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