I would hope so, it was always a far different idea than communism and to a point had its name blackened by association.
If Socialism can evolve it may well have a future here and in other western country's one day.
My idea is of a new caring sharing world and a system based on a hand up not a hand out.
We first have to ask is it fair that some get better health care, education, and so much more just because they have more money?
Could a real job that helps the community but takes no work from full time paid workers be better than a life on the dole?
I think we can learn much about better ways to make public owned endeavors work as well or better than privatized things.
So yes if we care about those who can not make it we can have a for of accountable Socialism.
I must underline calling me leftist is quite wrong but saying I want a better world is not.
And why please do those who think this way say only the left care?

Well belly to ensure health,education and even employment would be good, but there is a serious problem with public jobs.

First you need to have the utilities to employ these people and at the rate the states are going there will not be much left.
NSW the freight has gone from rail, country link is going and they have been talking about city rail.

Electricity thats gone

buses well that will be sold off

and for federal the commonwealth bank,telstra and now qantas so really this does not leave much if anything.

The pollies well there's jobs for people to do, scratch their bums,talk crap, and do they really do anything, they do have all those advisers, and tea makers, and letter writers.

What is left in the other states, not much

This is why there is no real income anymore for the states, it has all be privatised and what they got for selling off the assets has gone, so no more is constatly comming in.

So where does this leave the people, in a country of privatisation and hurt with higher costs.

We are done for

So really change does need to be made.

www.tapp.org.au

Dear Belly, firstly some housekeeping. I think you gained the wrong impression of my purpose in the Anzac day threat old son.. I'm totally in favor of it, please read more of my comments there.

Socialism? well, as with any big idea, it depends totally on the good will of those running the show. Socialism as an idea of equitable distribution of wealth and opportunity is great in theory.
But most people driving such an agenda seem to also deny a greater purpose in life, such as our reliance on and obligations to our Creator.

I contend that without a right relationship to God, there is little personal movitation for altruistic or socially beneficial directions in life, apart from tokenism for self satisfaction reasons.

The Pharisees of Jesus day were very much socialists in one sense.

Mat 23:5 They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, 6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, 7 and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men.

They gave of their wealth for the public good, problem was they did so in order to be praised and noticed. Would it surprise you that people in the Socialist heirarchy did the same to be noticed by those above them?

The pharisees were just one expression of the 'natural' man who lives for himself and his own glory. Today we have our share of that type.

So, I'd venture a theory that a Christian Socialism has a future, but even that would be seen as 'imposing' a religion on society.

Have a peek at how things worked in Ancient Israel, yes, they did have some harsh punishments, but on the social welfare side, they were all expected to look after their mates and the underprivileged. (including foreigners)

Tapp you are close to the truth here BD I except your new posts in the thread as your views.
May I say I build my idea of government employment after 22 years in that job?
And while you BD have a right to your views the self seeking thieves I found running Church's, not all of them, confirmed my view man made Gods all of them.
Socialism! well forever an enemy to communism and that part of it hiding behind the name of Socialism my dream is for a new Socialism.
One that is not the property of the left alone but of a caring sharing country.
We pay more to privatized things for lessor outcomes than we should.
If we can not get our trains to run on time and at a price how would selling them to some one who only wants more profit not better services help?
Once we expected public ownership to give better outcomes now we plan for failure so we can sell it!
Say railways, why can we not combine some best practice management with public ownership?
If the job is not getting done never forget the buck stops with management.
In my view those who blame the tools in say the NSW RTA are the problem.

Well, DB I agree with you that socialism is a nice idea but not necessarily in theory. On the other hand, I think god is totally irrelevant to this discussion.
Boaz, you've said yourself that christianity encourages a separation of church and state, and I realise that you're talking about the individual values of christians etc etc, but if for a moment you can accept that not everybody's values hinge on god and they are just as wholesome as yours, perhaps you can move beyond the god element of this discussion... otherwise I fear your contributions are going to be rather stale.

Socialism I don't think can be effectively introduced as a whole system. (Standby for Tao's contributions to the opposite).

