NationStates Jolt Archive

Excerpts from On Socialism

Before we may truly embark upon a discussion of socialism, we must ask ourselves what it is. Many close-minded nations consistently state that only their version of socialism follows it to the letter, and other nations have no idea what socialism is at all, merely dismissing it as a failed system used by extinct Cold War dinosaurs. But when we really look at it, socialism is a very loose term, simply referring to a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. The term has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammeled workings of the economic market...

Failed policies advocated by Mao Zedong and Josef Stalin are the policies that make the greatest impression upon the capitalist nations. Why? Because it is reassuring to their leaders. It is what allows them to sleep comfortably knowing that they oppress the worker, if only indirectly, every day by espousing a policy of inequality...

Socialism must be made accessible to the world, and drastic re-imaginings of the structure of society will ensure that socialism will never achieve great popularity within capitalist strongholds. We must, instead, adapt the system to fit socialist beliefs...

I propose two systems to make socialism beneficial, each derivatives of the generic 'market socialism' ideology. The first would be to create central planning boards, which, instead of altering prices based on arbitrary decree, would set prices based on supply and demand - a simulation of the free-market mechanism. If there were shortages, prices would be raised; if there were surpluses, prices would be lowered. Raising the prices would encourage businesses to increase production, driven by their desire to increase their profits, and in doing so eliminate the shortage. Lowering the prices would encourage businesses to curtail production in order to prevent losses, which would eliminate the surplus. The government, if both democratically elected and in control of the planning boards, would thus hand the means of production and economic regulation into the hands of the everyday citizen...

The second involves corporations - an integral part of a capitalist economy. As of now, CEOs are frequently chosen by a shadowy and secretive board of directors. But if we were to make CEOs elected by the people, and their salaries and such determined based on how they treat their workers and promote workplace democracy, people would thus also have inordinate control over the means of production. Coupled with a programme of land redistribution to give everyone a share in agriculture, I feel that we could again establish a type of socialism compatible with all...

About the author

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Manmohansingh04052007.jpg/162px-Manmohansingh04052007.jpg

Ajeet Visweswaran is the Chancellor of the Exchequer for British Londinium. He graduated from the Imperial University at Kensington, with degrees in accounting and socialist theory, later receiving an MBA in international relations and a doctorate in finance.

OOC: Please post sales/comments in this thread.

Sales within British Londinium are high, with nearly one million copies bought nationwide within its first day of sales.

While some casual readers note only that Ajeet's work mirrors exactly Graeme Igo's recently published thoughts on market simulation and congratulate him for being just about the only citizen of Londinium to embrace the concept, others are confused by the misuse of terms such as planning boards, the suggestion that democracy can be inordinate and that anything should indeed be so.

The work may be exported to the Commonwealth... depending upon whether or not it is produced in a socialistic environment. More likely, however, it will be published unlicenced by Soviet enterprises and, even so, will be primarily a curiosity attached to some bumper-editions of Igovian literature.

As the Questarian nation and its allies do battle with the New Alliance Treaty Organisation and the forces of Gholgoth, the book is little received in Questers, unlike other socialist literature which is passed around and read with disgust equalling 1984 and Mein Kampf.

"Its quite funny." Literary and economic critic Mark Chamberlain says. "Nations like British Londinium are quick to criticise us for our free market and free trade values. But a look at their history reveals they are the laughing stock of the international community; their socialist and regulatory policies have done nothing but make their nation the victim of various occupiers throughout history."

He writes.

"But compare to ourselves, with our free market, and others like us, such as Praetonia, and dare I say, Scandavian States. We're large, powerful, influential nations with gigantic economies, and our people are all considerably richer than those in British Londinium, and simultaenously considerably free-er and enjoy more liberties. But of course, under Socialism in British Londinium, you're equal, right?

Yeah. Equal to be shot by a Freek or raped by a Panteran."

On Socialism sold very good at Urmania. Allowed by critics and government, 502,389,432 books was sold.
"Socialists had started Urmanian Civil War that killed 2 millions of people, but they got some good ideas. For example, On Socialism is one of my favourite books."-said President Yon Lankin.
"Very good book, I hope it would help our party. We have bad times, you know. Our party has shrinked from 12000 people to 9000 last year."-said Katin Yoslov, Speaker of Socialistic Party of Urmania.
"This book is... Whoa, look! Free burgers!"-random 25-year-old man.