[ronimacarroni]

Well it seems that the written word doesn't hold as much power as it used to.
And with good reason. Socialist experiments in the past have made a turn for the worst.
There are new ideas such as libertarian socialism, but they can not be explained away.
What we need is to lead by example.
The same way the paris commune served as an example for the socialist movement, socialist town would serve as an example for the 21st century.
There's also more resources and solidarity to socialists in the form of loans.
The see ideas such as libertarian socialism becoming popular is by having a place which can serve as an example.
So I propose we start socialist town.
This town will composed exclusively out of workers cooperatives and/or communes.
For the US we could pick a place with low property taxes such as North Carolina/Tennessee
Let's start an American/European kibbutz

[Julian]

Surely this is for the libertarian or anarchist thread.

Socialism is social~ism is not kibbutz~ism or town~ism.

Why not start with a commitment by all people to pay 1% of their income to the very poorest people of the world. thats leading by example. and if you can afford a property in North Carolina you can afford a small contribution.

[Eauz]

Why not start with a commitment by all people to pay 1% of their income to the very poorest people of the world. thats leading by example. and if you can afford a property in North Carolina you can afford a small contribution.

Socialists (at least those I have read) do not support the idea of just giving money to poor people. The goal is to claim ownership over the means of production, empowering people to take control of their lives and develop themselves individually, which benefits the collective as well. It's somewhat like the concept of pull yourself up by your bootstraps, linked to socialism. For the most part, giving money to poor people has been a conservative/liberal concept, in order to appease the masses.

The concept of a socialist town is interesting and might be quite useful, however, the fact remains that this town continues to exist within a capitalist environment. They will still be dependent upon purchasing goods and services from the free market and would have significant attacks from media outlets (see Occupy Wall Street) to make it out to be an irrational idea. The town would need to actually be purchased from private property and would still end up paying taxes upon that property. It might be better if organized groups, such as Occupy Wall Street had a strong influence in the society and had the ability to counter-attack the media hatred and propaganda against the group. Such a group should also have donation outlets and social programs (Egypts Muslim Brotherhood for example) that people can support, if they don't have time to actually occupy or spend time in the streets.

[Julian]

there are plenty of socialists who support charitable giving especially to developing countries

Marx did not support Charity but I'm not a Marxist so its not a problem for me to say that its a very good idea in a world which is deeply divided.

the problem with Socialist Town is not that its under seige from Capitalism. North Carolina clearly isn't Russia in 1920. the problem with socialist town is that it appears to be a club for pooling wealth rather than a genuine attempt to solve the worlds most pressing inequalities

its not in itself a bad idea - I may have been too negative - its just that there is a trend on this forum for suggestions of that type. lets have socialism but just from the grassroots. lets have socialism where everyone can do as they wish. lets have a socialism based on the America dream

I think we need some good ideas for promoting social solidarity.

[ronimacarroni]

Now that I think about it Virginia would be the best state as two of the most well known communes are in there
acorn and twin oaks.
We could probably start a furniture coop and base the commune around that or something else.
edit:On second thought screw that. Its too much work...

[Husky]

there are plenty of socialists who support charitable giving especially to developing countries

What kind of definition for a socialist are you using? A 'I feel bad for the poor' kinda person, or a 'freedom from bourgeoisie rule' revolutionary?

The former, at least in my knowledge, is not socialism, although perhaps the sentiment would be shared by actual socialists.

[Julian]

I think this sounds kinda pedantic so apologies in advance - but I didn't say that giving to the poor was the best or only way to achieve socialism

I merely questioned whether socialist town benefited the world's poor and asked whether giving to the poor rather than invest in a co-operative would not be better.

Giving to the poor and setting up co-ops are both generally good things that well off people can do with their money. Neither are reactionary and neither are only done to appease the poor.

However organising production in accordance with a plan and making long term provision for the welfare of all are both essential to socialism.