How is socialism fundamentally different from the economic philosophy promoted by Adam Smith ?

2 answers:

7 0

Socialism is a evil scheme for the government to get what they want from the citizens without their conscent and most country’s that went socolist in the past killed millions of their own people and hundreads and thousands died to starvation and that country ended up being the worst on earth like CUBA North Korea China USSR Germany in the early mid 1900s and Canada

RoseWind [281]3 years ago

7 0

Answer: the difference is a concept of human nature. Adam Smith´s philosophy is based on assumption of competitiveness. People are competitive, they comptete, there is a rivalry between them. All that presupposes individualism, autonomy, initiative, free spirit. Socialism lacks that. Socialism constitutes another sort of onesidedness: its point of departure is that people are good, like to collaborate and share. That is why socialism wants to eliminate all inequalities (that is why it was and perhaps still is attractive).

Explanation: of course things are much more complex. Adam Smith is a man of 18th century, socialism is a concept that was here and there everywhere and all the time with us, but never totally realized. Nevertheless ideas (even those that seem to be the most beautiful) should be always tested in reality.

You might be interested in

Which of the following was a method of negotiation developed by President Eisenhower's Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles?

NNADVOKAT [17]

Brinkmanship was a method of negotiation developed by President Eisenhower's Secretary of State John Foster Dulles.

6 0

2 years ago

Why was the freedmen's bureau established

In-s [12.5K]

It was created to take charge of education activities. Whether it were to freedmen or refugees. These issues were under things such as clothes and medication. This was also good for african americans because they had rights they were denied when slaves. Such as social service , violence and justice, labor and contracts, and family services.

3 0

2 years ago

HELPP WILL GIVE BRAINLIEZT!!!!!

Maksim231197 [3]

Answer

The Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire, also known as the Conquest of Mexico (1519–21),[6] was one of the primary events in the Spanish colonization of the Americas. There are multiple 16th-century narratives of the events by Spanish conquerors, their indigenous allies, and the defeated Aztecs. It was not solely a contest between a small contingent of Spaniards defeating the Aztec Empire but rather the creation of a coalition of Spanish invaders with tributaries to the Aztecs, and most especially the Aztecs' indigenous enemies and rivals. They combined forces to defeat the Mexica of Tenochtitlan over a two-year period. For the Spanish, the expedition to Mexico was part of a project of Spanish colonization of the New World after twenty-five years of permanent Spanish settlement and further exploration in the Caribbean.

it is the correct ans hope it

helps

5 0

2 years ago

True or False<br> The Ancient Greeks never went to war without putting on their helmets.

Licemer1 [7]

Its true that they never went to war without putting their helmets on

3 0

3 years ago

Who most likely wrote the accounts of the interaction between Cortes and Moctezuma?

Jobisdone [24]

Answer: La Malinche a Nahua woman from the Mexican Gulf Coast, who played a key role in the Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire,

Explanation:

A nuhacting as an interpreter, advisor, and intermediary for the Spanish conquistador

7 0

2 years ago