Would you consider me a socialist?

I'm not really sure if I should properly be classified as a socialist or not and I was hoping that I could get some input from actual socialists.

One one hand, I think democratic socialism could potentially be the best form of government and I think that should be the ultimate goal of society. On the other hand, I think regulated capitalism is the best way to go until government can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is competent, transparent, and accountable to the people. If tomorrow the United States decided that it was going to nationalize all American businesses, I have no doubt that it would be a disaster. The US government doesn't even come close to being competent or accountable enough to consistently run the big corporations competently.

I think we should work on building a government based on science, democracy, and open debate. If we do that, I believe socialism will eventually arise if it is truly the best form of government as I think it is. After government starts proving itself competent in its daily tasks, the government should begin to create and run new businesses. If those businesses are ran well and are competitive with private enterprise, the state should create more businesses, begin to nationalize some business sectors, and evolve more towards state capitalism. Eventually, it should move towards complete socialism.

Basically, I'm saying that I think it would be best to take a methodical scientific approach instead of just diving into something without testing the waters. I think socialism is very likely to be the best system, but I admit that I could wrong. Also, I only think socialism is viable under a government that is accountable and competent. I don't see how socialism under an unaccountable corrupt oligarchy can possibly result in anything other than a disaster.

I'm not sure if this counts as Fabian socialism or not. From my understanding, the Fabian approach is to gradually move towards socialism inch by inch because the establishment won 't let it happen all at once. I favor a gradualist approach too, but not just as a tactic to get it implemented, but to ensure we get it right and don't dig ourselves into giant hole.

You're a socialist, just not of the Marxist variety.

Id say a socialist in the modern european vein.

You're a socialist. Not a leninist or a marxist but a socialist none-the-less.

I'd say that you're a socialist, or at least a social democrat, which to me is about the same thing, as far as government is concerned. I only thing I noticed about your opening post which I wanted to mention is that you seem to think that a socialist economy necessarily involves the state owning, and operating, industry. This is not so though. First of all there is libertarian socialism which does not include a government at all. And in democratic socialism there would be worker's self management , so the government wouldn't actually be directly controling the economy. I myself regard socialism as being an economic system more so than a political ideology. Which is why, if and when strangers ask me my ideological beliefs, I tell them that it's social democracy + economic democracy , which to me = democractic socialism.

I personally feel that I more closely resemble a social democrat than socialist because I don't want socialism right now. Just to clarify, I think regulated capitalism is superior to socialism in the absence of a highly accountable and competent government. I also don't think that type of government has existed on earth yet. These are some of the features I'd want in any government before I'd want it to tackle socialism.

• A voting system in which spoilers are minimized.
• Elections with no campaigning. Candidates for office would have to make their case to the public online and in publicly televised debates.
• Easy access to the internet and educational resources for every citizen.
• Open extensive debate. There should be an official central website that would host forums from which candidates for office, members of parliament, and political action committees could debate.
• An elected press that would have the power to conduct mandatory interviews with government officials and candidates for offices.
• Very high transparency. Government should have to account for every penny that it spends and bills should be available online as they are being drafted. We should also be able to see who amended what part.
• A partial meritocracy. Experts should elect experts in certain areas. This would primarily be for research, drafting educational requirements, and advising the elected officials.