Socialism OTD

Home Forums Decaffeinated Coffee Socialism OTD

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 58 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1884220
    AriHaleviRosman
    Participant

    How did Socialism cause so many frum Yidden to go OTD?

    #1884380
    ☕️coffee addict
    Participant

    Socialism (even though I don’t like it) doesn’t cause people to go off the derech people use it as an excuse

    #1884409
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Actually a prominent Rosh Yeshiva zt”l who grew up in Europe and saw the destruction socialism wreaked explained to me the following.

    In Europe the level of :poorness” was something we could not understand people literally had barely enough to eat and had to work unbelievable hard for what they did have.

    Communism/socialism came along and promised them from now on they would have what to eat and would no longer have to work so hard. Life would be good.

    So he explained there was a tremendous Yetzer Horah,

    Now in America when he explained we all have “breakfast like a king” and the Yetzer Horah of Socialism is much less.

    What is sad to me is to think that we have become so spoiled from the wealth that the Capitalist system has created raising the American standard of living to untold heights that we have forgotten what suffering Communism/Socialism brings.

    #1884429
    som1
    Participant

    the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of OTHER people’s money

    #1884476
    NOYB
    Participant

    Socialism didn’t cause people to go OTD. People were losing their grip on Hashem for various reasons, and socialism was a new, attractive Ideology that was sweeping people up all over Europe.

    #1884489
    The little I know
    Participant

    We are also fooled by the spoken word. There are words that convey wonderful concepts that can be enticing. Wouldn’t you prefer negotiation to war? Anyone would. But when facing terror, or enemies that are sworn to your destruction who never keep a commitment and consider lying virtuous, I would frown on useless negotiation. Doesn’t equality sound nice? Guess what. Men and women are not the same. We each have our assets and liabilities. Doesn’t psychic reality make sense? Well, if that means that a he can identify as a she, and vice versa, we have a Pandora’s box of senselessness open wide. Can a teenager identify as 67 years old and collect social security? Can we here in the CR identify as President and Vice President, or as other races, etc.? It rapidly deteriorates into the ridiculous. That’s socialism. The initial sound is attractive, but it results in utter chaos.

    #1884506
    Edmark1234
    Participant

    the basic concept is eradication of oppression and poverty which are very jewish values.
    its obvious now that it doesnt work at all, besides for all the other issues like secularism that came with it.
    at the time the compromise seemed worth it.

    #1884521
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear The Little,
    Your point is valid. But all the ideas you mentioned have nothing to do with socialism.

    #1884526
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Som,
    Socialism is much less based on hard cash, than even debt driven Capitalism. When production is being valued at near 100%, it is impossible to run out of money. It is deflation with high economic activity.

    #1884528
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Edmark,
    What does or does not work here? Which process we use to evaluate markets and production, is not indicative of inflation or failure.

    #1884530
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,
    The problem is greed. Socialism does not tame it, and Capitalism cannot compete with it.

    #1884724
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Nomesoreh

    The “problem” is that we do not live in Utopia.
    We live in the real world with real issues.
    The world is comprised of human beings who are complicated each with their own set of issues.
    Communisim/Socialismrefuses to recognize that.

    #1884727
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    As for “jewish Values”

    A bsic Jewish Value is that Jealousy is one of the things that remove you from this world.

    Yes some people have more.
    Deal with it.

    Yes some people are smarter.
    Deal with it.

    Another basic Jewish value is that stealing is wrong.

    You are not entitled to other peoples money.
    No matter how much they have.

    #1884739
    SchnitzelBigot
    Participant

    How did the OP come to the conclusion that Socialism causes people to go otd. One can argue that capitalism made people OTD in the United States.

    #1884756
    1
    Participant

    Capitalists give more charity than socialists

    #1884790
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Psychologically speaking there’s a basic reason why socialists giver less charity the capitalists.

    the basic philosophy of socialism is ingraining in someone their “rights” and everyone else’s obligations towards them.

    So it’s really hard for them to feel personally “obligated towards giving of themselves towards others.

    While capitalism teaches you the obligations you have.

    So when you see someone in need you cannot push your obligation on others.

    #1884916
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,

    “The basic philosophy of socialism is ingraining in someone their “rights” and everyone else’s obligations towards them.”

    This sounds like ‘bill of rights’ socialism, and may have been in the mind of FDR. (More likely that he viewed it as socialist, and not socialism.) It has been revived very recently. (Like this decade or last.)It is not at all basic to the philosophy of socialism.

    “While Capitalism teaches you the obligations you have.”

    Please explain. I never understood these socio-economic philosophies as educational.

