Is Kofi Annan a socialist?
337118
Kofi Annan is a dweeb.\n\nThe United Nations holds virtually no power or authority, and frankly, they don't really support the USA on any issues (look up the US voting record in the UN, and look up the UN's final decision).  Yet America supplies most of their funding and stuff.\n\nThe concept is good, but the results have been poor, from a US perspective.
847791
Ok my theory on this is two things:\n1. Lack of education on the true meaning of both.\n2. A purpose-full intent to redefine communism as socialism because a lot of liberals are called socialist.
338760
Absolutely nothing. Socialism theoritically sounds great. In practice, no one is so altruistic to believe in socialism. In fact socialism has caused severe damage to people than Capitalism. At least in capitalism the best make it somewhere on the top or just above the middle or at least above poverty level. Socialism in the long run creates poverty, no jobs, spoilt education, lopsided views and revolutionary ideas that might lead to terrorist activities. Socialism must be shunned like communalism and terrorism. It has been proved to be a failure and I do not know why there is so much of talk about it. If socialism has to succeed, we need humans like Gods. By the way, have you heard of Dachas?? They were part of a socialistic government and leaders of politburo used it. So much for socialism.
663976
ugh, i just answered this to find you removed it, here I go again.\n\nActually the word 'socialist' better describes todays 'democrats'.  People can still have liberal ideals without having them freakishly to the left of reality.\n\nLiberals are basically the ones who think a world wide utopia is possible if they 'live and let live'.  They are unable to mentally comprehend the fact that there are others in this world who do not tolerate views different than theirs.  Liberals, for some reason, are hypocritical in most of their thinking.  For instance, since they don't like George W. Bush, they think that a man who gassed to death over 30 thousand of his countries innocent people should be left in power, and defend the lives of people on death row, who were convicted of the most heinous crimes known to man.  Yet liberals for some reason think it is OK for a mother to kill a child.  \n\nLiberals also say it is wrong to discriminate by race/ religion (as do conservatives), but then the liberals turn around and make laws that give benifits to some, and not all, such as 'affirmative action'.  If that is not hypocrocy, what is?\n\nBasically Socialists, Liberals, Democrats, all stand for the same things.  They want to take businesses away from the ones who built them, and give them to the government to run, and give out free stuff to everyone.  What they fail to realize is that over time, the few who are working to support everyone else, will get tired of doing all the work, and the work will gradually decline, thus leading less to distribute.  Eventually we will be sitting in bread lines, waiting for our government rations, because it doesn't matter how hard you work, you will get the same amount of bread as the lazy democrat in line next to you.
916604
Communism, capitalism, and socialism are primarily economic systems.  There are a variety of political philosophies and systems that interface with any of these.  Added to that is the fact that many nations have economic and political systems that blend aspects of these various systems.\n\nKim Jong Il might use the mantle of communism, but North Korea is far from being a communist or socialist state.  Most of its population lives in poverty.  Famine is a constant threat for them.  There is no equal distribution of goods.  Kim Jong Il is a dictator, as was Stalin.  Their regimes were about centralized power and nothing about socialism or communism.
315709
Marx wasnt a conservative, communism is extreme liberalism\n\n\nand yes it is
1015851
If Jesus were here today he would be a democratic socialist.
630454
Totalitarian.  Communists and socialists are totalitarian.
1183511
Someone who believes in the communist ideology.
1046966
Please!  We all know the definition of Communism in its true since, but China, Cuba an others are still considered Communist countries.  America is a Capitalist/Socialist country as well given that we supply benefits to the elderly and many, many, many other services.\n\nRepublicans like to label Socialism as horrible as if it were a third world country democracy.  Socialism does what a government is suppose to do and that is Protect freedom, and offer services to its people.  Does this not sound like America!!!  Most Socialist countries might pay higher taxes, but there citizens dont pay for health care, retirement and many others we pay a fortune for.  Many citizens in socialist countrys live better lives than we do in America.
1180048
Remember, George Orwell was a Socialist, but hated Communism.  The animals were represenative of his feeling toward governments.  Also, the other person who answered had a good point.  Do your own homework.  That's a great book
533577
denmark is one, sweden norway and finland are probably socialist too.\n\nedit: the guy below me is wrong, Denmark is socialist. I mean, he spelled korea wrong. come on dude, I live here. I would know.
191302
If the liberals have their way Socialism. Hello Chavez
176814
If you believe that "communism is as communism does," and you use those shoddy tyrannies as the only possible socialist models, than the answer is no. On the other hand, if you consider the basic proposals of communism (actually socialism), then it gets more interesting. \n\nFirst let's get rid of the sillyness that equates socialism with tyranny. That's a little like saying that because Pinochet was dictatorial and pro-capitalist, then capitalism is dictatorial. And even though it's true that the democratic socialist movements were invariably short-lived, it's also true that their lives were most often cut short by their opponents - e.g., from Allende to Pinochet,  from Arbenz to a succesion of military dictators, etc. In short, there is nothing in socialist theory that prohibits democracy - in fact, many of its proponents have made the case that democracy is necessary in order to have the deliberation necessary to create a productive society. And capitalism, the real opposition to socialism, has done very well under a plethora of dictatorial forms, thank you very much.  \n\nThat being said, I do agree with the writer who implies that perhaps our species is not ready to deliberate on its own economic future. As a whole, we may not be intellectually or ethically equipped to get much past our present dismal state of quasi-anarchy. There's the "rub." Just as the population of the Soviet Union was told, "don't worry about the economy ... the party will look after it," capitalist regimes say, "don't worry about the economy, the 'invisible hand' and the captains of industry will look after it."
92917
There is not, nor has there ever been, a purely socialist state.
1104455
crap! i learnt that this year. i forgot about the first question. but i do know that there are socialist democracies. those scandanavian countries and there are some in europe. socialist democracies are basically where they have freedom unlike in the USSR but the government will do things for the people like give free health care, free education, stuff like that. \nhope i answered ur question
404729
Because  socialism is like a campaign slogan so that the populist governments and nationalists of Latin America can convince to the masses and their governments of which Capitalism is not beneficial and is necessary to eliminate it in its countries and thus to be united in a block of "integration". This will future see but real with the victory of the nationalistic party in Peru and the extension of the Mercosur.