My Ideology: I thought I was a liberal national socialist - turns out it is called libertarian socialism
I am socialist but I like money
Money is a mere tool, like many of my friends in the anarchistic community would put it. Money represents power and I want to become a powerful person - someone who is able to influence society. You might have the best formulated ideas, but if you do not have the power to let people hear or witness them, you will have no impact. This is just a basic aspect of society, it is not a subject of change. “Infowars” has always been a reality – the concept not the Alex Jones Show.
So what does make me a socialist at all? I believe we should think about a system that ensures people safety and gives everybody a fair chance to success. I know what you all read into this “he tries to defend healthcare, pensions and all those other evil systems” - believe me I am not. In Germany we are forced by the state to get health insurance from private companies that essentially take a huge share of the funds for their “management”. I believe a much more libertarian approach to healthcare would help our society a lot. To make sure somebody is taken care of in an accident or in case of severe illness, could be done with other methods.
I believe that the very basic infrastructure of a society should be free to use, mainly public transport and telecommunication. For water and electricity there could be a “free cap” until it costs extra.
I want BUI, not to dwell in my laziness, but so that nobody has the pressure to accept any job as long as they can support themselves and/or their families. I believe if this pressure is gone we will see a lot more healthy entrepreneurship and motivated employees.
Transparency is also an import aspect. We average people are under heavy surveillance through the internet. I think it is hard to fight that; even if states (NSA) don't collect data, google, youtube and facebook will. I think we need to turn it around by giving the average Joe easy access to surveille all official persons at least during their work. They were voted to represent them after all. This would be an very doable idea however I see the problems with it, maybe there is no need for transparent people if we have a transparent system to govern us.
The nationalism
I want government to be small, because I think your vote should count most when it is important. With today's technology we have revolutionary ways of verifying and collecting votes. Since Steemit is based on votes, I don't even think I have to go into further detail for you to understand what I mean. I will gladly expand on this, if there are people in the comments to bounce ideas off.
This also ties into my take on nationalism. There are many different aspects in how people behave in their local groups – heck even Düsseldorf and Cologne can be a difference like night and day when it comes to mentality. And those are not even 40km (~25 miles) apart. So when I say “nationalistic” or “national socialism” I mostly do that to refute globalistic or imperialistic ideas, like the EU or Americas World Policing -”nationalism” might not be the best word to describe it, but is being a "localist" even a thing.
My take on culture and specifically the German one differs more than I thought from 'the norm'. I feel like there are two ridiculous opposing ideas: “Culture is an illusion and an evil we should get rid off” and “Christian values teached us to act as moral creatures, this is what other cultures lack”. I don't mean to insult thinkers who voiced these ideas by calling it “ridiculous”, but I am honestly quite shocked to hear them voiced by people whose opinions on other topics I greatly respect.
I love many other cultures more than my own German one, but it is a part of who I am. The shyness, the nerdiness, me getting angry as soon as I see someone not obeying rules or social norms like responding to a “hello” or when people do not watch where you are going and block the way (Arrrgh! :D), but also the love for wisdom and critical thinking are just a trait I at least partly make my heritage accountable for. These are characteristics of mine that I am aware of and often try to compensate and even sometimes overcompensate. With everything in life there is a good and a bad side to these characteristics, I believe critical thinking also leads to the symptom of “Meckerdeutsche” (German just talking all day about how bad everything is), just to show there is a yin to every yang.
I think those characteristics are 'typical German', but that does not mean every German shares those or that a person from 10.000 miles away could not have the very same. There are also many other cultures that share many aspects of mine and when they don't it is rather intriguing, not alienating.
Why I support anarchism and why I hope anarchists will support me
My system should be as voluntaristic as possible - I know red, flag because I want to limit it, but I believe you see those limits as well, their need to be some game rules, a frame work – not necessarily government. This is needed to fight crime, ie the victim of a crime can prosecute the offender according to the victims community laws. In my idea the smallest form of a community can be the individual in the form of a Hermit/Einsiedler.
I often have problems when defining my political views in a short term like national socialist or libertarian national socialist. I could just go the route of neologism and call my believes Tobiismus, but I am not a big fan of littering our language with tons of unneeded words. The word national socialism has a nice shock effect and is only misleading because of it's third Reich association. I just found the term "libertarian socialist" while searching for pictures, maybe that describes better what I am.... Yeah it actually does, I just looked into on wikipedia, it is pretty much exactly what I believe in, why did nobody tell me this exists!? Just when I thought I bring fresh ideas :(...
Is that you, @sethlinson?
the Nazis
In my eyes the National Socialistic German Workers Party (the translated name of Hitlers party NSDAP) abused an honest movement by making racism, war and genocide a part of it. This is not a sole problem of national socialism, nowadays a lot of socialist concepts are abused to push agendas (see the SJW movement). Me occasionally calling myself a national socialist does not mean I see myself in the tradition of Hitler, Goebbels and co, I hope everybody who knows me can not only see this in my words but also in my actions.