    #1884981
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Simple.

    Socialism teach one that they the society i.e the government owes them certain tangible things i.e housing or healthcare.
    These are not free they cost money and they require the services of others.

    In other words if you are poor and I am wealthy you basic rights are that I am obligated to give you a portion of my work and you have the right to it.

    ( in other words your basic rights are the ability to steal from me)

    As opposed to the founding philosophy which stated that my inherent rights are God given and the government cannot infringe upon them but the government is likewise not obligated to grant you them.

    In actuality a central part of the philosophy of the founding of the United states was that basic rights were “inalienable”

    The government could not infringe upon them because they were GOD given, and hence if they made rules against your inalienable rights they were inherently unjust.

    Flowing from that is the concept of Capitalism, that it is not my skin color or creed that decides my success it is the “capitol” that I have and as long as I invest it the way I see fit the profits or losses belong to me.

    You do not have a right to my work nor do I have a claim on yours.

    #1884931
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,

    “Another basic Jewish value is that stealing is wrong.”

    A lot worse than wrong.

    “You are not entitled to other peoples money.”
    I am not asking anyone for money. But maybe I could take this to heart, and be more self reliant.

    “No matter how much they have.”
    You are bringing in revolutionary propaganda. It may have a point, and it may be unethical. But it is irrelevant to socialism which is about how to set up markets and production, not governments.

    #1884703
    huju
    Participant

    Socialist women and socialist female adolescents have loose sexual morals. That will get lots of frum men and boys OTD.

    #1885219
    charliehall
    Participant

    “You do not have a right to my work nor do I have a claim on yours.”

    I don’t have a right to your work; Judaism isn’t about rights but about obligations. But if I am poor and you are well off you are obligated to help to support me. If you refuse to contribute to the communal charity fund you get flogged and get your property confiscated by beit din. That is Rambam, Hilchot Matanot Aniyim

    “Flowing from that is the concept of Capitalism”

    America did not have a concept of capitalism yet. Kal v’chomer the Torah would have been quite surprised to see it being used to support something that would not exist for thousands of years. The Torah actually supports draconian limits on free enterprise. It isn’t socialist, but it isn’t laissez-faire either.

    #1885228
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Charliehall
    I fail to see where I stated the Torah supports capitalism.

    I did state that socialism is predicated on beliefs that anti fundamentals of Judaisim.

    I fail to see how you disprove that.

    Regarding Hilchos Aniyim.

    First off the halochos of Hilchos Aniyim simply establish a obligation upon me to help out poor people it (probably) does not establish an ability for an individual poor person to demand from an individual support.

    I do admit that this is subject to a dispute over whether it is mumon aniyim or not.

    You are correct in respect that there is a moral obligation that derives from G-d but that does not ascribe itself to a a secular government,

    Furthermore that obligation is predicated on my affording it.
    Pray tell how does that translate into property taxes for school bills when I cannot afford tuition.

    Secondly the Halochos of Charity establish many thing in direct contradiction to the secular ethics.

    Again that is because the din of Hilchos Aniyim a requirement on me personally to help poor people no to give money to a third party which then does with it as they see fit.

    If I have a job opening and a poor relative is capable of filling it I there is good Halachic grounds stating I am obligated to give to him.

    And that obligation is for food and clothing how does that translate in Sesame Street on PBS?

    #1885230
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Huju,
    Please enlighten me as to how one’s perspective of economic principle, can be interpreted in a moral sense.

    #1885233
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,
    You really have to get a fair handle on these academic disciplines. “You do not have a right to my work nor do I have a claim on yours.” That could be the mantra of Socialism! The worker is the only one who actually produces work. I still have no idea how it is educational. It is an understanding of our relationship with property.

    #1885238
    som1
    Participant

    and i already give maaser

    #1885237
    som1
    Participant

    voting to steal doesn’t make it morally correct!!
    as is practically all americans give more then 10% to taxes

    #1885262
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Charlie,
    Socialist virtues and policies can stand on their own merit. Once that merit is justified, it is no longer viewed as merely a socialist policy. It takes on it’s own nature, and will be called by it’s own title. A large amount of the productive regulations that cropped up over the centuries would be termed today, ‘socialist legislation’. But we know it as standard business protocols or ethics. Socialism is only used in policy making, when there uncertainty if the bill under discussion, is justified. Then Socialist philosophies can be used to demonstrate it’s need or potential. The philosophy lending approval to the law, is a mandatory part of man made systems.

