HE AINT HEAVY ...

 

"Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production. It includes the political theories and movements associated with such systems." - Wikipedia.

Yes, I know that it's a very short explanation and it does go around in a circle but it was just the opening statement of Wikipedia's analysis. If you want more - look it up yourself. Hopefully, in the expanded version Wikipedia might get its head out of its arse and explain what Socialism is really about, devoid of political references.



Socialism's roots are ......... very numerous and date back a very long time. Trust me. I won't bore you with copying and pasting a lot more from 'the web' but suffice to say, Socialism isn't a new invention and only has some passing connection with Communism regardless of what stupid right wing Americans, the Catholic church and most right and centre right political groups around the world including in New Zealand say.
The main difference is that Socialism has democratic ideals whereas Communism wishes to force 'equality' authoritarianism. Communism is a political doctrine and Socialism is an ideal way of living.

Sorry about the obvious Americanism but I kind of like what this is saying.

I was educated in the Catholic religion which, in New Zealand, at the time (1950s and 1960s), meant that we had a pretty good education from primary school through to college. Apart from the Christian Doctrine, which was crap and basically stupid  and which every intelligent pupil should have seen through, the nuns, brothers and priests taught us well and took a lot of care in ensuring that we met and exceeded the required educational standards at the time. This (apart from that silly Christian Doctrine and Catechism stuff) was usefully bound up in instructions relating to care, responsibility and conscience. I see this as a form of ethics and with which I try to lead my life.

I was also brought up in a working class family that didn't have much wealth but shared what it had with the wider family (predominantly Catholic so there were a lot of them). We had a form of family based socialism going on I guess and I have happy memories of spending school holidays with relatives all about the country - helping out on farms (before farm owners became millionaires) and in other enterprises. Similarly relatives from other parts of the country (and the world) would camp at our place when needed and mum and dad were often helping out others where they could with money, goods and labour.

My parents always voted Labour and this is something that I've followed. Labour, a left leaning political party and ideology in New Zealand has generally been a viable alternative to National which is a right leaning party and ideology. There have been parties and ideologies further to the right and the left but, fortunately, these haven't gained much traction and momentum. New Zealand is really a centrist country politically speaking. There isn't, fundamentally, a lot of difference between the centrist-right National and the centrist-left Labour. Both political parties, when in or out of government, have the needs of the public in mind. The differences arise in the wants of the public and so, naturally, those members of the public whose wants are perhaps more based on wealth and wealth acquisition will support a party that leans to the right (National). A smaller but significant proportion of them also support parties that lean even more to the right. The lesser privileged in society, who either don't have wealth or are not driven to its acquisition will naturally support parties that are left leaning (Labour) and those that are even more left leaning will contest what Labour advocates and/or give support to even more left leaning parties (that often don't have much of a presence in governance.

Is this a good thing?

Well, I think so.

New Zealand, as in New Zealanders have in our short history shown the world that we are sensible and reasonable people. We don't put up with being bullied and don't like bullies. 

The fact that a small population can get governance that broadly satisfies most people year to year without a  50:50 party split as shown by the Republican/Democrat divide in USA or the authoritarian ruling by most world governments attests to our reasonableness. Hey, I intensely disliked John Key as prime minister but that was probably because he's a dick and I hated Robert Muldoon. Muldoon though, even with some of his 'think big' projects and anti-Labour stance (remember that Labour/Communist political campaign he endorsed in 1975 to abolished the superannuation scheme that everyone would now admit would have benefitted New Zealanders if it had gone ahead). HERE was basically a socialist. His heart I believe was in the right place but he lost it a bit (gin?) and ended up staying too long and imploding the National party. The follow-up Labour government in the mid 1980s was a breath of fresh air to me and I really liked David Lange but his deputy, that weasel Roger Douglas brought the government down and his free market plans were disastrous to New Zealanders. Under the banner of a Labour government this fool enabled crooks, charlatans and chancers to burgle our resources. These pricks ended up as billionaires and some even got bloody knighthoods. Bastards!

Anyway, why this topic of Socialism?

Robert, a follower of this blog, for reasons best known to himself but I suspect it stems from his affiliation to the Catholic church, dislikes Socialism. He is one of those that confuses it with Communism and can get a bit vitriolic when talking of the Labour government and prime minister Jacinda Ardern. He says things like "our socialist state" see below:

It seems that the Labour government can't do anything right in his eyes. It is damned if it does bad things (to him) like taking a pro-abortion stance, endorsing same-sex marriage and promoting equality for GLBT people. It is also damned if it tries to support the most underprivileged in our society and has plans to put more money and services into the hands of those who most need it.

The post of his, above, is a case in point. Robert sees himself as a businessman and lines himself up with National. He adopts right wing ideology and anything that lines up with Toryism in the UK and Republicanism in USA. I shudder to think what European political movements he might follow and hope that it's not Fascism. I guess it's the Vatican. While Robert disparages the Labour government's initiatives he's not above accepting the handouts and benefits from social services (there's that bogey-word again). I trust that he will enjoy his 'socialist' heat-pump during the winter months.