Yes, I mean democratic socialism or social democracy, not totalitarian movements which adopt some socialist elements or label themselves socialist while butchering millions. Of course they don't label themselves totalitarian.
Fred
On Apr 14, 2006, at 4:05 PM, Sam Spade wrote:
What is mainstream socialism? Do you mean Democratic socialism? Or social democracy? Why is that "mainstream"?
Something like "The socialist international opposes racism" would be fine, I can't imagine who would object to that.
My point is that plenty of socialists were racist, and that nazi's are not ruled out from being socialist for racism or opposition to democracy for that matter. Socialism is known for its centrally planned command economy, according to my economics textbook. That is a criteria which all socialists fall under (to my knowledge). It is also material, rather than rhetorical in nature.
SS
On 4/14/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
On the contrary, the [[Socialist International]], which speaks for mainstream socialism, does oppose racism.
Fred
On Apr 14, 2006, at 1:49 PM, Sam Spade wrote:
Trying to add a view that National Socialism was, er, the only real socialism ever implemented seemed rather foolish, and out of place there.
The article needs more references, but I can see it is hard to do this in the overview (havent yet had time to read all the subarticles).
Justinc
Thats a pretty uninsightful interpretation of what was going on. Editors have been trying to insert that claim that socialism opposes racism:
"Socialism rejects the [[racist]] theories and [[totalitarianism]] of the Nazis, while Nazism rejected the policies of [[internationalism]], [[egalitarianism]], [[class struggle]], and common ownership of the [[means of production]] pursued by many socialists.<ref>[[Leon Trotsky|Trotsky]], Leon. ''[http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1930-ger/330610.htm What is National Socialism?]'' June 10 1933</ref>"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Socialism&diff=46506992&oldid=46506617
That is a highly misleading "citation" there. Trotsky doesn't define Socialism any more than Hitler, Mao or Marx does. They all are persons who claimed to be socialists, with wildly divergent views. There is no consensus amongst socialists on these issues, and it is false to claim their is one.
SS
On 4/14/06, Justin Cormack justin@specialbusservice.com wrote:
On 13 Apr 2006, at 23:25, Fred Bauder wrote:
Yes, and when I got to looking at it, some of it was still the old National Socialism is socialism stuff.
Yes that seemed to be the main issue when I looked.
I looked over the Socialism article and it didnt seem too bad, especially as it is an overview article that mainly is referencing other articles, always a hard thing to write well. Trying to add a view that National Socialism was, er, the only real socialism ever implemented seemed rather foolish, and out of place there.
The article needs more references, but I can see it is hard to do this in the overview (havent yet had time to read all the subarticles).
Justinc
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l