A book titled "Ideas and Opinions" by Albert Einstein, published by Bonanza Books, NY- i think in 1954 contained many of his social, economic and religious ideas. In addition of having a great mind he also had a big mouth and never hesitated to express his thoughts.

In this article he was smart enough to realize the inherent problem of socialism. He posed the question at the end .... and in reality there is no answer to it and there is no solution to the problem: Bureaucracy always kills any system if it is allowed to control. and that is the fatal problem of socialism.

Socially-responsible Capitalism has less fatal problem ... that is "Selfish Greed". not just greed and not just selfishness, it is the two combined. This can be controlled and checked but you cant control Bureaucracy since it is,itself, the controlling authority.

Albert Einstein may have been the smartest man in the 20th century. That doesn't mean that he couldn't make any mistakes.


The biggest problem with socialism, is that it takes away the right for the individual's right to choose what he or she wants to do.


It also takes away charity of the heart. For instance, brad donates a lot of money each year. If he is forced to give more money to the government then he will cut that amount of money that he donates. He may have stop donating. The reason for this is if the government is going to hold a gun to his head and make him help people. Then where is the incentive for him to help people because he cares.

It is like they tell you to leave room between your car and the car in front of you when you are stopped at a traffic light. Why do they say this? It is so you can go around the car in case it breaks down.

I agree you should leave room between the two cars. But that is so if the car in front breaks down and you hit the gas without realizing that the other car has broken down. You will have more time to re stop. But I say instead of going around the car Offer to help them first.

In the 40s he was a socialist, in the 50s he wasn't.  The fact is, intelligence and wisdom aren't the same thing at all.  Some of the brightest people I know are among the biggest fools I know.   On the other hand, I know a lot of people who aren't that bright, but make a lot of great choices in their lives.

 

He was indeed a socialist and that doesn't come as a shock to me.

Many features of socialism are right, true, intelligent, and necessary for society to function.

In the very article you link to, Einstein says

"Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?"

I agree with him. And I don't see how traditional socialists could have solved that problem or how current socialists and liberals SEE that problem and WANT to solve it.

He is right about a planned economy having the potential to be more efficient than a market economy. Nobody doubts that, not if they think about it for a moment. The problem with socialism is how to get there. It seems impossible and that is now clear whereas in the 1940s it was only apparent to either those who rejected socialism for no good reason (to them anything bad about socialism was "apparent") and to smart people like Einstein.

It is good that both Einstein and the first group were influential in the US in the 1940s. That way the US not only beat the fascists but also the communists.

Also note that "socialist" then and now mean two different things. In Einstein's days a "socialist" did not call himself a "liberal" and did not shout anti-Semitic slogans. In Einstein's days "socialism" was an alternative that was needed, not a palaeo-conservative attempt to revive fascism under a different name.

My parents are social democrats, but they are not "liberals" in the American sense or European mainstream.

Big differences...

If forced socialism does not work in China. It will not work any where. The reason I say this is because Chinese society is based on socialism, family socialism. Capitalism does not work very well either because it is everyone out for themselves.

If you could have socialism that isn't forced that may work. In the USA right now we are also using forced socialism in some of our government programs. Such as welfare, Medicare, disability help. I do not include social security or Medicaid since everyone who works pays into these two things. I also believe that these two programs could be saved by taking the money and investing it in non-voting stock of the fortune 500 club. The reason I say these companies is that the chances of them failing completely is next to non.

Yes I am on disability pay right now. That doesn't mean it is a good program.

Would you trust him to fix your car?

That explains the hair.  

The difference between a super genius and a mental dwarf is about the much.(finger and thumb being held together.)





No. But I would trust him to design one.

TA

In this article he was smart enough to realize the inherent problem of socialism. He posed the question at the end .... and in reality there is no answer to it and there is no solution to the problem: Bureaucracy always kills any system if it is allowed to control. and that is the fatal problem of socialism.

This is true, I do believe. However I believe that the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater. While there are definite problems with the structure of many socialist systems, I believe that the concept is sound and requires further refinement. One of the key sticking points that many conservatives always come back to is the concept of personal responsibility and how it is washed asunder by the tide of socialism. I don't think that necessarily has to be the case with socialism, and that a system comprised of personal AND social responsibility is the best way to go!

Dr Guy

Would you trust him to fix your car?

Yes I would. I would also ask him if it would be feasible to have a flux capacitor installed. Once this was done I would then go back in time and twist Milton Friedman's young mind toward socialism, muah ha ha ha ha!!!

 

Isaac Newton was an alchemist.

Does that mean we should be trying to turn lead into gold because he thought it was possible?

In the future you will have already done this. And your plan will have backfired, which was what swung him so far away from socialism. Thanks!!   

Interesting you bring up Newton- he also spent a good part of the latter half of his life trying to find a mathematical framework or code behind biblical scriptures. Not that ridiculous "bible code" that's been hawked about predicting meaningless little bumps of history, but he was actually looking for mathematical equations behind the writings.... but we don't hear much about that these days....



You're right in this regard. Just because someone has accomplished something spectacular doesn't mean that they are right in every thing they do, say and think. I just find it interesting that someone who was arguably one of the most popular contributors to modern science held these views. In my opinion it's an excellent article regardless of the author... but here's the question.... if you didn't know that it was written by Einstein, would you still have read it? Would you still have given it the same consideration? Normally an article espousing socialism on JU is pounced on pretty quickly but everyone has been playing nice in this thread.... kinda disapointing actually

Actually they can do this. I saw them do it on a college science show. Or at least they made the lead look like gold.

  



That is exactly it, and a good summation. Reading it all, I am glad you put that statement in there - in the comments so others could read and think about it, and in the end, he is just another man with opinions, but a very highly regarded one. And that is why we listen. Not agree, but listen.

Slap a little paint on there, and presto!


The point about any economic system is that they all work perfectly well in theory, but people not contributing messes them all up. And nobody can seem to find a happy medium where you help those who can't work without helping those who can work but don't. Because people are crafty, and shifty, and dishonest, and that kills ANY system. So pick the one that encourages people to work, encourages people to be honest.