syndicalists envision trade unions bringing down the state through a general strike

Hope that helped.

[Seyorni]

Fascinating -- but this is not the socialism conceived when we refer to the 'Socialist' Western European economic and social models.

[GeneCosta]

Originally Posted by Seyorni

Fascinating -- but this is not the socialism conceived when we refer to the 'Socialist' Western European economic and social models.

I don't think social liberalism and social democracy should be confused. Britain's Labor Party and France's Socialist Party have put forth a "third way" policy. I'm not saying that you can't have a socialist market, but most of the leadership has given up on socialism. Tony Blaire only gives lip service to "socialist ideas." The workers are little more in control over the means of production in West Europe than they are in the United States, either through the market or state control. I just picture more concessions due to Europe's historical tension.

Of course, you're free to disagree with me. There is no set definition for socialism.