Elements of socialism however - essentially social liberalism - have a great deal of potential, though I think we've canvassed this pretty well here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=464

Belly,
Don't we already have some of these socialist attributes in our present system. Education is available to all, and it is not substandard just because people are willing to pay for private education.
We have a health care system available to all, albeit slow for some.
Our welfare system should be viewed as a hand up, it is there to aid people in times of hardship whether that be through unemployment, raising a family or medical reasons. Unfortunately the system is often abused and the perception becomes "handout". Will those that flaunt the system now change under a more socialist system?
We have people working for the community already, they are the public sector employees, some 1.7 million of them. Don't we already have a work for the dole scheme? Often critisised that it's doing work that could be done by genuine employees.

Our society doesn't revolve around equality and it seems money is a measure by which we differentiate ourselves. Some strive for more, and some are capable of making more money and it is they that provide the basic standards for those can't or don't.
Surely that must be a form of socialism.

rojo, I think you are pretty much on the mark with your comments. We actually have a socialist mentality in general (reflected in the fact that we have set up and maintain a socialist state). This mentality is also demonstrated in the vast willingness of the Australian people to dig deep and donate to those in need during times of crisis. To make any further improvements to the system would be dependant on the recipients of assistance being willing to take it as a hand up and not a hand out. Eg I respect your right to bum around the beach and surf all day, but I shouldnt have to pay for it because I choose to work. On the other hand, if you are a single parent of small children, then I have no problem with some of my earnings going to help you through that time. The problem is, that the more people rip off the system, the more disillusioned the contributors to that system get.

Country Gal, rojo -

In reference to economic theory (not cultural), what you both describe is essentially social liberalism in a nutshell - the idea that the market can dictate the minutiae of supply and demand, though there is a role for government to pick up the slack where market economics do not act in the interest of citizens.

As opposed to classic liberalism, which describes the market as the be all and end all goal for society.

When faced with the flaws of classic liberalism, its proponents point to the fact that the system has never been properly executed, as protectionism and regulation exist everywhere and prevent trade on an equal footing, be it international or domestic.

Ironically, the socialists can put together a similar argument for their system.

I'm of the view that either system in totality is damn near impossible - we're looking at two diametrically opposed visions of economic utopia. Depending on who you ask, each can be heaven or hell.

Which is why I tend to think that debates on such a broad level are doomed to failure, and you're better off focusing on the issues at hand... but that's just my view.

One of a large family I grew up in a far less welfare state than todays.
Social welfare did not play a big roll in my life, but I have seen a great deal of waste in that field.
miss using the system is rampart, my new Socialism would never be inclusive.
And never a hand out, accountability for every dollar spent is not unlikely.
We and the world will not forever be doing this well, right now we do hand out sit down money and get no returns.
If I found myself out of work I would rather a job than dole check.
But a whole lot of issues could be handled better, more low income government housing.
And CG even in my birth place more worthwhile help for drought stricken country towns.
Why not a government paid for scheme to divert some river water and waste water inland?
Above all this should not be a leftist thing but something for a caring country.

Socialism is now just a very dirty word.

NO_ NO-no and no; Your kidding?
Socialism is Communism with a few mutating synthesis factors;It is a preditory word that denotes Looting and nothing else.It is a pathological disorder that denotes and underminds peoples actual abillity to acheive, and even when people do acheive, it is then stolen by higher Socialist Uprovdome Dictates.
Socialism in any form can only exist on the basic principle of propaganda and lies.
What a sack of Trope theological steaming fretilizer- That is Socialism.

