One description of Socialism not generally expressed is that it is a situation in which “ the weakest and most envious among us acquire political power”. Or, it is what happens when those who cannot compete in society through effort and risk decide to change the rules.

Enter Albanese: most left wing leader of the most left wing Australian government ever.

Some people who cannot get ahead by their own initiative and achieve the rewards of their initiatives, come to resent the rewards themselves.

Socialism is anti the human instinct to be rewarded for effort. Socialism views risk and reward as the enemy, despite the fact that it is what builds prosperity. Capitalism might have its flaws but, unlike socialism, it is the only system that works because it motivates people to improve their lives, and even helps those who don't.

Socialists want to control people - make them dependent on them - all the better to control them. People are just something to be managed and taxed for the benefit of the managers.

Australia was built through aspiration. Our political culture, certainly under Albanese, appears to be “uncomfortable with aspiration itself”, always on about redistribution, never creation.

(Source: Damien Costas, ‘When risk becomes the enemy’. Costas is an entrepreneur and author of ‘What Happened To The Lucky Country’, Amazon)

I would be very careful about your description of socialism if I were you ttbn. Many of the quotes you use are justly applicable to your favourite love child Pauline.

Take “… always on about redistribution, never creation…” That’s all we have heard from Pauline recently. Take the homes off people she doesn’t think deserve them and absolutely zero about how to create any new ones.

“…Socialists want to control people - make them dependent on them - all the better to control them. People are just something to be managed and taxed for the benefit of the managers…” That’s right out the playbook of her preferred supplier of aeroplanes, the lovely Gina. Wasn’t it Gina who wanted to import workers from 3rd world countries who would work for $2 p/hr. And of course, Gina has always been on about reducing the taxes she pays. Then there was the time when she bought a major share in a national newspaper, thinking she could control the editorial content of it. Talk about benefiting the managers.

And finally “… the weakest and most envious among us acquire political power …” Pauline would have to be the most envious person I an aware of, desperately seeking political power

Not my description, Aries. the description of the author whose article I reviewed.

I acknowledged the author at the bottom. The quotes are from the article. There is nothing of me in it.

You will know by now that ON has no intention of taking anyone's house from him or her. That was Bomber Barny's blue.

I have no more connection to One Nation than you do, but it is my understanding that they are opposed to foreigners being allowed to invest in domestic properties for rental purposes. As is the Coalition.

You will have to enlighten me with what you call Hanson's play book. I don't keep tabs on everything politicians do.

I don't see what a private citizen's gift has to do with Socialism or whatever brand you have on One Nation. It's perfectly legal.

That same private citizen might or might not have imported cheap labour - you don't provide evidence of that, nor that the person has done anything illegal under the immigration laws or labour laws.

ttbn, Yes, I know they are Damien’s thoughts, but you quoted them. Therefore, I reiterate my statement - I’d be careful when quoting definitions of socialism.

There was, and still is, a great deal of confusion over just exactly what Pauline’s position is on foreign, non-citizen and permanent resident’s home ownership. Her gripe of foreigners owning homes is as far as she goes. As things stand at the moment, she has no clear plan for creating more homes. To me, this reeks of the concept you quoted that – “…Socialists want to control people…”

Yes, Gina’s gift as a private citizen is totally legal, but it does play into the “…benefit of the manager…” criteria you (sorry, the author you quoted. but distance yourself from) attributes to socialism.

F.Y.I.- Here is 1 article about Gina’s thoughts on workers earning $2 p/day. There are plenty of others if you care to search.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2012/09/05/160614909/asias-richest-woman-slammed-after-musing-about-workers-paid-2-a-day

I hope this clears things up

Who do I have to be careful of? The Socialists? They have certainly killed millions of people in the past - their own people.

As for your old BBC (even less trustworthy than our ABC) article, Gina Rinehart never paid anyone $2 an hour. She was warning Australian workers almost 15 years ago that they needed to get more competitive. Pointing out that Africans in Africa worked for $2 an hour. She wasn't saying that Australians should do the same. Unions blew up the tongue in cheek commen out of all proportion.

Her workers are paid $130k to $145k a year. Federal backbenchers, including the Socialists, get around $240k plus perks.

But, of course what she does has nothing to do with Socialist politics, which fails every time voters with short memories put them into power.

The confusion about Pauline Hanson (who by the way is only 10 years younger than I am, and hardly my “love child”) lies mainly with the mainstream media and her political opponents. Pauline herself has been sure what she stands for over 30 years. She has not wavered or ‘changed her position’ like Albanese.

