# How does socialism contravene freedom? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 8, 2019, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175 "2019-02-08T12:27:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/61 "2019-02-15T09:34:41Z")
> [@Jragon](#): > > The Scandinavian model is Social Democracy. Democratic Socialism a la the DSA and their ilk is different. Yes, you are right. Mea culpa. And its extra embarrassing for me to make that mistake when I am ranting about how people get the terms confused. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/62 "2019-02-15T09:49:32Z")
> [@XT](#): > > So did I. Short answer…Sweden (Denmark et al) aren’t socialist economies nor socialist governments. I believe Grim Render also addressed this. But they do have (along we almost all European countries) socialist parties (in fact the horrific attacks by Anders Breivik were targeting the Norwegian socialist party). Those parties are NOT running on platform of abolishing capitalism and democracy and replacing it with a socialist uptopia where the workers control the means of the production. Whether or not 100+ years that was the definition of “socialism”, it certainly isn’t anymore. It is a system of democratic government where the state actively intervenes in the economy to fight inequality by means of social programs paid for by higher taxes. There have been many periods since the end of WW2, when those socialist parties were in charge of Scandavian countries (and many other Western democracies). Whatever you can say about the success or otherwise of those governments, they DIDN’T abolish fundamental rights and collapse into dictatorship. There is a fundamental flaw (I would go as far as to say intellectual dishonesty) in the conservative argument against “socialism”. Its that it is perfectly A-OK and freedomtastic for a government to force you to pay taxes for the army, police force, judiciary. But if that govenment forces you to pay taxes for the army, police force, judiciary, AND public healthcare, thats a SOCIALIST DICTATORSHIP, we have NO freedom any more! ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/63 "2019-02-15T11:39:02Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Monstro, a basic flaw in your OP is the assumption that everyone wants geographical and social mobility, unstressed and educated workers, and so forth. > > Certainly, the lower and middle classes desire these things, but if you look back to the early industrial revolution you will find many examples of “owners” who restricted the mobility, finances, education, and access to medicine of thousands of employees. From paying workers only in script that could only be redeemed at company-owned stores to discarding employees who became injured or ill, and other long-term practices like debt-slavery where the debtors are paid such low wages it is impossible for them to free themselves, to share-cropping, child labor, and on and on… There is a certain category of individuals who want to be on top and want freedom to travel only for themselves, keeping the [del]serfs[/del] [del]peasants[/del] employees on lockdown is a feature, not a bug. I believe there’s this [great tool](https://tenor.com/view/revolution-guillotine-marie-antoinette-off-with-their-heads-behead-gif-12604431) that we as a society can use to deal with those kinds of people. 🙂 > [@senoy](#): > > It does contravene freedom. A perfectly free being is answerable to no one. His only constraints are those imposed by nature and logic. A society by its nature takes away some of that freedom. My ‘primal man’ can not go about taking what he wants now. The structure of society dictates that some ‘things’ are no longer available to him, but in a perfectly capitalist world, the things that are ‘his’ are ‘his alone’ to dispense with as he pleases. He is ‘free’ to accumulate what he is able to accumulate and dispose of it in whatever way he chooses. The theory behind a socialist state is that those things that he accumulates are not truly ‘his.’ They or at least a portion of them belong to the community to be distributed as it pleases. This inarguably infringes upon the ‘freedom’ of the man. No longer can he take his 100 gold pieces that he earned or created and throw it in a volcano. Now, he can take 60 of them and do so, but the other 40 are no longer his and forcibly confiscated by society in the form of the state. This seems to me to be less ‘free.’ But we all live in societies, and our “freedom” is never quite “free” in this sense. Maybe in anarcho-communistic isolated living with no real footprint this makes sense, but in society, every action is largely defined by power structures, and limited by the ownership of others. My freedom to swing my fist is limited by your freedom to have an unpunched face. And it is largely through those types of limitations that we consider ourselves “free” in any meaningful sense. I am undeniably “freer” because of laws that make it illegal to enslave others. Indeed, the very act of ownership limits the freedoms of others - if there is ripe fruit in my neighbor’s garden but my neighbor is on a 3-month vacation, I am not free to pick the fruit, even if I am starving and it will otherwise go to waste, because he somehow “owns” that tree. I am not free to walk across his property, because he “owns” the land. Whether this