History is a fickle thing. The problem with history is that it is written by people who are, well, human, and therefore imperfect. It was also experienced by people who will put their own lenses on things, it is entirely impossible not to convey some sort of feeling about a subject matter. But perhaps the most important thing to remember about history is that because you are human, as you study history it is not always easy to imagine a society in which you do not live or a society whose rules you do not follow.
As we have begun to look at Socialism, I am having this trouble. I was born in a time virtually with out socialism or communism. The Berlin wall had fallen four years previously, and the USSR dissolved two years previously. To me these things are ancient history, and it is difficult to imagine an actually world in which they worked. Similar to how hard it is to imagine a world where, if I had been born into it, I would not have gone to school, and it would be normal to be married with four children right now. (Ok maybe not four, but that's close right?) And so as the class begins to look at socialism I experience a whole new world.
My journey first began, where all such journey's begin, at the beginning. =) To be a tad more specific, with the required readings on instructure. From there I read the Communist Manifesto, which I though I understood. But it didn't make sense. Did Karl Marx really think that people would want to live in a world where everything was shared, would this really foster the most progress? But maybe that was seeing the end from the beginning, like I mentioned in Shaun's blog, maybe they were just trying to improve the deplorable conditions they saw around them.
So to try and understand more about communism and socialism and their traits I went to the dictionary and a search of MIT's open course ware. Now I think I understand that socialism is an economic system based in sharing. That is the sharing of the benefits of industry. While communism is a political system based in sharing. But as it was implemented by the USSR, there wasn't much sharing of power, things were simply done by the party in the name of the people.
Now if anyone would like to add to this knowledge insight would be helpful. Because currently I'm going off of the books: Hunt for Red October (Clancy), Anna Karenina (Tolstoy), 1984 (Orwell), the movie: October Sky, and this website on Samantha Smith, which I learned about from the song " I saw the Time" (Alabama).
I know that Marx attempts to refute this claim, but I see the main problem with communism/socialism as being motivation. Few people are motivated to work for the good of the State, but they will work harder if they can see the personal benefit. So the big problem with socialism is that it attributes to much virtue, and not enough vice, to human nature.
As we have begun to look at Socialism, I am having this trouble. I was born in a time virtually with out socialism or communism. The Berlin wall had fallen four years previously, and the USSR dissolved two years previously. To me these things are ancient history, and it is difficult to imagine an actually world in which they worked. Similar to how hard it is to imagine a world where, if I had been born into it, I would not have gone to school, and it would be normal to be married with four children right now. (Ok maybe not four, but that's close right?) And so as the class begins to look at socialism I experience a whole new world.
My journey first began, where all such journey's begin, at the beginning. =) To be a tad more specific, with the required readings on instructure. From there I read the Communist Manifesto, which I though I understood. But it didn't make sense. Did Karl Marx really think that people would want to live in a world where everything was shared, would this really foster the most progress? But maybe that was seeing the end from the beginning, like I mentioned in Shaun's blog, maybe they were just trying to improve the deplorable conditions they saw around them.
So to try and understand more about communism and socialism and their traits I went to the dictionary and a search of MIT's open course ware. Now I think I understand that socialism is an economic system based in sharing. That is the sharing of the benefits of industry. While communism is a political system based in sharing. But as it was implemented by the USSR, there wasn't much sharing of power, things were simply done by the party in the name of the people.
Now if anyone would like to add to this knowledge insight would be helpful. Because currently I'm going off of the books: Hunt for Red October (Clancy), Anna Karenina (Tolstoy), 1984 (Orwell), the movie: October Sky, and this website on Samantha Smith, which I learned about from the song " I saw the Time" (Alabama).
I know that Marx attempts to refute this claim, but I see the main problem with communism/socialism as being motivation. Few people are motivated to work for the good of the State, but they will work harder if they can see the personal benefit. So the big problem with socialism is that it attributes to much virtue, and not enough vice, to human nature.
I am with you on the whole socialism and communism being ancient history. When I first heard that communism and socialism had 'fallen' only a few years before I was born I was shocked! Of course I was about 10 at the time but still.
ReplyDeleteAs I keep thinking about the whole sharing aspect of government, I think why not? I still wonder sometimes.
I think that the whole reason for why not is because people aren't perfect, and power corrupts. James Madison said it best in his Federalist 51, "If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."
ReplyDelete