ON's idea for getting more housing includes a 5 year freeze on GST for new builds, reviewing, scrapping mandatory design rules and disability requirements on the chance of some disability that most people never incur, and reviewing government charges and taxes, fees and red tape.

Finally, dragging up your pet hates against non-Socialist politicians, and a rich woman who provides jobs and wealth for the country and workers - as well as herself - doesn't take the heat off Socialism, which always drags society down.

15 years after Rinehart's warnings, Australia's growth and economy, its cost of living, is close to the bottom of a list of similar countries.

If you like Socialism, you could always try to convince us of its virtues with a thread of your own.

Hanson and Rhinehart have intersecting worldviews.

Gina isn't a manager she's an owner. James Burnham warned in his criticism of managerialism, that trained managers who don't know how to create businesses beyond their immediate responsibilities, equate with the classic abstractionist's that Marx referred to. The red tape of corporatism, especially creeping corporatism, creates scarcity.

Both Hegel and Marx attempted to synchronise/ consolidate Plato's 'Abstraction' with Aristotle's 'Experience' who essentially got it from the line that is attributed to the dialogue between Socrates and Plato from memory in The Republic- where they come to the conclusion that 1. Philosophers should become rulers or 2. rulers should become Philosophers. Alexander the Great was the culmination of the philosopher ruler but he rejected this idea. And I agree 2 is ok, 1 is not- rulers should become philosophers not the other way around.

Adam Curtis talks about the rise of managerial corporatism in order to control the "unstable capitalist". But we need to return to people that are willing to take "risk to produce" based on how they see the world in existentialist subjective experiential experimental terms.

Ayn Rand says the rich can only become rich by producing something of value, if you destroy the rich you destroy the production, then there is scarcity, prices increase, and the poor suffer.

Bob Whittacker said Marxism is an academic aristocracy.

Essentially Aristotle said that truth is about experience, Plato said that experience was a projection of the absolute abstractions- Plato was wrong.

Hegel in his dialectic said that the abstract mind created experiential reality. Marx said in his dialectic materialism that the material experiences of the sum of the individuals created the abstract institutions that enslave them- but not everything is slavery- and Marxist's don't love the slaves- they envy and hate the rich- because they can never reach it- they can't produce.

Marxist's need to realise that, they can't break the laws of physics, only break themselves against them.

There are philosophers that talk about the rebels that reject the prisons of law, god, and finally nature. But by their arrogant rejecting of nature they reject and destroy themselves.

Don't let Marxist's drag you down with them.
_________

Most things are about some level of balance- Marxist's don't believe in 'realist' balance as they are 'idealist's' (in a bad way)

CM

Dead right. The owner uses his or her money. The manager uses other people's money.

And although Margaret Thatcher's words have been repeated over and over (but ignored) the Socialists will eventually run out of other people's money.

Let's see if Aries 54, bless him, warns you to be careful about your references to towering conservative intellectuals, the likes of which we will never see again.

Warnings and threats are the forte of Socialists.

I'm tired of the whole "what is socialism" argument. It, in the end, just boils down to claims from the socialists that socialism is (1) never really been tried and (2) is holy writ.

Along with claims from the not-socialists that has (1) never worked and (2) is just a scheme by some to get power and by others to confiscate wealth.

And never the twain shall meet.

But I'd just pick up on one of Aries' points. It seems that since Gina Reinhardt is a major donor to One Nation then all of Reinhardt's opinions magically become One Nation policy!! How about we look at the union donors to the ALP and see if Aries agrees that all opinions held by union leaders magically become ALP policy. Methinks Aries will suddenly decide the rules that apply to one don't apply to the other.

No ttbn I am not in the business of defending socialism. And yes, mhaze I am sure that the unions have a big influence over Labor policy. Just as the gambling industry, the mining industry, and all the other lobby groups and financial doners have influence over decisions made by every political party since political parties were invented.

As someone else on this blog likes to say – “Kudos” to CM who at least acknowledges that Pauline and Gina have “ … intersecting worldviews … “

What a pity that you, ttbn, are so one-eyed, that when the attributes of socialism you yourself quoted can just as easily be applied to the extreme right – (i.e. ON) you fail to acknowledge the fact. You even view the act of simply pointing this out to be a “threat” which in itself is a retreat into blame shifting.

