Well, they existed before we called socialism “socialism”, but any that were established as a free community service was still operating under a socialist mindset, no?
Yes, although it might be called a philanthropic mindset.
I think that most people here for example are not socialist (I am an ex leftie for example), but most people here would be pro-library in principle I guess.
I'm pretty sure there would be libraries available which are provided by non socialists. Roads won't disappear either.
People who are not socialist are still generally community minded, they just want choice over how they contribute.
Socialists want to force people to contribute to a system they did not agree to, it doesn't mean that non socialists won't contribute. They will.
That would actually be an interesting thing to study. I wonder what the responses would be if we asked everyone here what they would do if we took all the money away from libraries and had the option to either try again, or do something else with it.
I agree that implementing community-funded ideas doesn’t necessarily make someone a socialist under the definition that it’s used around here.
My view, for instance, is that any service which is necessary for a safe and competitive existence should be established as a publicly-funded safety net. I believe that anyone who wants private-access to a different service should have it, but that people should not fail or die as a result of access to basic services.
To some, that makes me a socialist. But that term is allowed to include Nazis and Communists and North Korea for some people around here, so valuing socialized services can be dismissed as the same Lunacy as Mao’s Great Leap Forward.
You catch a lot of flak round here because you are somewhat more left leaning than most of us, but these are important issues to discuss.
That would actually be an interesting thing to study. I wonder what the responses would be if we asked everyone here what they would do if we took all the money away from libraries and had the option to either try again, or do something else with it.
I think if you did a post on this question you might get some interesting conversation. In my experience, it's hard to get post titles right though. I'm rubbish at it.
I may, but I haven’t made any new posts here yet and have been reluctant to do so. Even though I am permitted to talk here, I try not to give the impression I’m attempting to influence the conversation here, and I don’t want to start one unless I feel like it’s something people really want to discuss with a leftist in their community.
Even though I am permitted to talk here, I try not to give the impression I’m attempting to influence the conversation here
This is fair enough, although I think such a post would be fine because people can choose to ignore it or disagree with you. it's quite an interesting question to me.
If you do make a post, you have to get the title just right to get sensible engagement. That's my experience.
Yes, although it might be called a philanthropic mindset.
I think that most people here for example are not socialist (I am an ex leftie for example), but most people here would be pro-library in principle I guess.
I'm pretty sure there would be libraries available which are provided by non socialists. Roads won't disappear either.
People who are not socialist are still generally community minded, they just want choice over how they contribute.
Socialists want to force people to contribute to a system they did not agree to, it doesn't mean that non socialists won't contribute. They will.
That would actually be an interesting thing to study. I wonder what the responses would be if we asked everyone here what they would do if we took all the money away from libraries and had the option to either try again, or do something else with it.
I agree that implementing community-funded ideas doesn’t necessarily make someone a socialist under the definition that it’s used around here.
My view, for instance, is that any service which is necessary for a safe and competitive existence should be established as a publicly-funded safety net. I believe that anyone who wants private-access to a different service should have it, but that people should not fail or die as a result of access to basic services.
To some, that makes me a socialist. But that term is allowed to include Nazis and Communists and North Korea for some people around here, so valuing socialized services can be dismissed as the same Lunacy as Mao’s Great Leap Forward.
You catch a lot of flak round here because you are somewhat more left leaning than most of us, but these are important issues to discuss.
I think if you did a post on this question you might get some interesting conversation. In my experience, it's hard to get post titles right though. I'm rubbish at it.
I may, but I haven’t made any new posts here yet and have been reluctant to do so. Even though I am permitted to talk here, I try not to give the impression I’m attempting to influence the conversation here, and I don’t want to start one unless I feel like it’s something people really want to discuss with a leftist in their community.
This is fair enough, although I think such a post would be fine because people can choose to ignore it or disagree with you. it's quite an interesting question to me.
If you do make a post, you have to get the title just right to get sensible engagement. That's my experience.