Eight myths about socialism—and their answers

[marmar]

from the Party for Socialism and Liberation:






Myth #1: Socialists want to take away your property

This myth confuses private property with personal property. When socialists talk about the abolition of private property, they are referring to the socialization of the means of production—the resources and equipment that create wealth. Working people do not own this type of property—which is why we have to work to survive.

Right now, the wealth of the 1,000 billionaires is equal to that of the 3.5 billion poorest people on the planet. In order to provide everyone with more, that wealth must be commonly owned, and not the property of those few capitalists.

Socialists have no interest in taking away one’s home, car or individual items intended for personal use. In reality, as the foreclosure crisis has shown, under capitalism the banks own most of this property as well—and will take it away as they please.

Myth #2: Socialists are against democracy and for a dictatorship

The two-party “democratic” system under capitalism is in fact a dictatorship of the rich. Under it, working people create all the wealth, but capitalists—who own the corporations and banks—have all the economic power and use it to control politics. That fact never changes, even if we have the right to vote. We get to vote on who will oppress us next, while all the important decisions are made in executive boardrooms. ................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.pslweb.org/party/marxism-101/eight-myths-about-socialism.html

[dkf]

1. Are there any countries that are like this?

"Socialism rewards hard work, while under capitalism the richest people are the ones who do no work at all. In a socialist society, the working class controls the means of production and the fruits of its own labor and therefore has a real stake in the realization of its full capacity to produce."

[Starry Messenger]

2. What a great resource!

Myth #3: Under socialism, there is no incentive to work

Socialism rewards hard work, while under capitalism the richest people are the ones who do no work at all. In a socialist society, the working class controls the means of production and the fruits of its own labor and therefore has a real stake in the realization of its full capacity to produce. The main incentive to work under capitalism is the threat of being fired and starvation.

Under socialism, a person is paid according to the work they do. Under capitalism, the least productive members of society—the bankers and CEOs—grow obscenely wealthy while working class people live paycheck to paycheck.

Myth #4: Socialism is against human nature

Human “nature” changes depending on the type of society you are living in. Marx explained that the ruling ideas and behaviors of a society are those of its ruling class. We are taught to believe that humans are naturally violent, exploitative and selfish because those are the principles on which our society is built. Looking through human history, including thousands of years of communal, class-less societies, we can see that another “nature” exists. Even in our present society, we can see in our daily lives tremendous examples of shared sacrifice and solidarity—even if those don’t make the evening news.

That's a handy link to have at the ready.

[PETRUS]

3. Good link, thanks. About Myth #4: Socialism is against human nature:

"Human “nature” changes depending on the type of society you are living in."

I don't think humans are totally pliable, and I do think there is such a thing as human nature. For the most part, I tend to agree with evolutionary psychologists when they point out that the brain is a huge bundle of contradictions. People are BOTH cooperative and competitive. I don't think conditions change human nature itself, but certainly behavior will be different depending on the environment.

[Starry Messenger]

4. I know what you're saying.

Last edited Sun Dec 11, 2011, 11:12 PM - Edit history (1)

The argument stems from the difference between "idealism" and "materialism" in Marxism. (And by idealism, it is meant anything outside of objective reality--imaginary, thought-based; not idealism like wanting good things to happen) The human nature idealist argument is that humans have some quality that existed outside of our time before even appearing in nature--that there is some a priori quality that we take on simply because it was bestowed on us from outside and it is unchanging. Usually this is where we get into spiritual areas, because if this "nature" didn't derive from our experiences and existence and is eternal, it must be otherworldy. And it will never change.

Materialism says that humans are the result of a historical process in nature. We have behaviors that are common to our experience, but how and why did they arise? Was there a spirit that breathed qualities into us? Or did we evolve depending on the conditions that we faced, our social nature, and the fact that we depend on each other for survival, which are all unique qualities of our species. Are we "naturally greedy", or is this a basic primitive survival behavior that gets aggravated in a fight for resources? and becomes totally malignant under capitalism. Could it be totally stemmed in a change of economic conditions? The idealist wouldn't think so, there is the thought that man will "revert" to some unchanging nature handed down on high no matter what the conditions.

[PETRUS]

6. That's helpful, thanks.

To me, socialism doesn't seem against nature; I wasn't sure why anyone would have to defend it that way. I think problems can stem from a failure to take human nature seriously, e.g. your becoming malignant under capitalism observation.

Given that I think we can be best understood as primates who spent most of our evolutionary history living in small groups in Africa, I guess I'm a materialist.

[Starry Messenger]

10. You're welcome.

Socialism doesn't seem against nature to me either. For a lot of people it does though. I've had wacky conversations with people here where they say that capitalism is the only thing that keeps humans from killing each other, it "evolved" to deal with our evil natures. And these are liberals. o.O Add in the fact that the right-wing still tries to suppress basic Darwinism in the textbooks and that many of them feel no embarrassment about going on a public debate and raising their hand "no", that they don't believe in evolution. Idealism still rules our political sphere and influences policy.

[TBF]

5. Excellent post -

and thankful you got here! Marmar posted a lot of content in the SP group in DU2 for those who may not have found the group there.

[white_wolf]

7. In regards to #5

"Myth #5: Socialists don't respect freedom of religion

Socialists consider religion a private matter, and actively fight against discrimination on the basis of religion.

Marx never called for the banning of religion. He pointed out how historically religious institutions have discouraged people from fighting against oppression. They instruct poor and working people to wait instead for a better after-life.

There are many examples, however, of movements that have used religious ideology while struggling for a better world. While many socialists are atheists, the PSL whole-heartedly welcomes people of all faith backgrounds that want to fight to make that world a reality".

I posted this in another thread, but it might as well post it here too, it's Lenin's "Socialism and Religion."

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1905/dec/03.htm

[socialist_n_TN]

8. Number 6

Myth #6: Socialists only care about class oppression—not other forms of oppression

PSL members are tireless fighters against all forms of oppression. We believe that racism, sexism, anti-immigrant bigotry, homophobia and all other kinds of discrimination divide poor and working people and must be fought if we ever want to move forward. We put ourselves in that revolutionary tradition of socialists who take up the banners of Black liberation, women’s liberation and LGBT liberation.

This is something important to say too. The only thing I would add is that ALL OPPRESSION (remember that oppression stems from a top down governmental/ruling class bias against a certain group) is at it's basis economic. If you get rid of the classist/governmental bias with economic democracy, i.e., socialism, then all that's left are individual biases. And if we're all equal (or roughly equal) economically then somebody not liking you because you're black, gay, or a woman becomes a PERSONAL issue and not an oppression issue.

And in practice, the MOST militant fighters against oppression throughout history have been the socialists.

[socialist_n_TN]

9. And BTW marmar, I'm glad to see you here

[GreenPartyVoter]

11. Thanks for sharing this!