I’m going to have to ask this again it seems. Where has 100% socialism worked for longer than 10 years for a country?
I think socialism is a great idea, but it doesn’t work for anything larger than a small commune and you have to have a common purpose. The greeds are going to take over and become authoritarian pretty quickly if you try it for a country. That’s why socialist democrat seems to be the way to meet everyone’s needs. Bernie style.
You could lazily ask that question or you can actually read about how anarchist and communist societies are formed and destroyed (hint: often by outside armies when theyve only just begun). Capitalism clearly doesn’t work for anyone but the rich & powerful, so we need to try something different. No one has The One True Answer, we have to build the new world starting from where we are.
I agree that social democracy would be a big improvement over the terribly cruel form of capitalism we have today. I would make further changes than just that, but we can choose not to fight each other at least until we get that far. Organize together instead of infighting.
I’m going to have to ask this again it seems. Where has 100% socialism worked for longer than 10 years for a country?
it’s confounded by the US, a powerful state, being deeply ideologically opposed to socialism. Maybe shit would have worked without the US sabotaging it
If a system cannot defend itself from the influence of foreign interest, it can’t function on the world stage. That’s like saying a motor design would work without friction or thermodynamics sabotaging it. It implies there are still problems that need to be ironed out before the system is rolled out.
I don’t know if any political system would stand up to a concerted effort to sabotage it. If socialism was the dominant paradigm and some small country tried to do capitalism, it very well might have been sabotaged. It wouldn’t follow to say capitalism can’t work after shooting all the leaders and buying all their media
The thing about capitalism is that it excels at concentrating power into relatively few hands, which makes it much easier to direct resources for specific goals.
But that’s not really the point. The point is that the conditions of the world are what they are. If your system requires the conditions to be otherwise in order to succeed, you either need to secure those conditions first or abandon the system.
As we saw with the USSR, the opposition from the US helped turn it into a corrupt oligarchy. The efforts to secure a strong socialist state just made their resources easier to divvy up.
That’s not to say I disapprove of socialism and endorse capitalism. But we cannot ignore the material conditions in the world. Any improvement needs to take them into consideration, and have the ability to deal with them.
Aye. If we could get a global leadership to fix tax havens and regulate for sustainable praxis we’ll get closer to the fully automated gay socialist space communism we all would enjoy.
That’s socialism. It should be noted socialism is a very broad spectrum of ideologies, and they primarily fail at being implemented in the first place, not at being maintained.
Liberalism is difficult to implement as it requires the powers that be to relinquish some power to capitalists and the middle class, however when both those groups started holding significant economic power liberalism could succeed in many parts of the world.
Socialism is harder to achieve as there are no large economic powers that gain from it. Greedy corps, governments, and individuals all oppose its implementation and therefore it’s difficult. There’s also the issue of organizing everyone and all that.
So no, you don’t seem to quite understand. Socialism doesn’t fail, nor is always organized into communes, and “socialist democrats” describe socialists.
Things need to change and sitting on our hands and saying that changing the system in any way won’t work is extremely counter productive.
Also, it has become clear that capitalism can’t maintain democracies for all that long. It’s not a stable system. The few accrue wealth and property and create oligopolies which destabilize the systems we depend on, leading to the slow decline of social and liberal democracies worldwide. Capitalism needs to go.
Edit: Basically what I’m saying is that you don’t know the definitions of the words you are using. “Communist states” are largely not communist. They are often state capitalist or some degree of a planned economy. The workers don’t own squat. Most socialists I know don’t argue in favor of anything similar to china or the soviet union, but actual democratic socialist states. While many want revolutions we also generally work towards reforms and unionizing since a revolution requires some popular support.
All positive aspects of liberal states are socialist policies implemented by socialist politicians or forced through by unions. Usually unions. I therefore personally favor forms of socialism that lean into the union part such as syndicalism. Might be worth having a look at that if you want to learn what socialism is.
if it doesn’t work, then why would america try their best to shut socialism down? seriously if you need a test and you’re in the uk, I can hook you up with a therapist
Socialism and capitalism aren’t diametrically opposed. Functionally socialism is just capitalism + egalitarianism. If capitalism can go to the moon… socialism prevents everyone from drowning. They aren’t mutually exclusive.
