Socialism is bad for one simple reason: One person or a minority of people decide for the whole country.

This is bad. Socialism cannot work without forcing people to abide by the minorities judgment. This is why I don't like it. People get forced to do things they would not normally do. In order for Socialism to work, the people need to be forced to abide by it.

In America, we are a Republican Democracy. Society drives the government, not the other way around. This could be called socialism with a great problem. The Democracy allows each member(citizen) to voice their opinion to drive the government. But the Republic, bounds the country to the rule of law. This is how our system works in its basic form.

Each citizen is a republic. Each community is thus another level of republic. and the States are a republic, and the Federal government is a republic. Only through the union of lower republics does the community, States, and Feds get their power.

Even though we are a Republic, we are also a Federalist system. The founders combined Socialism, Democracy, Republic, and Federalism into one unique country. Through the Constitution the system is bound together not with force, but through choice.

I am sure you red the Federalist papers, and the history how we go through the Ages, swinging the perpetual pedalium from conservative to liberal and back.

The country was liberal at their founding. They replaced the rule of England with a new country full of promise. As the years went on, through the freedom we have, the country drifted from liberal to conservative and back and forth.

The danger occured when the progressive movement read a book written by Carl Marx. His c*******t manifesto, embodied the extreme socialist, as c*******m. Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler knew that socialism will not work without support. Whereas, the United States works with or without support. That is the difference. Each American has the right to protest any idea they disagree with, and have their chance to persuade the public in dealings with themselves and other nations.

In a socialist state, the people are not the judge, not through the majority. Socialism, like Monarchies, have a very few with ultimate power that can last a lifetime. As far as the Presidency, it only lasts eight years. So the people can change the rules set by the president, and if they see fit, change them in a short period of time, where socialism has proven to fail due to the fact that they resist change.

Socialism has another problem. The other problem is in the quality of life. The wealth of the nation is squandered on the people, making the people dependant on the government. The people should never be dependant on their government because of one simple sin---greed. The lust for power and greed will destroy a socialist country. Evils would be covered up and eventually, Socialism would lead to a dictatorship, incidentally the same way a pure democracy will lead to the same.

Now, removing the need to excel in life, causes the human person to become dependant on the system. If the system fails then those who are dependant on the system also fails. Quality of life deteriorates into oblivion. However, if the people are challenged through their own free will, then the society flourishes in all things.

The failures of Socialism and Democracy comes from people becoming lazy and squandering their wealth. That is why our Republic has safeties in place to persuade the public through freedom to improve their situation.

Looking at Socialism, C*******m, Democracy and Republics, the question must be asked, "Where does the motivation of the people come from? The Government or the people?"

Under that understanding, does the farmer, force his plants to grow? Or does the farmer just give to the plant what the plant needs to grow? The plant decides how to grow, but the farmer restricts the plant in that growth. The farmer is thus acting like the government and the plant acts like society. In a country, the powers to be, have to make a decision. Do we rule from the top down, or the down, up?

If the Government drives the people, the people shall revolt.
If the People drives the Government, the country will flourish.

Freedom through the rule of law(Republic), established by the majority(Democracy), held together by a strong central government(Federalism), shall create an economic system(Capitalism) that will make wealth.

Socialism, C*******m, F*****m, Marxism, all move wealth throughout their country but never generates wealth. Wealth can only be generated if the individual does what is necessary, to provide for their personal prosperity. That prosperity of the single individual joins the prosperity of other individuals and the nation then generates wealth from the powers of the earth. In the other systems, a certain amount of wealth, is then passed to those who do not join in making that wealth. Then the wealth is squandered. Then the wealth runs dry. The lowest of the people first feel the loss of wealth then it goes to the most prosperous and the nation collapses.

C*******m only works if the community is bound by the same belief. The Roman Catholic Church which is separate from the nations practices this with democracy, however it does work because the Catholics are bound by not only the rule of law, and Republican systems, but also they share everything in a common even distribution of wealth. However, greed entered into the system, and that c*******m destroyed the point of the organization and doubt ran like an epidemic and people could not see the difference between dogma, belief, and organization. Not to mention the religion was based on faith, where reason supported that faith.

The American experiment was based on reason where faith supports that reason. Therefore, in a religious sense, c*******m works, but in a reason based system only democratic republics work.

Does this make sense? Because it is only the principles i wrote here. There is also another aspect of this, that is called the human person.