lol. it is political-science jargon.
No it's not
jar·gon1
Dictionary result for jargon
/ˈjärɡən/
noun
- special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand.
Socialism is not a word specific to any profession or group
Law has its own jargon as does engineering, computer science etc which consist of terms that people outside those fields are not familiar with.
Yes, it is. They teach that in political science.
Funny I never tool Poli Sci and I doubt you ever did.
We studied socialism in history class
The pilgrims practiced socialism.
More like communism.
As I see it communism can work on a small scale
Libertarian-ism cam also work on a small scale
Republics such as ours can work on a much larger scale
Socialism (the real definition not yours) can indeed be implemented on a large scale but the result is an immovable bureaucracy that grinds the people under the boot heels of big government and if you thin there won't be an ultra elite population under socialism you are wrong
I’d like to throw a hat into the ring for your consideration, also for a national holiday. A very old hat. That of Governor William Bradford of the Plymouth Plantation. It was under this seer that the early Americans went from a flirtation with socialism, to the economic system that made this country the engine of world power that it became. Read the story below, and let’s add Bradford to our blessings:
As Governor Bradford explained in his old English (though with the spelling modernized):
“For the young men that were able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children, without recompense. The strong, or men of parts, had no more division of food, clothes, etc. then he that was weak and not able to do a quarter the other could; this was thought injustice. The aged and graver men to be ranked and equalized in labor, and food, clothes, etc. with the meaner and younger sort, thought it some indignant and disrespect unto them. And for men’s wives to be commanded to do service for other men, as dressing their meat, washing their clothes, etc. they deemed it a kind of slavery, neither could man husbands brook it."
Because of the disincentives and resentments that spread among the population, crops were sparse and the rationed equal shares from the collective harvest were not enough to ward off starvation and death. Two years of communism in practice had left alive only a fraction of the original number of the Plymouth colonists.
Realizing that another season like those that had just passed would mean the extinction of the entire community, the elders of the colony decided to try something radically different: the introduction of private property rights and the right of the individual families to keep the fruits of their own labor.
As Governor Bradford put it:
“And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number for that end. . . .This had a very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted then otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little-ones with them to set corn, which before would a ledge weakness, and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.”
The Plymouth Colony experienced a great bounty of food. Private ownership meant that there was now a close link between work and reward. "
Research | AIER