    The Torah is Divine. As a divine system it’s laws always have to be justified in of themselves. We cannot say, Hashem would not have created this law, but He saw that there was a flaw somewhere else, so this law was made as a safety net. [For example, saying that the whole intent of the slavery laws is that it was the best that could be hoped for. This gets to be a gray area, I am not intending to discredit anybody.] Therefore, the underpinnings of the Torah, which in Human terms would be it’s philosophy or terms of thinking, do not describe the values of the Torah, as much as it does the Facets of the Torah. [Yiras Shamayim, Ahavas Torah, Avodah, Chukim, etc. according to which ever Jewish thinker you prefer.]

    So, in conclusion to validate a man made system from the Torah, requires translating the Laws of the Torah into the potential practices of whatever philosophy. And since human thinking is forever evolving, it will be thrown back in your face with tenfold the amount of ‘proofs’ you started out with.

    The Torah allows us to be Socialist, Communist, Capitalist, and a million other things. So if you find socialism beneficial, then ‘go in happiness and eat your bread, and drink your wine with a gracious heart’. But do not think that you have the Torah’s backing for what you chose to ask of others to join you. You stand on your own merits. The Torah has empowered us to do so. Empowered, not entitled, designated, or compelled.

    #1885264
    se2015
    Participant

    Many of the early jewish socialists regarded socialism with religious zeal. I looked for a quote online and found this attributed to Berl Katznelson, an early founder of labor zionism – “Everywhere the Jewish labourer goes, the divine presence goes with him.” I don’t know what language he said it in. It sounds like he’s quoting Rav Kook.

    I would question the assumption in the original question that socialism caused them to go otd. It’s entirely possible that many were leaving anyway. Religion and socialism are not mutually exclusive. Many Eastern European Jews who immigrated to America left religion behind and never became socialists.

    #1885277
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Because debating whether I have a right to the fruit of someone else’s labor is inherently implying that they do not intrinsically own the fruits of their labor.

    #1885335
    MaidofCH
    Participant

    Socialists are somehow viewed as non-judgmental and inclusive, which appeals to people with self-esteem issues. Also, a socialist-style environment will coddle those who are depressed or fragile.

    In my younger days, when I was insecure, I might have viewed the Antifa/BLM crowd as the “cool kids.” Today they just seem stupid and suicidal.

    #1885348
    Doing my best
    Participant

    Socialism originally gained so much popularity because in a utopian society it makes the most sense, if everyone worked together than we could produce more. At that point in the worlds history, nobody understood that bad apples always ruin everything.

    #1885498
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Doing,
    Working together is mere propaganda or advertising. It is used in all societies. It has nothing to do with economic doctrine. It is central to the anthropology of civilizations. Or in other words, social studies.

    #1885499
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Se,
    I like your point.

    #1885503
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,
    Socialism is founded on the idea that I can only gain from your labor, if you receive compensation equal to your efforts. (Such as being paid commensurately to what you worked.) Nothing, empowers the worker as much as Socialism. Your Critique should be on Communism and Capitalism.

    But I still do net get your point. The common thief does not rationalize that property is unowned. He justifies it, based on that he has needs, and he wants it, and is able to steal. And, that money comes and goes, and repayment is possible.

    #1885515
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Maidoff,
    Socialists are people with a perspective on how the markets should be managed. Like financers, bankers, and investors. What is a socialist style environment?

    #1886079
    huju
    Participant

    To nomesorah: I do not understand your question.

    #1886189
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Huju,
    Socialism as opposed to Capitalism, is about valuing activity (or work) over investment. There is no ethical message. So where do loose morals come in? (Do not answer where it came up in history. Rather where it has a place in Socialism.)

    #1886298
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    n0m
    You have a very unique view of Socialism.

    #1886307
    huju
    Participant

    To nomesorah: Loose morals among socialist women do not have to do with socialism. But for socialist men, it is a happy coincidence.

    To “1”: A recent study found that left-leaning Americans give more to charity than right-leaning Americans. That does not conflict with your comment about capitalists’ charitable generosity, because most so-called left-leaning Americans are capitalists.

    #1886343
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Huju,
    In an academic sense, I have no idea what you are talking about with Socialists and morals. Many of the iconic workers in history [Of both genders.] never married. Because they worked nonstop. They remained celibate all their lives. This includes Jews who spent their lives on a given activity, such as Ben Asher.

    As anthropology, I would like to know if there is any record of this idea. Or is it your opinion.

    #1886348
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Dear Ben,
    Anybody here wants to offer an alternate explanation of Socialism, based on reality instead of psuedo journalism?

