Interesting. I’d never heard of left-wingers identifying themselves as “cultural Marxists” before. I always thought it was a pejorative term, like “social justice warrior”. Thanks for sharing.
That’s actually kind of my point. “Socialism” is a really vague umbrella term that covers a whole range of things. As a socialist myself (a traditional socialist, as opposed to the identity-focused socialists of the video above) I’m biased in believing that humans are naturally cooperative and that “socialism” is a reflection of the “natural” state society should function in. Therefore, I believe (and this is just my biased opinion) that, yes, most governments and societies throughout history have had elements of what later became known as “socialism” in their systems including, as crazy as it sounds, the Republican Party (although there are many within the party who clearly want to eradicate any elements that exist). I realise that some people here will think I’m completely off the rails for saying this, but I don’t think it’s possible for a society to function without some socialism.
Having lived in the UK under both types of Government, I would have to disagree. Whilst I dislike too much Statism ( an absolute requirement of Socialist ideals) , I realise that there must be "some " support for the less fortunate and a Health Service available to all. That is from my own moral standpoint and contrary to some Conservative views.
I remember the chaos of 3 day weeks and 18% inflation, Unions ( that had rightly won better conditions and proceeded to become extreme and resort to economic extortion,).
I remember my Father paying 90% Tax , over a certain amount .Socialism made the UK literally 110% Bankrupt , if you recall. I also, do not condone what followed , although we had to try and balance the books.
I think it is not “Socialism” that a society needs , but just a degree of consideration and some compassion mixed in with the Economics. I do, however , find it refreshing to read your point , as you make it without decrying the holders of opposing views.
i do not have a problem with Socialist people, I just disagree that it can viably work in practice. one day perhaps, until then , it seems to produce yet another hierarchy.
I’m actually too young to remember the “bad old days” of socialist Britain, although most of what I’ve heard and read about it is negative. I don’t think that a proper socialist system has to lead to that kind of situation though, and I think that the other social democratic European countries prove that. However, it seems we basically agree on what we constitute a “moral society” to be. It’s just that, in my definition of the term, I would say that “some support for the less fortunate and a Health Service available to all” is socialism. It just isn’t socialism to the extent that I would like to see socialism implemented. And when Theresa May is cheered on by much of the British public for vowing to “defeat socialism”, it makes me very worried, because I don’t want to live in a country that doesn’t have that basic morality you just described.
Which two types are those? 
I remember the chaos of 3 day weeks and 18% inflation, Unions ( that had rightly won better conditions and proceeded to become extreme and resort to economic extortion,).
I remember my Father paying 90% Tax , over a certain amount
The US had a 91% tax rate up to 1963, without the NHS. (LBJ slashed it the following year, following JFK’s plan.)
Socialism made the UK literally 110% Bankrupt , if you recall.
They kept going, didn’t they? The US also keeps going, with its debt now in the tens of trillions of dollars (and over 100% of GDP), and still nothing to match the NHS.
I think that’s fair – society is, after all, a social construct. I also think it’s fair to say we’ve all lived through dictatorship, since anyone who dictates orders is a dictator. 
Socialist ( bad) and Conservative ( slightly better…until recently) Liberals minority…don’t count 
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1433643/Labour-remains-haunted-by-the-sound-of-squeaking-pips.html
We only kept going and survived with the removal of the Socialist Policies that had crippled the Economy 
As the thread is about Marxist musings…interesting that , where he disagreed with Government , Marx liked NO taxation …more like an Anarchist or Libertarian view.
Karl Marx, On Taxation (1848-1849)
Last I heard, your health care system wasn’t new & shiny but was still functioning. 
Oh and in case you missed it, I put as much faith in Charlie’s economic wisdom as in Rollo’s.
Oh dear …if only.
80,000 waited at A&E Departments on trolleys and corridors for more than 4 hours, with 1000 waiting over 12 hours…worst waits since records began.
non urgent surgery ( cataracts/hip replacements etc) longest delays for 9 years…over 4 and a half months…around 21.3 weeks now.
3.76 million people on waiting lists
Bed Occupancy levels at 95%
85% deemed maximum by Doctors
I guess it depends what you mean by "functioning, "YYY
Maybe if we spent as big a proportion of GDP as the USA, we may get it working.