construction actually makes sense is a complex topic, but it hardly matters, because in order to uphold this construct, we need laws - a right that is not defended is hardly a right at all, and property rights will not uphold themselves absent people willing to enforce them. (There’s a reason “[Property is Theft](https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/01/why-taxation-is-neither-theft-nor-slavery)” is often a socialist rallying cry.) > [@XT](#): > > Well, it seems a bit ironic to me that folks are complaining that ‘Americans’ don’t understand socialism while seemingly not understanding it themselves. To break it down, Capitalism is purely an economic system. Wat > [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Long answer: read F. A. Hayek’s _[The Road to Serfdom](https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo4138549.html)_. Or, to name at least one better alternative, don’t! 🙂 > [@](#): > > Short answer: let’s look at just one example that you brought up in your OP, namely public schools. We have a public school system where everything is owned and operated by the government in most places. (In some, there’s been welcome movement towards school choice involving in charters, vouchers, and other options. Nonetheless, the vast majority of America’s school-going children are stuck in public schools.) > > Do children like going to public school? No, not in most cases. Just read an old _Calvin and Hobbes_ book or watch _The Simpsons_ or _Bob’s Burgers_ to get an accurate look at how most kids feel about going to a public school. > > And why should kids feel any differently about it? They are forced to wake up early in the morning, when in many cases they would be healthier if they could sleep longer. Many ride on cramped, unpleasant buses. They get ushered into ugly, unpleasant buildings. They are forced to sit in a certain room for a certain length of time, then forced to march to a different room at a different time, and so forth through the school day. They spend much of the day on monotonous, repetitive exercises, studying topics that they mostly don’t care about. Many endure bullying. Meanwhile, “school resource officers” prowl the hallways with guns and truncheons and handcuffs prominently displayed, an implicit warning about what will happen to students who don’t obey the system. [Violence sometimes occurs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuNeykbfNkA). > > How can public schools not be seen as an attack on freedom? …You go looking for an “attack on freedom” and the example you come up with is… _public schooling_?! Ugh where do I even start with this? Maybe by pointing out that “do children enjoy X” is a terrible metric for whether we should be forcing them to do that. We force kids to do all kinds of shit they don’t want to do. It’s called _parenting_. Most kids don’t like to eat their vegetables, or clean their rooms, or do chores, either - are those horrifying attacks on freedom as well? :rolleyes: Also, please note that some of the problems you list here are primarily problems with American schools. German schools, for example, do not have a problem with security guards clapping kids in irons - what the ever-loving fuck is wrong with your country?! Most German schools put in work to be attractive, and if the classes are uninteresting or dull, maybe a change in curriculum is in order. We also don’t have those traditional ugly school buses - we have a far more active public transportation network; I took the train to class when I was living in Neufahrn, and walked when I went in Mainburg, and our buses are pretty damn nice. Other problems are problems in any freely social dynamic where people are stuck working together. Bullying exists in schools? Sure! It also exists in workplaces, social groups, clubs, households, and basically anywhere else where people are thrown together, and good schools can and do act against bullying. And after that, what’s left? Curriculum that students aren’t interested in? Bus rides? Monotonous exercises? These are all problems inherent in any kind of schooling other than homeschooling (which for many simply is not an option, ). Charter schools cannot and do not solve these problems. Even more radical alternatives like Montessori and Waldorf have these problems, and bring their own problems with them. Meanwhile, y’know what actually limits people’s freedom? Not getting a GED. That seriously limits your options as an adult in a meaningful way. The propagation of general public education has done more to further freedom than any shitty book by Hayek could dream of doing. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/64 "2019-02-15T12:05:12Z")