Well, that was a lot of stuff for one article, is there anyone who considers himself a libertarian socialist? What do you think about this Ideology? I will definitely do more research on it.
I really enjoyed the read, it's two very apposing ideologies in my opinion. I understand your empathy in wanting everyone to have a fair chance in life, but my root issue with socialism is that it is forced. That's why it's wrong, because its immoral to steal from people even if you vote to steal from people.
what if everybody shares voluntaristic, though? I also think pure anarcho capitalist will have some social contract for trade, responsibility, etc. won't they?
If everyone chooses to share of their own volition it's no longer socialism. Therefore if the community, or people in charge of the community also know as government, no longer controls, owns or regulates the mean of production and distribution you would end up with free market capitalism.
Almost every government in the world is a socialist government to a degree, as long as they are taxing their population.
I think it depends on what you mean by social contract for trade and responsibilities when it comes to anarcho capitalism or just capitalism. Capitalism is in essence forced altruism, you have to provide people with something they need or want otherwise you won't eat.
yeah and that is why I am no an-cap.
there are a ton of people who would disagree with that, me included :P
I think you're missing the fundamental principal here, in a socialist society the community has control and ownership, the ability to voluntarily choose has been forfeited. This is not my opinion on socialism, it's the textbook definition of the ideology.
We can argue that at inception of a social contract like socialism people had a choice, but what about anyone who is born into such a contract or those who choose to no longer be subjected to the contract? Do they have the freedom to be be excluded, no.
We would also then need to explore the legitimacy of such a contract imposed by a democracy which is majority rule. If 60% of a country voted for a socialist state that negates the voluntary will of the 40%.
This is a great topic to discuss and explore, thank you for posting this, I will definitely be following and upvoting.
Well yes, they do. You can always declare yourself to be a one man community. That is why many of your "capitalist" ideas can survive in my socialism.
I do want direct democracy and I dont think it has to always be the 'one way vs the other way' mentality. We should all work together on solutions to our problems and not just make them in our small groups and then let them compete. Sometimes this might be a good way but most often it is not.
I am also am for small governments, it is much easier to get a decision everybody in the small community is happy with. You can also talk about veto mandates for individuals and I want to make the exit of a community as "gentle" as possible, maybe he as a person can just make different contracts with the rest of the community?
Thank you for the friendly feedback and the lively and civil discussion!
Have a look through Smallism.org for a system that addresses some of these concernts. However, you do seem to be wanting the cake, and eat it too. It's not possible to have small government, big welfare. The smallism way is to not take the fruits of your labours away in the first place. This has huge implications on the freedom of the job market. Communities will become responsible for their own insurance needs. Still in development, but the root cause of problems of both the left and right have been exposed, now it's just developing a system of incentives that match the most people. And the only way to do that, is local. Smallism.org
BUI can be done on a small scale tho :). I am against insurance in general, I believe in case of emergency people and doctors will help, there is no need for a centralized system to do that, just the possibility..
Smallism sounds like an interesting Ideology, thanks for the recommendation.
Insurance is actually a wonderful system when done properly. And it's the only alternative to centralized system. The question is that of incentives. Currently, the incentives for all parties involved in health care, are horribly out of alignment.
a thing I should have touched on is that I want people to have some sort of stake in their community like investors.
I think it is much better if most visits to the doctor are not covered by insurance. If you would have to pay him 100$ you would not be pleased with a generic 5-minute check up.
If there is an emergency I think every doctor and human will helpif he gets the possibility to do so. They wont open their checkbooks and cross arms if a fellow human is bleeding to death. That is not what humans do.
Now, that. Is exactly, what Smallism.org is all about :)
We're looking for people to help develop the system as the core people are very part time due to Ph.D research on decentralization but if you like the idea and can help have a look at the about us section
For the second part. You're expecting the doctor to do something for nothing, and I had this conversation with some one about education and teaching. Doctors and teachers have to eat. There are better ways of achieving these goals.
I think people should be rewarded for helping society/the people around them. But again I think we only need the possibility rather than a system. It is in human nature to show gratitude - nobody needs to be forced to do it, in my opinion.
Pay, is a reward for helping. How about I employ you on a 'possibility' of paying you?
I read some and I agree with most stated, especially the notion of the "optimal size of a team". There are also a few points I disagree on like "Socialism creates slavery", but I think that depends on the definition of the word socialism.
I think one big thing you need is a symbol. I don't know nothing about arts, but maybe @kralizec or @oendertuerk can help you, for a small fee of course. They are capitalists as well ;P
You need to do more research into what socialism actually is, and more importantly where it leads. Check out Stefan Molyneux, Sargon of Akkad on Youtube for very detailed analyses. I've spent the last three years wondering around Asia which was blighted by socialism for many years, it is horrific. Long story short, the Economics doesn't work, people get unhappy, the government loses control, kills people who are unhappy because they critisize the government who will not relinquish the power they have because socialism.