Ah, that’s nothing. Try waiting five years for a specialist in (some parts of) Canada. 
Getting back to old conspiracies in new bottles (and to religious fervor in politics), how about the movement to make witch hunts literal again? 
I nominate “tippy-toppy” for the 2018 Covfefe Prize! 
In the world in which QAnon believers live, Trump’s detractors, such as Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin, wear ankle monitors that track their whereabouts. Press reports are dismissed as “Operation Mockingbird,” the name given to the alleged midcentury infiltration of the American media by the CIA. The Illuminati looms large in QAnon, as do the Rothschilds, a wealthy Jewish family vilified by the conspiracy theorists as the leaders of a satanic cult. Among the world leaders wise to satanic influences, the theory holds, is Russian President Vladimir Putin.
My sources tell me the real overlords back on Rigel VII are having a good laugh about this.
Are they Marxists? Or did you mean to return to the Trump thread ? 
These days, just about every thread is a Trump thread. 
Since (as you said) the term ‘socialist’ covers a whole range of views, describing yourself as a ‘traditional socialist’ is virtually meaningless. Whose tradition are you talking about, from which period of history?
I think the word ‘Marxist’ has been re-used as an insult for a very good reason: most (not all) of Marx’s theories have been disproved by experiment. Marxism as an economic/political theory is therefore defunct, and we’re free to use to word to describe the real-world outcomes of his views.
99% of governments throughout history have existed for the benefit of the governing classes. Many of them still do. To the extent that they cared about the governed at all (or cared about the possibility of revolt) they might have thrown a few bones to the hoi polloi dressed up as fairness. Funnily enough, these concessions were often extracted by subordinate noblemen (not the beaten-down classes) on behalf of those who they lorded over.
Neither of those are working out as intended. The modern Brit is fat, ill, lazy, entitled, and ignorant, which suggests that “support for the less fortunate”, the NHS, and the education system are not just failing, but having the opposite of the intended effect. And since they consume together about 70% of a (very large) tax take, there clearly isn’t much wiggle room for the expansion you desire.
While you might be right about the natural propensity of people to co-operate, my observation is that this is outweighed by their natural propensity to fuck things up and make poor life choices. If it weren’t, we wouldn’t need governments.
What do you believe is lacking in the British implementation of socialism?
So are we on Earth 
According to a Little Rock radio station 102.9 KARN: The FBI was seen loading boxes onto a DOJ Boeing 757 cargo plane today in Little Rock Arkansas. This is the home of the Clinton Foundation offices. The plane was loaded full of document type boxes. There aren’t too many places in Little Rock that could fill a cargo plane full of boxes.
It is no secret that US Attorney John Huber is investigating Uranium1 and the Clinton Foundation, and now the FBI has opened up a new investigation into the Clintons.
Who knows…maybe it’s just a conspiracy. As I said before , only time will tell. 3 Hail Covfefes from YYY if it turns out to be true 
What, you still think I’m a Clintonista just because I’m anti-Covfefe? 
Are they Marxists? Or did you mean to return to the Trump thread ?
As I said, I was bringing us back to an earlier part of the discussion (see post 10). Although if Rowland is right, the USA has secretly been Communist all along!
Clearly, the Victorian reformers had it all wrong, and we should send the little ones back to the factories and ships where they belong… 
Actually, this WHO list from 2016 ranks the UK as the 33rd most obese country, in a four-way tie with Dominica, Syria and Uruguay. The US, meanwhile, ranks at #12, exceeded only by Pacific islands (Nauru is #1) and Kuwait.
The winner at #191? Vietnam. 
China comes in at #168, with no mention of HK/MC/TW.
Aaaand there we go again with the if-its-not-this-it’s-that train of logic.
I never said it was right to lock people away in the poor-houses or debtor’s prisons. However it is an exquisite form of cruelty to lock them into psychological prisons, pampered children trapped in adult bodies, living lives which have no higher purpose, deprived of those few sources of pride which might make life meaningful. They are responsible for nothing, not even their own actions. The outcome is as horrible is it is predictable. I have a degree in this shit. I might have been a bone-idle student, but I do remember some of it.