> [@HMS\_Irruncible](#): > > Each and every one of these ideas is harmful and stupid. Be fair. Some of them are hilarious. Part of the problem is the negative definition of freedom: freedom just means that you don’t have anyone actively interfering with your plans. But that’s not really all that important a thing for human happiness. Much happier as freedom defined as the capacity to realize one’s desires. Capitalism restricts freedom in a really important fashion: it says that you can’t use the materials you need, even if using them is vital to fulfilling your deepest desires (e.g., eating, not dying of disease, etc.). You can’t use them unless someone else–their owner–gives you permission, and they can deny that permission for the most trivial of reasons. And you’ll go to jail if you use those materials without permission. That’s a serious restriction on freedom. Socialism also restricts freedom, but it’s a balance: you can’t use those materials without permission, but sometimes the state grants the permission when the owner is being a butt. The owner’s freedom is restricted in a way that heightens the freedom of the non-owner. Which system is more meaningfully free? 1. A child starves on the street because the factory owner refuses to feed the child; or 2. A factory owner must relinquish some money, and as a result, the child is able to eat. I’ll take the freedom in that second system over the first any day. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/65 "2019-02-15T13:25:02Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Capitalism restricts freedom in a really important fashion: it says that you can’t use the materials you need, even if using them is vital to fulfilling your deepest desires (e.g., eating, not dying of disease, etc.). You can’t use them unless someone else–their owner–gives you permission, and they can deny that permission for the most trivial of reasons. And you’ll go to jail if you use those materials without permission. That’s not “capitalism”; that’s “property.” ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/66 "2019-02-15T15:05:03Z")
> [@griffin1977](#): > > But they do have (along we almost all European countries) socialist parties (in fact the horrific attacks by Anders Breivik were targeting the Norwegian socialist party). Those parties are NOT running on platform of abolishing capitalism and democracy and replacing it with a socialist uptopia where the workers control the means of the production. Whether or not 100+ years that was the definition of “socialism”, it certainly isn’t anymore. It is a system of democratic government where the state actively intervenes in the economy to fight inequality by means of social programs paid for by higher taxes. > > There have been many periods since the end of WW2, when those socialist parties were in charge of Scandavian countries (and many other Western democracies). Whatever you can say about the success or otherwise of those governments, they DIDN’T abolish fundamental rights and collapse into dictatorship. Those parties, as far as I know started out as actually socialist or communist a century or so ago. Then, over time they’ve changed or evolved their policies towards what today is known as social democracy. That does not change the meaning of the word socialism. Plenty of political parties have had names that had very little to do with their actual policies. It is confusing, because there are also smaller parties further to the left that use the term socialist with some more justification in their names. And competing for voters with them may be part of why the major bloc parties retain their old names. But it doesn’t change the meaning of “socialism” any more than lots of dictators in Africa leading parties or nations calling themselves “democratic” changes the meaning of democracy. There are still countries out there that are actually socialist. North Korea and Cuba spring to mind. What you describe is more social democracy, the Nordic Model or even the normal setup of first world nations, depending. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/67 "2019-02-15T15:47:17Z")
Early 20th Century “socialism” failed because it created a political class that held power of people. The people were trading in one form of oppression - that of private land owners, merchants, industrialists - for another. Where (some) European governments have succeeded (until recently at least) is in using capitalism (which is a good economic system, but requires that wealth be redistributed so that power doesn’t concentrate into too few hands) to generate wealth and freedom, and also using its tax revenue for the common good. Moreover, they have recognized that redistribution of wealth cannot simply be achieved arbitrarily but rather through the decisions made by a representative government, which can change according to the interests of the people. Public monies derived through taxation are also used to fund public education and other important institutions. When there is balance of power among public and private institutions, and when there is public transparency of government and its relationship with private power, there is generally a higher degree of trust and faith in government. And I’d also assert there’s even a higher degree of trust in private power as well, as people assume that it operates in the common interest by tapping human freedom and brainpower to do good things (like create products and services we can use, and jobs and income we can use to buy things we need, or things we simply want) In America, private power has become a corrosive force. Not only will it continue to undermine faith and confidence in the government, but it will also weaken faith in the private sector as more and more people take a dim view of the oversized influence it has on public policy and dialogue. All one needs to do is to look at how healthcare is becoming _the_ issue in American politics - mainly because everyone is starting to realize how bad it is. And that’s precisely because