"And yes, mhaze I am sure that the unions have a big influence over Labor policy."

Well that's not quite what your were saying about the Reinhardt/One Nation connection earlier where you were quoting Reinhardt views as though they must have been One Nation views. But I'll accept the change of heart.

As Aries54 thinks that I'm "one-eyed" because he doesn't agree with me - which he is perfectly entitled to do - and he is not one-eyed in his beliefs apparently, there's nothing else to be said.

Mhaze

I love the pictorial description of Socialism.

Bob Whittacker said Marxism is an academic aristocracy.
Canem Malum,
Bob's right !

Where is socialism's successful implementation? There is no end of utter disasters and no reason to to believe that Magoo's effort will be any better.

The time for arguing about whether socialism was better than capitalism is long past. To believe that it will deliver anything other than disaster is bonkers.

I like people and want to see nations embracing personal freedom, at peace and prosperous. That is why I detest socialism. Like Magoo, socialism epitomises lies and betrayal.

‘There are none so blind as those who will not see’. An old adage, said to have derived from an Old Testament comment from the prophet Jeremiah : “Hear this, you foolish people, who have eyes but do not see, have ears but do not hear”.

It was cleaned up and the modern version appeared around the 16th. Century.

The polls on the latest Socialist budget indicate that around 60% of Australians have regained use of their eyes and ears.

It's reported that the ON campaign 'Fire the Liar' has attracted over $1 million in donations in a single day.

Net zero is the new socialism. Wind and solar transitions bring the usual economic, environmental and social disasters of socialism, and the belief that the IPCC forecasts were changed because of the success of net zero shows that the lunacy is still well entrenched.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jun/11/climate-crisis-science-emissions-good-news-corp-misrepresentation

Hi Fester,

You ask; "Where is socialism's successful implementation?" Australia, New Zealand, Britain, France, Holland in any western democracy you can name. We have the best mix of Capitalism and Socialism, not perfect, but better than each on its own. Capitalism brings enterprise and innovation, Socialism adds safety and security. We operate as a mixed society, allowing for private ownership to produce wealth, while tempering that with state intervention to provide a safety net for all.

"It's reported that the ON campaign 'Fire the Liar' has attracted over $1 million in donations in a single day."
- I got the info about Pauline's huge donations from the latest Magoo video.

It's over for this Commie thief. Anthony Albanese One Nation
http://youtu.be/jDYJFi32mB0

Is this so called "donated" money, just a way of disguising mega dollars from the real power behind One Nation, the puppet master Gina Rhinoceros?

The Coalition are running scared, one Liberal fool Tony Pasin wants to split the Liberal/National ticket with One Nation. Another Liberal Alex Antic is claiming One Nation is part of the centre right of Australian politics, a radical far right racists party, centre right? ON candidates like Dean Smith who attempted to join 'The Base', an international neo-Nazi terrorist organisation, centre right? With Tony Abbott again calling the shots in the Liberal party, who knows what deals they will do, vote Coalition, and get a far right extremist!

Albanese himself asked Labor supporters to give $27 each to ‘fight’ One Nation. Haven't heard any more about that, but it seems One Nation has now been given over $2 million to fight the worst government ever. I don't follow the showy part of politics, but I've seen Albanese's call described as an ‘own goal’; and Hanson certainly seems to have beaten him at his own game.

The Coalition should be worried that they don't get gobbled up completely by ON.

Pasin and Antic need to convince the rest of them that they will not get back into government without One Nation's support.

Gina Rhinocerous?

I'm starting to wonder if it's more of a Gina 'Adelson' type thing.
Or perhaps maybe more of a Gina 'Murdoch' type thing.

And if you want to follow this type of thinking...
And see how far the rabbit hole really goes..
I would recommend everyone here watch this..

http://www.youtube.com/live/-7gGIjs0STgt=1128

What's with all this Israel and Jewish stuff?
Things just don't seem right?
All these leaders acting like they're following orders
What's really going on in the world?

http://x.com/ShadowofEzra/status/2061968319100407849

>>Jared Kushner admits his friend Nat Rothschild was the one who helped him find his new off-the-grid private island in the middle of the Mediterranean while he was on his boat on vacation.

Kushner says he had a private meeting with Albania’s Prime Minister on Rothschild’s boat.

The private island will be exclusively for the rich, the powerful, and the elites.

“We were on a friend’s boat, Nat Rothschild’s, on vacation.”<<

Rothschild, that's interesting.
Trumps not running the show.

