Do you believe that globalism & socialism leads to more corruption in our country as well as around the world?

Maybe I`m wrong, but it seems to me that we were less corrupt when we had less socialism & globalism. What do you think?


Oh my Lord, what have I done???

OK, SORRY that most of those who answered did not understand what I meant. By using the word "globalism" I am referring to global trade, global economy & also those who are pushing for global government. With "Socialism" I`m referring to social causes promoted by the government, special interest groups & private organizations; for example the Red Cross is a private organization involved in social issues. Recently I watched a news documentary about Haiti six months after the eathquake. They showed tents, where those whose homes were destroyed by the earthquake were still living. Basically, no homes, roads, hospitals or schools are being built, so what is going on with all the money that has been donated? Is this a case of "socia"l corruption taking place in Haiti?

Update 2:

Rollo: You have made a false assumption about me & the question. In my opinion, there are many who use the poor in order to advance their political ambitions. There are also those who will take what has been given to the poor for themselves. For example, the situation created in many poor countries in which those in power will steal the food, water, medicine, clothes & most other items donated to the poor.

Don`t ever assume that I don`t care about the poor or anyone else. As a Born-Again-Christian, every single human being on this planet & their circumstances are important matters to me.

Have you ever heard this song that has these lyrics;


If it were not for the grace of God I would still be a poor Puerto Rican who at the age of five had to fetch water in big cracker cans from the river, had to fetch wood for cooking, had to tend & milk cows & goats. I could go on & on, but I think you`re getting the picture.

11 Answers

  • JEFF S
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Socialism is full of corruption big government and then all the subjects yes full control over the people no rights because there is no responsibility the government takes care of everything for you isn't that just grand utopia at last. Where there is no God and just man you have big trouble it has been proven all through history. I would rather have the private business approach than the government in full control. I would rather have responsibility for myself than having the government taking care of me. With responsibility comes rights and when you have no responsibilities you have no rights and anyone that thinks that rights comes from being taken care of well I got news for you. Think about it.

  • 1 decade ago

    I think it does lead to more corruption and of course a lot more terrorism.

    In the U.s. we are now also fighting the trend toward a communist side of governing.. we do not need the government or big brother to do everything for us. It seems the younger the generation the less likely they are to want to make any decisions for themselves unless it is how much sex to have, drugs to take and how to party.

    I know that is generalizing and I shouldn't but over all it seems the over 5o crowd worked a hell of a lot harder and cared more about their country than themselves. And just for the record I am not over 50 and unfortunately do fall into the lazy group.

  • Daniel
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    It's a time and social trend, not an economic/political one. Current policies do not start corruption in an individual, but are gauges that one can 'measure'. Our emphasis on handouts are due to our views on responsibility. Our acceptance of abortion is due to our placement of value on human lives. The wars we fight show our need to be absolutely secure, no matter what the cost. This is not just an American thing, but a human thing in general.

    I don't subscribe that communism is inherently immoral, nor is global cooperation. Some associate communism with godlessness due to the Soviets and Chinese. I think this is merely coincidence. Being an economics major, I don't particularly like socialism, but I realize it's an organization issue, not a moral one. Not to say that we can't screw up organizationally.

  • 1 decade ago

    I don`t know about that, but it certainly leads to upsetting military balances that have kept world peace for the past 60 years.

    The new Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty only reduces AMERICAN weapons, while allowing nukes, without any restriction, to be placed on Russian bombers again. Even Jimmy Carter didn`t mess up that much.

    Reducing military balances seems so good, unless it is only one-sided. The West relies on the nuclear umbrella for the maintenance of our security too.

    Obama also has other unique marks in history.

    He is the first leader in history to reduce his own military during a time of war.

    He is the first leader in history to tell the enemies of his military movement plans.

    He is the first leader in history to announce to the enemy when they will "win" through pullouts, even though NATO is actually winning. This is true. Get away from the "Yellow Press" and go to facebook. check "ISAF:NATO Forces in Afghanistan" to get the real news.

    He is the first leader to apologize to potentially hostile and actual hostile people for the sacrifices and efforts of his own army.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    If you mean socialism like National Socialism in vein of Hitler then it would be better not to have it.

    If you mean that there would be problems with just Marxist socialism and not adding environmentalism then you are correct that Marxist socialism should be added to environmentalism.

    Green-Marxism and a revolutionary United Nations utilizing the U.N. Charter while able to act might face problems with corruption but enough force backed with people it could be countered.

    By this I mean to try to counteract corruption to best extent possible.

    Democratic elections preferred but it still appears problem had by corporations by effective political structures based not on money. Still ideas for human survival so should be allowed.

    Source(s): U.N. Charter,Paine.Rights of Ma,n,ideas drrived from paine marxism,environmentalism, plus reading about Rwandan Genocide.
  • Tony Z
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I suggest that you research the logical fallacy "post hoc ergo propter hoc." That is even assuming that there is more corruption after 1933, when many social programs in the USA were instituted.

    Certainly, before 1933 there was a lot of corruption and evil in the world. Do you want me to elaborate?

    "Globalism" is a subjective term with many meanings, depending on whom you ask.

  • Rollo
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I fail to understand what this baseless conjecture rests on.

    With less socialism there were people dying in the streets in abject poverty, often suffering from preventable diseases like dysentery and cholera, and then there was the issue of people being sold into slavery.

    Obviously a less socialist society is one in which there is less corruption, because according to you, poor people do not matter.

    GREED leads to corruption, and that exists within socialist and capitalist societies.

  • V2
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    I would suggest you to read some Mandeville, who was a friend of free market promoter Adam Smith. His poem “"Fable of the Bees” explains why free market, scam and corruption go hand by hand.

    Since when NAFTA is socialist?

  • Nikki
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago


    Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.

    Thomas Jefferson

  • Joan J
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Different time, different situation call for different measures. History belong where it is, in the past learn from it but never repeat it.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.