100 odd years of murdering an mayhem puts it on par with primative socialism that is Jihad; whoood a thunk it?

all while I understand your post and the reasons behind it I hope you understand 2 things.
The great difference in the 2 communism and Socialism, the fact communism knew the difference and blackened the name Socialism.
And that my thread is about a new far different Socialism.
Why different? easy I like many in a partly miss spent youth thought one or the other of use to mankind.
Not for the first time I was wrong.
Communism makes slaves of workers and nearly every one it controls, it is the enemy of freedom.
Socialism ?I have not seen it work other than as a dictatorship and freedom is too good to waste.
We do have partial Socialism now.
But one day soon capitalism may stumble and even if it never does I would like a more caring sharing world.
Public ownership of some things would not ruin the world.
Why should government run Telsra say not be run well?
Or why can government run trains not run on time?
Far from waste my new Socialism would ask for returns on investments.
Do we think sink or swim is a worth while way of life?
Would you pay for better services?
or are we bound for profit makers running every thing?

I do not really understand what the debate it here. In Australia, we currently live in a largely, or at least partial, socialist society. We all benefit from and appreciate the advantages.

For example:

As a society, we need an effective communication system. If it were up to private, for profit, interests, it may be 'unprofitable' to provide services to more remote users - so they would not be serviced. For those who say that regulations could prevent that - then that is not capitalist - it is pseudo socialist.

We need a supply of electricity. In Calfornia, the balance was wrong - it went too private. Private companies calculated it was more profitable to minimise maintentance and avoid upgrades - resulting in regular, periodic 'brownouts'. It was more profitable for the private electricity generators, but it did not provide the best service.

I could go on. Life in Australia would be much worse if market forces and profits were allowed to dictate focus and expenditure.
Therefore, as a society, we need socialism. To what extent can be debated, on a case by case basis.

Please inform this ham radio operator and communications nut apart from the ABC radio and television what part of our communications is publicly owned?
And as a separate question how long will we own the ABC?

Belly

If that was referring to me, I meant telephone and electronic communication - Telstra.

Take a look at the priciples of Socialist International all you doubters Leigh and All especially.

http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng2.html

Can you say what you fundamentally disagree with?

Lets hope the new Govt. will remember its membership of Socialist International, Tony Blair and his New Labour seem to have forgotten.

Ru....I read your link and found this:

[- The internationalisation of the economy and wide-spread access to information and new technologies can, if brought under democratic control, provide a basis for a world society better suited to cooperation. It is obvious that a world family is no longer a utopian dream, but, increasingly, a practical necessity.]

Now..while I don't disagree with the principle here, there are a few stark realities which need to be considered which may 'foil' such a noble outlook.

"Democratic Control" ? :) when I picked myself up from the floor after an hour or so of absolute belly wrenching laughter...(not really) I just sat there looking glazed-eyed. 'Where' do you find any democracy where such things as 'cooperation' are in practice? That is really a means to an end... the end being the enhancement of the power held by the wealthy.

Such Principles ignore the following:

1/ MOST people wish to fulfill their own aspirations and live their own dreams.
2/ Given that there are smarter people in the world than me (I'm serious..there are :) I know they would not want my dullness to hold them back from achieving all they can.

3/ Approximately 25% of the world adheres to this belief system "Be it known to you this day, that the World and all that is in it belongs to Allah and his Apostle" so.. without meaning to be a wet blanket, this 'group' has zero interest in 'socialism'. They prefer 'sharia'.

4/ Ethnicity and Tribalism. See the borders in Europe ? do a 'cia factbook survey of 'Ethnicities' in each European country, and you will quickly discover that 'tribalism' is alive and well.

There is a plethora of other rasons why Socialism won't work irrespective of how 'warm and fuzzy' it sounds.

We already have a VERY socialist country. (but we could go further)
*Jumps on Soap Box at State Libary*
*Picks up Megaphone* yells...."Bringgggg back the dental scheme"

I think you hit the nail on the head D B;

ruawake,

That manifesto is a standard procedure; you will find that was the common ground Lenin as well as Stalin, and of course their band of Useless Idiots proselytizing the virtues of nothingness; I use these examples and in no way detract from other well known dictators who so used the expression Working People; fairdinkum.

A few other names to throw into the ring; Mussolini- Hitler- They were also professing the virtues of the Worker; although a little bit of ambiguity on their behalf in explaining in definitive terms ; what exactly did they mean by Workers ?

