Hmm, how very Marxist of you. Obviously, your "challenge" is to attempt to redefine socialism into something uniquely your own, without admitting it is merely a corrupted parroting of classic communistic theology.  You are a fake (and not a very good one).

The challenge of socialism involves coaxing individual consciousness to conform to a Hegelian dialectic. Once sufficiently mesmerized, the lost soul becomes more susceptible to manipulation by their power-hungry leaders.

More projection, Fred, filled with generalizations and the tiresome repetition of your incoherent motto...  You can say it a thousand times, and it will still make no more sense.  Why do you keep harping on it?

Collectivism and group-think demand uniformity of thought lest the mob stone the independent thinker for heresy.  A culture of monolithic coercion is despicable no matter how noble the claims of its followers.

Mike, you are absolutely right that "it is an astute in the obvious observation that socialists can NOT grasp, truth, facts, economics etc." 

It is a simple matter of self-preservation — the truth is their death knell.  Like gamblers losing a rigged game, facing the truth means admitting they've been conned.  They keep doubling down, and once completely lost, curse the world and bring everyone down with them.  "Burn it all down!" becomes their death song. 

Hypocrisy is their creed and denial their practice.  Hate is love, slavery is freedom, war is peace, debt is money, honesty is violence, lies are truth, sex is a construct, crime is justice, responsibility is bondage, victimhood is currency, blame is influence, and death is liberty.  There is no greater example of evil  incarnate.  Their lust for power is insatiable, their gratitude non-existent, their envy self-evident to all but themselves.  Their fruits will be their destruction.

Good Lord, I will not let them drag the rest of us down into their pit, not if I can help it.

Holy cow, you are losing it, man.  Please, pull yourself together.  Good for you to resist the "jab" — so did I. 

As for not letting you finish your post, LOL, that's on you, no one can click the 'Save' button but you...  I can't imagine what it is like to be in your head-space, but I am beginning to get the picture,  Good luck with all that!

Fred, you project your ignorance.  I have no idea what you wear, the color of your skin, or the length of your hair, so how can you presume I am judging you by those characteristics?  I am responding solely to your own words, nothing else.  

Your statements are filled with assumptions that fail to address the counterarguments to your own claims, especially regarding 'socialism'. Your views seem to be a blend of fascistic and communistic group-think, interspersed with utopian ideals that would be more appropriately left for individuals to decide, rather than being dictated by what you call your 'social abilities'.

As a home-schooling parent, I can say that you obviously aren't speaking from any real experience but merely parroting the party line of the public school unions which have turned schools into a labor racket.

Children are ALWAYS learning, in school and out.  The key is to provide the examples you wish your children to emulate.  The best teachers are facilitators to the inquiring minds of their students, reminding them that they can accomplish anything if they put their minds to it.

Indeed civics and the structure and intent of republican government are crucial subjects for Americans, otherwise they can become unwitting slaves to de facto rule.  Public schooling too often has become a one-size fits all approach, promoting obedience to 'authorities' and 'experts' rather than the responsibilities of self-sufficiency, self-determinism, and their natural born rights that are never subject to a vote or can be legislated away.

True empowerment is founded upon the rights and responsibilities of man.  In contrast, entitlement arises from ignorance, dependency, and a distorted sense of fairness, where the government acts as an all-powerful entity, manipulating outcomes to benefit those who use mass influence to strengthen and enrich their positions of authority, constantly contended for by those craving power.

Frankly, I've had enough of socialism in schools, nor do I want "to create more coordinated strategic mental processing capabilities."  That is absolutely fascistic to its core — Hitler and Stalin would be proud.  Fred, do you have any self-awareness what-so-ever?

I lead no one other than myself.  I have no desire to lead you or anyone.  I am happy to walk with you if we are going in the same direction, but I will not blindly follow you simply because it is "your turn." 

Collectivists love to follow and to lead.  Individualists love to blaze their own trails, to go where no one has gone before.

If you are an educator, who are your students?  I doubt you have ANY.  Sincerely, you express nothing but platitudes, praise yourself constantly, display not an inkling of self-awareness, and demonstrate your lack of knowledge of political science, philosophy, and religion ad nauseum.  Delusions of grandeur, narcissism, egotism, and ignorance are your greatest claims to fame.  Seems like a typical progressive to me, yet you consider yourself its lone voice of sanity.  LOL!  I laugh out loud!

My heart goes out to you, though, as you must be a very lonely person who has alienated himself from even those that share your utopian ideals.  If only you would listen to actual voices of sanity that even bother to engage with you...  It's sad really.