Watch the damn video already.

The Liar, when asked about the huge donation to One Nation, pathetically suggested that One Nation was lying about it, with that smirk he displays when he is uncomfortable.

$2.6 million now, with the average amount only $59; so there are a lot of people out there wanting to ‘fire the liar’.

Paul,

"Socialism adds safety and security"

What utter garbage. Socialism is a sewer pipe that takes a nation and its people to a cesspit. As mhaze showed with the cartoon, it promises everything and delivers nothing. No welfare. No healthcare. No personal security. Environmental destruction. An authoritarian state run by an elite. Neo-feudalism if you like, where you are a slave and have nothing if you don't have power.

You don't even have freedom of thought. Look at you here, claiming anyone differing from you socialist agenda to be far right, racist, and ironically even a Nazi. Typical socialist scapegoating, and total bs. Churchill would tick all the extremist boxes for you, yet he was a life long opponent of socialism (both the national socialist and communist orthodoxies).

Like many here I am utterly horrified by the gross incompetence, corruption and profligacy of Magoo's socialist odyssey, but find the outcome unsurprising on a basis of historical precedent and economic theory.

https://youtu.be/mVVWeyM2ilY?si=GQfibcP4IWoaxU7E

Ten years ago biographer Phillip Ayers predicted that the two major parties would fade away, and One Nation would come to the fore.

Ayers didn't live to see it, but his prediction might now be coming true.

He described, at the time, the choice of politicians in Australia as similar to that between Coca Cola and Pepsi. Boring.

Certainly the weaknesses that held Pauline Hanson back 10 years ago have gone, and she is on a roll. She has certainly made the Liberal Party look even smaller than they were when they jailed her. And Murdoch's “get the cow” instruction was a fizzer.

Ayers noticed 10 years ago that One Nation had “a list of policies” that the knuckleheads are still denying to this day.

Ayers listed (accurately) the dirty tricks that would be used to fragment One Nation.

Ten years later, Hanson's “clear sense of alternatives to the status quo” can no longer be denied.

If Albo is skeptical about Pauline’s claim of receiving $2m+ in donations, I would be too. Especially after reading this report published in The Guardian (Yes, I know, that bastion of Marxist, pink, commie, woke propaganda … sigh)

It seems that ON has failed to meet its legal obligations as required of an Incorporated Association. These failures include:
• more than $1m in missing and worthless assets
• failed to hold annual general meetings on time
• repeatedly filed annual and financial reports late, or not filed them at all
• used an account manager to sign a director’s declaration form
• not filed annual returns with the regulator since 2022

Matthew Pinnuck, a professor of financial accounting at the University of Melbourne described the reports as “incredibly sloppy” and “The overall quality of the preparation and presentation of the financial statements is very poor and unprofessional,”

Maybe her friend Gina, from whom Pauline admits “taking policy advice from”, has advised her that there is simply so much red tape required to run a political party these days, you should just ignore the rules. If, after years in the game, this is the sloppy and sub=standard behaviour Pauline displays now, heaven help us if she ever did become PM.

Source:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/jun/11/one-nation-party-financial-reports-returns-fair-trading-ntwnfb

Hi Fester,

Lighten up pal! Get back on your medication!

I don't know why needed to launch into a tirade of abuse on the subject, as I was merely saying a degree of socialism is necessary in society for the social good of all. I'm not advocating for Communism with it public ownership of the means of production. Things like pensions and universal health care etc need to be paid for by the collective whole rather than in a dog eat dog unrestrained Capitalist society where its left to the means of the individual. For me the mix is much fairer where those who can look after those who can't. That's the society we have now in Australia.

Socialism is much closer to parasitism than symbiosis & once it gains support an economy goes into freewill. The most blatant example is the Public Service bureaucracy ! It's only due to slightly more responsible intermittent conservative administrations that it hits the ground not as sudden & hard as would otherwise. This guarantees the slowing of the bandwagon & helps create some stability ! The single biggest problem or fault really, is that merit does not get a foot in the door & that is what brings about inflation that could be avoided. Just look at the 4.75% pay rise planned for next month. No-one's got any extra money yet but prices have already gone up to literally require another raise to compensate. Dog chasing tail scenario repeat after repeat & no end in sight !

James Burnham and others point to Managerialism as the idea behind Marxism. It seems that Bob Whittacker picked up on this when he referred to the Academic Aristocracy. Apparently when Macarthy referred to Communism in the Cold War he was really talking about Managerialism.