As for obesity, I’m not interested in rankings. Stand on any street corner in the UK and you can count at least 30% of the population as carrying too much bodyfat (although it depends a lot on precisely where you are - on a Council estate it’ll be 4 in 5 of the women over 30). Not necessarily obese, but well on the way to medical complications by the age of 50.
They look like this because, again, the government tells them that if they don’t eat marmalade sandwiches for breakfast every day then they’ll die of exhaustion and if they drink full-fat milk they’ll die of a heart attack. I exaggerate, but only slightly: check out the NHS healthy-eating pages. When they get ill - diabetic, for example - the NHS tells them to do more of the same.
The NHS is thereby creating and maintaining a large and reliable customer base. Devilishly clever if you’re a profit-making enterprise; not so good if you supposedly exist for the benefit of the nation.
I never said that either! I said factories and ships, not poor-houses and prisons. 
In all seriousness (even though this is supposed to be a silly thread), what do you expect children will do when you abolish universal education (as you’ve suggested before)?
Never let objective facts get in the way of subjective impressions! 
What was this thread about again? 
However it is an exquisite form of cruelty to lock them into psychological prisons,
Well, that’s the thing with this planet.
I don’t think we really have factories and ships anymore. At least not accessible to the British poor. The former are occupied by Bangladeshis and the latter by Filipinos.
Exactly what they do now. The kids with proper parents will go to school (because their parents will be taxed less and will therefore be able to pay for a school of their choice). The other sort of kids will lurk in parks, steal cars, do drugs, and get pregnant.
The main difference is that the State will save 50 grand per kid, regardless of the type of kid. A more subtle difference would be that the kids of neglectful parents might have a glimmer of hope in their lives in that they will be able to see clearly what utter losers their parents are - because the State will no longer be glossing over their mistakes - and might make some minimal effort to do better. I can think of several ways that motivated kids with no parents and no money might be able to pay for education with creative financing (and to preempt your objection, I’m not talking about sweatshops and prostitution).
The great myth of the far left is that the State can “help people” [by spending money]. It can’t. Some people are just unfixable. The best that the State can do is not make you worse than you potentially are.
Yeah, I meant those surveys need to be taken with a pinch of salt because they are aggregates of country data, which varies dramatically in terms of its quality, definitions, and demographic reach. Koreans, supposedly, have a high rate of obesity and diabetes. It’s possibly higher than it was 50 years ago (because they’ve acquired a massive taste for pot noodles and sweets) but any visitor to Korea can observe that they’re hardly blazing a trail past the Americans and Europeans.
Nice theory (like Marxism), but where’s the real world evidence that less educated societies are more prosperous? Or that societies without compulsory education are better educated? (Societies, not individuals.)
A more subtle difference would be that the kids of neglectful parents might have a glimmer of hope in their lives in that they will be able to see clearly what utter losers their parents are - because the State will no longer be glossing over their mistakes - and might make some minimal effort to do better. I can think of several ways that motivated kids with no parents and no money might be able to pay for education with creative financing (and to preempt your objection, I’m not talking about sweatshops and prostitution).
The less the state controls the child, the more the parents control the child. In cases where the parents are the problem, how does giving those same parents more control help? If the truant officers are all laid off because the state no longer has a say in where children should be during the day, the parents can basically do what they want. Financial opportunities for young creative people are meaningless if they have neither the autonomy to realize those opportunities nor protection from people who have worse ideas. And at what age are they supposed to start making a living, anyway? Will they also be permitted to drive, vote, drink, get married, join the army and all that?
The great myth of the far left is that the State can “help people” [by spending money]. It can’t. Some people are just unfixable. The best that the State can do is not make you worse than you potentially are.
Some people are some people. That’s always been true. Universal education, at least for children, hasn’t been considered “far left” (in the West) since about the 19th century.
I think you’re reading it backwards. South Korea* is #183, between Eritrea and Ethiopia (Japan is #185), which means they’re much less obese than Europeans and Americans, not much more.
*North Korea ranks at #164, still quite thin by global standards but a bit surprising in comparison to SK. Perhaps they have a different way of doing statistics there, but then again, the affluent minority has been growing in recent years.