    #1888916
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    The socialist political movement includes a set of political philosophies that originated in the revolutionary movements of the mid-to-late 18th century and out of concern for the social problems that were associated with capitalism.[12] By the late 19th century, after the work of Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels, socialism had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production.[43][44] By the 1920s, communism and social democracy had become the two dominant political tendencies within the international socialist movement,[45] with socialism itself becoming the most influential secular movement of the 20th century.[46] While the emergence of the Soviet Union as the world’s first nominally socialist state led to socialism’s widespread association with the Soviet economic model, some economists and intellectuals argued that in practice the model functioned as a form of state capitalism[47][48][49] or a non-planned administrative or command economy.[50][51] Socialist parties and ideas remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence on all continents, heading national governments in many countries around the world. Today, many socialists have also adopted the causes of other social movements such as environmentalism, feminism and progressivism.[52]

    #1888915
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    so·cial·ism
    /ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
    noun
    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole..

    #1888954
    n0mesorah
    Participant

    Hi Ben, I missed you on this thread!

    I am aware of all that you posted. And, could use it to source my previous posts. It seems like we have the same picture of Socialism, just we are stressing different parts. It would be two tedious to haggle over each line of the article above. So, let’s try something else. I see you ended with line about environmentalism etc. That gives me an idea.

    Suppose an environmentalist comes to our town. He asks us to conserve and protect our natural resources. We are fine with that. But that would leave a lot of access to our natural resources at the mercy of the public. Naturally, the question arises as to who would supervise that the protected resources are maintained and not stolen for individual profit. He answers, “I am a socialist”. I take that to mean that, he believes that it is up to the people to defend what they have left unowned for the public, just like they protect their personal property. You take it as, he does not believe in the right of the individual to what has been put there by nature. Even at the expense of the resource itself. (It will be left unprotected.)

    #1889032
    CTLAWYER
    Participant

    @ Ben Levi
    A googled definition without attribution……………..

    That said, I have no problem with regulation by the community as a whole. That means a representative government sets the rules. Things such as permits, OSHA, minimum wage, workers’ compensation insurance, Unemployment Insurance tax, EPA requirements, etc.

    “Owned” is not really socialism, it is Communism, which I do not favor.

    Someone in this thread keeps posting Communism/Socialism as if they are one and the same. NOT, also the OP’s question was about Socialism, not Communism.

    #1889033
    charliehall
    Participant

    Thank you, Ben Levi, for those clear definitions. A lot of people call themselves socialists who don’t fit that definition. Bernie Sanders is the best example in the US. He is no Norman Thomas or Eugene Debs. (Thomas was a socialist but not a Marxist. There were many Christian socialists in the US and Thomas was one of them. Another was Francis Bellamy, author of the Pledge of Allegiance. Both were Christian ministers.)

    And a lot of people are falsely slandered as socialists. Joe Biden is a great example.

    #1889211
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    n0mesorah,
    I fail to see your point.

    #1889273
    charliehall
    Participant

    Israel was a socialist country — by the accurate definitions Ben Levi gave — for the first three decades of its existence. Even today, most of the land is either owned or controlled by the government. David Ben-Gurion was a socialist, so was Moshe Sharett, so was Levi Eshkol, so was Golda Meir, so was Yitzhak Rabin.

    And for the most part the dati and charedi parties had no objection. The dati parties were part of every single government under every Prime Minister I mentioned, and the founder of the main dati party, Rabbi Dr. Yosef Burg, was a huge talmid chacham. The charedi parties were part of the first three governments but stopped being a part of them for reasons other than socialism.

    Had Israel been a free market economy in the 1950s it is unlikely that the then desperately poor country would have been able to support the huge number of huge immigrants it welcomed. Command economies work well in crises — the US had command economies for both World War I and World War II.

    #1889306
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Charliehall,

    You are 100% correct about Israel being a socialist country.

    In fact Bibi’s claim to fame and the reason for his enduring popularity is the fact that he is one of the first Prime Ministers, perhaps the first, of the State who actually has an understanding of economics.

    For most of the States history the Prime Minister was exclusively a security expert with no real economic experience unlike the MIT trained Bibi

    As a result Bibi is actually credited with finally destroying many of the socialist components of the State and unshackling the Israeli economy.

    #1889307
    Ben Levi
    Participant

    Furthermore of course the founding of the State was inextricably linked to Socialism.

    The founding of the State was the main thrust of the Haskala movement which was inextricably linked to Socialism.

    And of course the Gedolim did not object to Socialism per se.

    They were busy fighting a war to rebuild Torah in the State that was being waged on virtually every front. The moral justice of the kibbutz was not exactly on the front burner.

Viewing 50 posts - 1 through 50 (of 58 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.