You see, it is a con job on the middle classes;

When you hear Socialism in any form being promoted, it is the sound of the Looters death knell and a leper’s kiss and you best run like hell when the warning bell have sounded their approach.

People seem to be confused with professionalism and common Civility and values; and due to partial Socialism or a more accurate terminology Mussolini’s Fascism wester societies are in a rapid spiral and out of control; so there you have it, a Union boss and a Brick layer.
The other Bloke was a Corporal.
Ha

While ever there are floods, droughts and bushfires then Socialism will be alive in Australia.
The average bloke, and blokess, on the land will always be fiercely independent and anti-Socialist until hit by anyone of the above, then there will be a ready acceptance of the handout or the long term loan etc etc.

All-

You confuse fascism with socialism. Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state. (as in Howard's Australia, replace state with economy).

Your contribution is ill considered and factually wrong. If you have little or no comprehension of the issues I suggest you read more on the subject.

BOAZ, if you wish to bring everything back to evil Islam, what is your reaction to the one million Turks who took to the streets to protect a secular society in a muslim country, backed by the army.

Solidarity, fairness? why avoid the issue?

Is Mise, you can be thankful for socialism too when next you pick up your welfare cheque.

I think Australians will always give a hand up to their fellow man, particularly when being down is through no fault of their own.
You shouldn't confuse "ready" acceptance with forced acceptance. As you say the people on the land are an independant lot and don't take assistance unless they have to. Govt actually spends quite an amount of money trying to get farmers to apply for drought help.

Spoken like a good socialist ruawake;

Now about reading more, that is simply not true; Psychology is the mitigating factor.

I could direct you to some logical and deductive literature, but some how I think you would still like to maintain the dream and would not consider those factual arguments in your ideological assessment on the subject.

Just by the little you have written , it is your self who does not read much , but I would extend some consideration that the limited writings you have absorbed ; throw it out ; and like any good socialist propaganda( Oxymoron) it is that very propaganda that appeals and manifests on that very psychology of others;

Unless there is another factor I would need to consider?

So now you will argue that; you have the answers to fix the problem Socialism in its clandestine operations created?

I don’t think so.

Telstra is no longer publicly owned.
I am surprised so many posted without making that clear?
And Socialism if that s what some think we have now is not working.
BD how can such a dedicated Christian think of a more caring world as a warm and fuzzy dream?
Self interest is indeed a powerful thing.

Egad people, the debate you're having about socialism within capitalism is missing the ball.

Wiki 'social liberalism.' There you go - now which is the better system - classic liberalism, or social liberalism? Now there's a debate which might have a role in Australia's future.

If we can just stop frothing at the mouth about socialism and realise that yes, elements of socialism are embedded in society, and what is the best role of government, then maybe we'll get somewhere...

rojo,

I don't get a welfare cheque.
I get a fortnightly payment from a grateful Government and People for services rendered in the direct defence of Australia.

I only ever saw small farmers, with a misguided sense of propriety that would refuse assistance. Generally the bigger the property then the more they were willng to accept taxpayer help and also the bigger the property and the higher that they imagined themselves to be in the social scale, the more they owed the banks. Which is itself a form of socialism in that the other account holders or those paying off homes etc are the subsidees of the 'big man'.

Is Mise, and so you should be looked after, for services rendered. In a purely capitalistic society,in theory, you would have been paid well at the time, and left at that. Our societies owe everthing to people such as yourself, and I trust you are looked after accordingly.

You took a broad brush to people on the land in your comment, I saw no differentiation and felt it an unnecessary slight toward people who find themselves in trouble. How do they prepare for a drought worse than any other recorded? Particularly if the unknown effect of climate change is considered.
Presently farmers are affected by interest rate rises resulting from primarily the housing bubble and discretionary spending with credit.
The high Australian dollar is a consequence of the resources boom that farmers are not benfiting from. Many of our commodity prices are linked to the US dollar and are poor as a result, even if there was produce to sell.

I don't think "handouts" to farmers any different to say automotive industries, just because of the perception that "landed" recipients are anti-socialist by nature