sc94597 said:
As a libertarian, I wholeheartingly say, yes it is. Is there a free market in national defense? No. Is national defense paid for with taxation by a government? Yes. Is it socialist, then? Yes. In fact, national defense is the most (and first) socialist market found in the United States. The political landscape before the mid 1800's was opposed to a national, standing, socialist, military, and was for voluntary, free-choice, militias. |
That doesn't work for me. I understand the defence of the US population from foreign invaders could be seen as socialist or protecting society but then the military can also be used in aggressive ways that can de-stabilise the world and actually be a cause of damage to that society. Also those who fight in the military you could say are potentially sacrificed so not good for their place in society (i.e. dead).
Also the military command structure is about very powerful people at the top and bullet fodder at the bottom not really designed around socialist principles of shared responsibility or common ownership etc. Not that I would ever suggest that you could have a military force managed by socialist principles.
There is this comment on the wiki page;
This article is about socialism as an economic system and political philosophy. For socialism specifically defined as a stage of development in Marxist theory, see Socialism (Marxism). For the concept where the state promotes the social and economic well-being of its citizens sometimes mistaken with socialism, see Welfare state.
As a british person my views are everyone should be entitled to equal health care, education, justice and other essential services as the ideal. However I believe totally in capitalism and that people who work hard, are inventive, highly skilled, enterprising etc should be rewarded. The only exclusions clearly are violent criminals who by their actions become in my view sub-human and obviously should not have many of the same rights. Their freedoms should be severely limited too.