The thing that characterizes Marxism is not just it's "claim to support the poor", Queen Victoria was involved with the development of duplex housing in an effort to house the poor. Often helping the poor is resultant of other ideological means than socialism and Marxism.

Marxism seems to come from the terrible traditions of envy that are related to the French Revolution- Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Rand, Bezmenov, Solzynitzen, others commented on them.

Sorry I've been offline for a few days- it appears that the governments new under 16 policies are having unintended (or maybe intended) consequences

Hi Kudos Kid,

Glad you're back. I didn't know you wee ones had been banned from OLO as well as having your Snapchat account turned off! These people you name all the time, like Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Bezmenov, Solzynitzen, are they personal friends or just acquaintances? With names like that I'm sure the Lovely Pauline will have no trouble booting them out of the country, alone with all the Abdul's and Mohammad with em'.

Good on you CM. I like your reference to that "socialist" HM Queen Victoria.

The only the thing real Socialists in Australia are doing for the poor is making them poorer.

https://www.facebook.com/watch?v=1181353530400827

That could help with thinking about things !

Hi ttbn,

Queen Victoria was a drug addict, she was hooked on opium! As the Kudos Kid will tell us, according to his great philosopher Arsethrolte all opium addicts are Marxists. Can't believe a word the old chook said!

This thread was a wasted opportunity.

It was titled "A quick review of Socialism", but after several dozen comments no one really discussed socialism. Instead, we've had socialism described as envy, resentment, dependency, bureaucracy, managerialism, climate policy, Medicare, Albanese, Net Zero, welfare, and whatever else the person commenting happened to dislike at the time.

Nobody seemed particularly interested in defining socialism before declaring it either the source of all human misery or the foundation of civilisation.

Whether one supports it or opposes it, socialism is an economic idea, not a personality defect. Yet most of the discussion focused on the alleged motives of socialists rather than the actual policies, institutions and economic arrangements involved.

The result was a debate in which everyone criticised or defended a different thing while calling it by the same name.

As mhaze observed, perhaps that's why these discussions never seem to go anywhere. If participants can't agree on what socialism is, it's hardly surprising they can't agree on whether it works.

Hi John,

Welcome back to the team. In your absence I spent a lot of time educating the Trumpster. I was making real progress, he was becoming almost coherent, I said almost. Unfortunate when I thought I have made it with the lad, he slipped backwards, I found him back into the red, white and blue face paint, dressing up in his buffalo horn outfit from the 2021 Capitol riots calling himself, the "Yellowstone Wolf of the USA" and screaming; "MAGA, MAGA, where is Donald". BUT we shall never give up, I am determined to turn the lowly slug in a wonderful something or other one day!

On the serious topic of Socialism. The Labor party officially still holds to the principles of Socialism, with its constitution committing it to the "democratic socialisation of industry, production, distribution and exchange" to eliminate exploitation. Although in a modern liberal democracy such as ours that principle seems somewhat of an anachronism. As a centre left party, Labor is more of a progressive reform party working within the framework of a modernised Capitalist system. No federal Labor leader has seriously called other party members "comrade" since the days of Gough Whitlam, 50 years ago.

p/s Dougy Cameron NSW Labor Senator 2008/19 always called people he liked "comrade". Dougy was from the left faction of the ALP.

' they envy and hate the rich- because they can never reach it- they can't produce.'

Perhaps though the system dictates that most can't produce without capital in the first place. It's all very well to talk about risk when the risk is so ameliorated by a family wealth safety net.

'No federal Labor leader has seriously called other party members "comrade" '

Oh I guarantee they do it in private. Just like a masonic handshake

Marxist Managerial Socialism is about scarcity and nihilism and weakness. Capitalism is about productivity and creation and strength. Traditionalism is about preserving the culture and identity using tools such as the tools of industry research and development without letting these tools dictate to society. But as always there is a difference between theory and practice. But Socialism in theory and practice is bad. Socialism seems to be about destroying the west in support of the east. We need to protect the west from socialism, and need to take steps to gaol "leaders of socialism" under treason laws- in universities, in the media, in the courts, in bureaucracy, etc.

Hi Kudos Kid,

Please don't confuse true socialism with your version, which is national socialism, two different things. My kind of socialism involves fairness for all, your's involves guns and bullets, and other nasty things, totally different.