of what I alluded to above: the concentration of wealth and power, its tendency to use that wealth as political leverage, and the complete lack of transparency in the system. How much does oxygen cost? How much does a consultation with an anesthesiologist cost? Which EMT is covered by your insurance policy? More importantly…why the hell should we even have to ask these questions? Because there’s no transparency, that’s why. And in economics, markets that are free - truly free - require transparency. There is a fundamental shift in power taking place in American “democracy” and America’s so-called “market” economy, one in which the ability of interests to use wealth as leverage is more likely to occur than an open, transparent marketplace transaction. That’s not economic freedom. That’s not even freedom. That’s taking a new step each day in the direction of tyranny. And we seem to be waltzing there willingly, knowingly. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/68 "2019-02-15T15:58:54Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Part of the problem is the negative definition of freedom: freedom just means that you don’t have anyone actively interfering with your plans. > > But that’s not really all that important a thing for human happiness. Much happier as freedom defined as the capacity to realize one’s desires. Boom. There you go, that’s the distinction socialists are concerned with. There’s a reason FDR’s “four freedoms” include “the freedom from want” and “the freedom from fear”. I don’t care if I’m free to amass 10 million dollars - In practical terms, to me, this is akin to the freedom to sprout wings and fly. I care if I’m free from being hungry and cold at the end of the day. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/69 "2019-02-15T16:08:32Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Early 20th Century “socialism” failed because it created a political class that held power of people. The people were trading in one form of oppression - that of private land owners, merchants, industrialists - for another. > > Where (some) European governments have succeeded (until recently at least) is in using capitalism (which is a good economic system, but requires that wealth be redistributed so that power doesn’t concentrate into too few hands) to generate wealth and freedom, and also using its tax revenue for the common good. Moreover, they have recognized that redistribution of wealth cannot simply be achieved arbitrarily but rather through the decisions made by a representative government, which can change according to the interests of the people. Public monies derived through taxation are also used to fund public education and other important institutions. When there is balance of power among public and private institutions, and when there is public transparency of government and its relationship with private power, there is generally a higher degree of trust and faith in government. And I’d also assert there’s even a higher degree of trust in private power as well, as people assume that it operates in the common interest by tapping human freedom and brainpower to do good things (like create products and services we can use, and jobs and income we can use to buy things we need, or things we simply want) > > In America, private power has become a corrosive force. Not only will it continue to undermine faith and confidence in the government, but it will also weaken faith in the private sector as more and more people take a dim view of the oversized influence it has on public policy and dialogue. All one needs to do is to look at how healthcare is becoming _the_ issue in American politics - mainly because everyone is starting to realize how bad it is. And that’s precisely because of what I alluded to above: the concentration of wealth and power, its tendency to use that wealth as political leverage, and the complete lack of transparency in the system. How much does oxygen cost? How much does a consultation with an anesthesiologist cost? Which EMT is covered by your insurance policy? More importantly…why the hell should we even have to ask these questions? Because there’s no transparency, that’s why. And in economics, markets that are free - truly free - require transparency. > > There is a fundamental shift in power taking place in American “democracy” and America’s so-called “market” economy, one in which the ability of interests to use wealth as leverage is more likely to occur than an open, transparent marketplace transaction. That’s not economic freedom. That’s not even freedom. That’s taking a new step each day in the direction of tyranny. And we seem to be waltzing there willingly, knowingly. This gets the relationship backwards. Nordic countries are able to have large governments and high taxes because they are high trust societies. When people pay high taxes they trust that it is being spent well and that those in power are honest. For example insurance fraud in Norway is estimated at 15 million dollars US, while in the US it is estimated at 80 billion dollars a year. That total does not include medicare fraud which is estimated at 60 billion dollars a year. The Nordic countries score the highest for perceived lack of corruption. Another component is cultural Jante law is still around and affects politics in those countries. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/70 "2019-02-15T16:11:30Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Boom. There you go, that’s the distinction socialists are concerned with. There’s a reason FDR’s “four freedoms” include “the freedom from want” and “the freedom from fear”. I don’t care if I’m free to amass 10 million dollars - In practical terms, to me, this is akin to the freedom to sprout wings and fly. I care if I’m free from being hungry and cold at the end of the day. Moreover, let’s say a few hundred landowners are “free” to impose perpetual serfdom on tens of thousands of peasants who are technically “free” in the eyes of the law but have no real economic freedom otherwise - what good is freedom, then? Constitutional “freedom” is meaningless if it lacks safeguards that enable and empower someone to become free by virtue of their own self-determination. As always the question is one over the extent to which the law and institutions should go to ‘protect’ each and every individual. Should it protect people who are perpetually irresponsible? That’s something over which reasonably minded people can disagree, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/71 "2019-02-15T16:16:04Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > This gets the relationship backwards. Nordic countries are able to have large governments and high taxes because they are high trust societies. When people pay high taxes they trust that it is being spent well and that those in power are honest. For example insurance fraud in Norway is estimated at 15 million dollars US, while in the US it is estimated at 80 billion dollars a year. That total does not include medicare fraud which is estimated at 60 billion dollars a year. The Nordic countries score the highest for perceived lack of corruption. Another component is cultural Jante law is still around and affects politics in those countries. I have no idea where you get your stats from, but assuming you’re accurately using statistics in the aggregate, then you’ve just undermined your own rebuttal. You’re saying the US has five times the amount of fraud in the aggregate - it has 10-12 times the population. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/72 "2019-02-15T16:25:34Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > That’s not “capitalism”; that’s “property.” …do you REALLY think that’s a helpful response? Because come the fuck on. The privileging of private property rights, along with the concept that these rights should only be altered through a mutual voluntary agreement in the free market, is the cornerstone of capitalism. Was what I wrote really so unclear to you, or are you bizarrely scoring some sort of pedantic points here? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/73 "2019-02-15T16:37:25Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I have no idea where you get your stats from, but assuming you’re accurately using statistics in the aggregate, then you’ve just undermined your own rebuttal. You’re saying the US has five times the amount of fraud in the aggregate - it has 10-12 times the population. …but you need to also factor in the percentage of each population that actually has insurance. ---
**Author:** ![puddleglum](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puddleglum/32/137_2.png) [@puddleglum](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puddleglum)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/74 "2019-02-15T16:47:57Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > I have no idea where you get your stats from, but assuming you’re accurately using statistics in the aggregate, then you’ve just undermined your own rebuttal. You’re saying the US has five times the amount of fraud in the aggregate - it has 10-12 times the population. 80 billion is 5,333 times as much as 15 million. Which means there is about 500 times the amount of insurance fraud per capita in the US. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/75 "2019-02-15T17:48:21Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > …do you REALLY think that’s a helpful response? > > Because come the fuck on. The privileging of private property rights, along with the concept that these rights should only be altered through a mutual voluntary agreement in the free market, is the cornerstone of capitalism. > > Was what I wrote really so unclear to you Yes, yes it was. I admit, I haven’t been following this thread as closely as I might. But when you wrote “Capitalism…” I thought you were going to say something about capitalism. Then you went on to say something that applies to any society in which anyone can own private property; and I thought, “Is he really equating capitalism with property? And thus implying that under any other system, like socialism, no one can own any personal property? If so, then yeah, I can understand why people are so scared of socialism.” ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/76 "2019-02-15T19:16:06Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > This gets the relationship backwards. Nordic countries are able to have large governments and high taxes because they are high trust societies. When people pay high taxes they trust that it is being spent well and that those in power are honest. I am not convinced the horse is before the cart here. It may be that a government taxing and spending it well comes before the trust. Also, the histories of the Nordic nations have led to very different attitudes to central government, yet the Nordic model seems to work across all of them despite differences. I also wonder if Germany, Belgium, Austria, Nederland etc are that different ? I suspect trust and good government are more interlinked than a simple “we can’t do that here” > [@puddleglum](#): > > For example insurance fraud in Norway is estimated at 15 million dollars US, while in the US it is estimated at 80 billion dollars a year. That total does not include medicare fraud which is estimated at 60 billion dollars a year. The Nordic countries score the highest for perceived lack of corruption. I suspect the fact that the US sluices 18 % of its GDP through a byzantine set of health care providers and insurers with little transparency or predictability nor any standardization beyond a cultural expectation of stratospheric prices has something to do with it. It is just a far more fertile ecosystem for fraud. > [@puddleglum](#): > > Another component is cultural Jante law is still around and affects politics in those countries. The Jante law is a set of attitudes written in the 1930s, describing the attitudes in a very behind-the-times Danish small town. It survives because it has a certain cultural relevance, much like the Flintstones in the US. But you shouldn’t expect it to affect policies any more than Fred Flintstone does. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/77 "2019-02-15T19:41:32Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > 80 billion is 5,333 times as much as 15 million. Which means there is about 500 times the amount of insurance fraud per capita in the US. My bad, I read million and million; you clearly wrote billion. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/78 "2019-02-15T19:48:09Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > This gets the relationship backwards. Nordic countries are able to have large governments and high taxes because they are high trust societies. When people pay high taxes they trust that it is being spent well and that those in power are honest. For example insurance fraud in Norway is estimated at 15 million dollars US, while in the US it is estimated at 80 billion dollars a year. That total does not include medicare fraud which is estimated at 60 billion dollars a year. The Nordic countries score the highest for perceived lack of corruption. Another component is cultural Jante law is still around and affects politics in those countries. Going back to this for a moment, there’s little argument from me that there are cultural differences, which means that results will vary from place to place even if you have identical policies. Still, I think the earlier point that I made about transparency stands. But more than that, the bigger point I was getting at - perhaps clumsily - was that the right kind of socialism can promote liberty, just as the wrong kind of capitalism can promote oppression. ---
**Author:** ![Red\_Wiggler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/red_wiggler/32/13190_2.png) [@Red\_Wiggler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Red_Wiggler)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/79 "2019-02-15T20:12:19Z")
Perhaps we have more systemic corruption than Norway because our systems lend themselves more to corruption. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2019, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175/80 "2019-02-15T20:50:38Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Yes, yes it was. I admit, I haven’t been following this thread as closely as I might. But when you wrote “Capitalism…” I thought you were going to say something about capitalism. Then you went on to say something that applies to any society in which anyone can own private property; and I thought, “Is he really equating capitalism with property? And thus implying that under any other system, like socialism, no one can own any personal property? If so, then yeah, I can understand why people are so scared of socialism.” Yes, every society has private property in some form. What **distinguishes** capitalism, as I said, is the fact that in capitalism, if someone else has some things as their property, > [@me](#): > > You can’t use them unless someone else–their owner–gives you permission, and they can deny that permission for the most trivial of reasons That is decidedly **not** how property is defined under all systems with private property. Even in our highly capitalist society, you have WillFarnaby et al. freaking out about taxation, because it comprises a government impinging on absolute private property rights. In a lot of societies, including ours, there are limits placed on private property, and others are allowed to use yours without your permission: easements on property, rights to trespass in an emergency, etc. To the extent that we allow this sort of use of property without permission of the owner, to the extent that we involuntarily transfer property away from the owner in order to help others, we’re already not capitalist. If you’re not following a thread closely, it may be wise not to engage in one-liner corrections of what others say :). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-does-socialism-contravene-freedom/829175.md?page=5)