For such an expert on socialism you sure seem to be anti-social.  As far as I can tell, your "social abilities" are non-existent.  No wonder 'socialism is a challenge' for you.

"I am the sole support for tolerance," says Fred.  Messianic complex much?

Not if I have anything to say about it.  What a crock of nonsense.

-Sigh- Fred, your incessant parroting of your tired motto makes it no less fraudulent.  It is not even logically or grammatically correct.  Socialism is not a "challenge", it is a political ideology.  There is no such thing as a "social ability."  Where is "freedom" in a socialist country?  Can you criticize 'authorities' or refuse government mandates?  What rights are inviolate with a socialist government?  What is not subject to vote?  Socialism imposes many obligations upon the people that they have no power to resist.  This is not freedom but a form of authoritarianism.

A republican form of government founded upon the inalienable rights of the people is the only protection of freedom. 

The challenge of socialism is to lay claim to that which belongs to the people individually and in concert without resistance.  The primary tool for such a 'revolution' is to twist truth into error and lies into gospel, the questioning of which is heresy — a statist theocracy indeed.  (Thanks, Mike!)

The primary skill I endeavored to teach my children was to always be truthful in thought, word, and deed — to seek the truth, whatever it may be.  A truth seeker must inevitably be a truth teller, not the least of which is being honest with oneself.  How do we discern what is true or not?  And how can that be instilled within us and others?  Contemplating this earnestly is indeed learning how to think.

Of course since the truth can cut like a knife and destroy illusory worlds, it should be tempered with Love and compassion.  Follow those principles, and you will find yourself on the road of Liberation.  The truth shall set you free!  ;-)

Another completely arbitrary theory to be imposed on the people because some arrogant 'expert' deems it so.  This is just another prime example of authoritarian rule that could not be enforced but by threat. 

This is exactly the kind of narcissistic and arrogant rhetoric I have been talking about, Fred, in which you daily spout.

Hear, hear, Mike!

As I recall, Reston, you grew up with welfare and social assistance, public education and credit that with your success in life.  But under a system of regulation for having children, your parents would not have met the requirements, so they would have remained childless, and you would not have been born.

And depending on what political ideology is in vogue, the requirements for parenting might also include tests of political allegiance.  Those with the wrong ideals would be refused while those that would support the party would be approved.  This is how it works in communist Cuba, Reston.  And poverty has not been reduced one iota.

If only we could have a benevolent, omniscient dictator or council that could regulate all the people, then all our problems would be solved... 

Good grief, this is how Hitler, Stalin, and Mao came to power.  Too many people?  Murder them!  Who to kill?  Those that won't agree with us.  Such hubris among the eugenicists is how we have gotten to this point. 

Because humans are not animals, Waffler!  The herds themselves in nature require no regulation.  Sheesh.

Understood.  But the ends do not justify the means or guarantee the outcome. 

The government is nothing but an extension of "the neighbors."  If the neighbors can't do it, neither can the government.  There are plenty of laws on the books to protect children from abuse but can only be applied after the fact. 

Our laws are to address grievances, not compel behavior.  That is the way a free society works, for good or ill.  Each of us is responsible for our actions.  Had the abuse been known to the neighbors, they should have addressed it. 

My condolences for your brother and to all who have suffered such abuse.  Child abuse is a big problem, and there are no easy solutions.  Giving power to the state to require permission to have children would only lead to even more authoritarian controls.  Once such a precedent is set, there would be no turning back...

Once again, Fred, you are speaking through both sides of your mouth.  Whatever you attribute to socialism is in fact, not socialism.  You are hijacking the term to define your own utopian vision. 

Since you claim to be the only person who knows what socialism is, why not use your own word to describe what you are talking about?  Socialism isn't any of the things you claim over and over with your tired motto only changing the last part of it each time.  

Your philosophy borrows from Judeo-Christian and Marxist tenets while claiming to be socialism.  To my mind it is a denial of Nature's God and the individual's natural born right to self-determinism within the limits of Natural Law:  As you sow, so shall you reap.

I respect your for aim for the highest achievement of humankind, but your expressed method to those ends too often resembles those of fascists and communists throughout history.  Your utopian dreams require the rest of us to abandon our own dreams, and thus can never be realized without force.

Thank you, Fred.  That clarifies some things, but I am still a bit confused.

What is a "social individual"?  What's the difference between an individual and a social individual?

Since the nation/society is made up of individuals, how can a "nation" value anything?  How could a nation "set limits"?  And what are "revolutionary insights"?

Fred, I am still waiting on the answer to my questions above.