Quote:
Originally Posted by CHCl3
I'm sure Anarcho-Capitalists would love a socialist future. Also Left Anarchists are already socialists.
Also can you define free? I'm not trying to be an ******* but that word is surprisingly subjective. Libertarians and Marxists both believe in freedom but disagree vehemently.
|
I was pretty vague on purpose... I'd rather explain in readable responses than a book that will only get tl:dr.
I define freedom as the ability to do "things". The more things you are allowed to do, the more free you are. Ideally, everyone should be equally free, because there is a balance of freedom. You can only become more free, by infringing on the freedoms of others. Socialism allows the average component of a society, the prospect to do "more things" through taxation of those who already have more freedom than the rest.
Successful socialism acts to protect against tyranny, and dictatorships of all kinds. In the United States, the systems in place have produced many inequalities. It is my opinion, that this is a result of a lack of socialism. And for various reasons (education, economic, and political inequality to name a few), the United States does not offer freedom (even if it offers incredibly more freedom than many other countries).
We should be absolutely free to do whatever we want, so long as it does not infringe upon the freedoms of others. Socialism has the potential to draw that line.