Guys, if you like what I'm trying to start here, I need some help getting the method and message out. @kralizec @oendertuerk. Smallism.org
People can do it better for themselves.
I do not need to do more research and Sargon even describes himself a left winger btw. I can define socialism for myself, I dont need to justify the action of people who abused and mislead the movement ;)
Unfortunately in the USA we are taught from a very early age to join one of 2 camps, either the Democrats or the Republicans. I hold a lot of Libertarian views, however, which blend aspects of the 2 main parties. I think free markets lead to higher standards of living, and I believe that government should generally leave people alone and have a minimal role.
I had an interesting conversation with a former classmate about socialist policies like universal health care and education, and conservative values such as giving businesses lots of room to expand and letting individuals have many unrestricted rights such as owning weapons. My classmate brought up the point that countries with good social programs for their citizens and unrestricted rights tend to be ethnically homogeneous. I was sort of shocked. America is very diverse, white-European descendants are slowly becoming a smaller population, and I would prefer that a government system that gave social benefits and guaranteed individual liberties to people did not have to be one color or one race, but transcended race, ethnicity, and religion.
Then I realized how it made sense. Take Switzerland for example. Most people are Swiss and most people are white. You can argue that they have an incentive to look after their own people and thus give up some of their money to pay for education, health care, and other programs, whereas America doesn't have this ethnic motivation. In addition, people in Switzerland own lots of guns, which is a massive personal liberty even though you may consider it dangerous. But they have a relatively mild murder rate due to firearms. So you have to wonder, if all people are of the same kin, then won't they be less inclined to fight with each other and hurt their own kind?
I would actually like to see socialist policies blended with conservative ones. The government, the media, and the educational system do a great job at dividing people in America and ordering them to look at history from one perspective only. One of the fears of conservatives is that if we do pay for massive social programs then we will face massive immigration and our resources will be depleted. However, if we had limited immigration this wouldn't be as much of a problem.
These topics are important and complex. Thank you for posting your views. I'll follow your content!
Steemit just swallowed my first reply, no draft saved...
The main thing I wanted to say is that every culture has his good and bad side, the approach of multiculturalism to "mix it all so only the best characteristics prevail" seems silly.
Cultural difference does not mean you cant be friends but living with each other might be challenging sometimes.
Thank you for the long comment and the supportive words!
I remember why I doubt that theory: Because of Germany :D. We are a hugely diverse country by now. We also have a lot of polish and russian migrants. The grandparents of my mother were polish as well.
There are a lot of tensions and problems here that is true but rarely any violence.
Yeah..well, you cant have liberty and also be a nationalist or a socialist. Those are mutually exlusive. Liberterianism is about principles. Either you are for total freedom, or you're not. Just because you like certain freedoms doesn't mean your not a socialist.I'm sorry :) Principles are the key here. Taxation IS theft. Theft is a violation of your property. It has nothing to do with liberalism in the classic sense.
Aye, my Nordish brother I can! I never talked about taxation once, did I? Community projects can be voluntaristic as well as the financial sponsorship for it.
You said you wanted free public transport etc. How are you going to finance that without taxation?
by people wanting to fund infrastructure for their community. Isn't that the classic libertarian approach? People will want infrastructure without a state, so thy will come together and handle it on their own.
Sure, if people want to offer free transportation for other people they are free to do that.
Dude - interesting stuff - but don't you have more important things you need to be doing like...
https://steemit.com/steemwars/@sirknight/official-submission-to-steemit-australia-and-the-world-are-at-war
Sry mate, it is really hot in germany, so I was busy drinking beer in the sun :3
Hey dude!
You are what your are. I think it's as easy as that. Only because we have predefined categories, it doesn't mean we have to use them for ourselves. It's more than enough when other people use them to try to make sense of us.
Who cares if you are a left-win-right-anarchist with 5% socialist background. Or maybe even 6%? And what if you think different about it tomorrrow?
The dude is the dude and that's it. Me too, by the way ;-)
My opinion.
Well, it is true that the idea of political parties itself is annoying and creates unneeded conflict. The German parlament looks a little bit like an old theater where acts were shown for the public, doesn't it. ;)
It was funny to see though that the libertarian socialists interpret socialism quite similar to me. In our language "sozial" also has a quite positiv connotation, even though the SPD is working hard to change that.
It can be frustrating that many people I talk to in politics always assume no-money, no-property hardcore communism, when I say socialism.
I know that it is very hard to get rid of old and beloved firm convictions. The process is slow and tough. But in the end you will be able to tell all of us frankly: Ok, I was socialist, and I loved to be it, because it felt so good. But now I am not socialist any more. I am a libertarian. :-D
In the end it doesn't matter how you call the whole thing though.
I was told the same thing, when I was 16 ;), but we will see