I agree that socialism “doesn’t scale”, but that’s due to the nature of markets. TLDR you simply cannot trade globally without the mechanics of capitalism coming into play. Like the beginning section of Karl Marx book was explaining how the economics of one region could directly cause a famine in a completely separate region.
IMO communism will only work in a society that enacts it peacefully. A violent revolution inevitably costs skilled individuals and inherently creates detractors. 90% of the challenges in a capitalist society will still exist in a communist one. The less traumatic the transition the better positioned society is for immediate success.
Most socialists are against capitalism while a lot of them ooh and ahh over a coffeemaker they just got off amazon. The people bitching here in this thread are using capitalism to do it. I really think we can have a world where communities and the government help each other, it doesn’t have to be like it is now. It actually has been pretty good in some portions of the last 100 years. Definitely not perfect though. A democracy sucks, but it’s the best option there is.
I’m going to have to ask this again it seems. Where has 100% socialism worked for longer than 10 years for a country?
I think socialism is a great idea, but it doesn’t work for anything larger than a small commune and you have to have a common purpose. The greeds are going to take over and become authoritarian pretty quickly if you try it for a country. That’s why socialist democrat seems to be the way to meet everyone’s needs. Bernie style.
You could lazily ask that question or you can actually read about how anarchist and communist societies are formed and destroyed (hint: often by outside armies when theyve only just begun). Capitalism clearly doesn’t work for anyone but the rich & powerful, so we need to try something different. No one has The One True Answer, we have to build the new world starting from where we are.
I agree that social democracy would be a big improvement over the terribly cruel form of capitalism we have today. I would make further changes than just that, but we can choose not to fight each other at least until we get that far. Organize together instead of infighting.
Where the hell has capitalism worked?
it’s confounded by the US, a powerful state, being deeply ideologically opposed to socialism. Maybe shit would have worked without the US sabotaging it
If a system cannot defend itself from the influence of foreign interest, it can’t function on the world stage. That’s like saying a motor design would work without friction or thermodynamics sabotaging it. It implies there are still problems that need to be ironed out before the system is rolled out.
I don’t know if any political system would stand up to a concerted effort to sabotage it. If socialism was the dominant paradigm and some small country tried to do capitalism, it very well might have been sabotaged. It wouldn’t follow to say capitalism can’t work after shooting all the leaders and buying all their media
The thing about capitalism is that it excels at concentrating power into relatively few hands, which makes it much easier to direct resources for specific goals.
But that’s not really the point. The point is that the conditions of the world are what they are. If your system requires the conditions to be otherwise in order to succeed, you either need to secure those conditions first or abandon the system.
As we saw with the USSR, the opposition from the US helped turn it into a corrupt oligarchy. The efforts to secure a strong socialist state just made their resources easier to divvy up.
That’s not to say I disapprove of socialism and endorse capitalism. But we cannot ignore the material conditions in the world. Any improvement needs to take them into consideration, and have the ability to deal with them.
Capitalist countries have problems defending themselves as well. Maybe that’s not the system’s problem.
Aye. If we could get a global leadership to fix tax havens and regulate for sustainable praxis we’ll get closer to the fully automated gay socialist space communism we all would enjoy.
That’s socialism. It should be noted socialism is a very broad spectrum of ideologies, and they primarily fail at being implemented in the first place, not at being maintained.
Liberalism is difficult to implement as it requires the powers that be to relinquish some power to capitalists and the middle class, however when both those groups started holding significant economic power liberalism could succeed in many parts of the world.
Socialism is harder to achieve as there are no large economic powers that gain from it. Greedy corps, governments, and individuals all oppose its implementation and therefore it’s difficult. There’s also the issue of organizing everyone and all that.
So no, you don’t seem to quite understand. Socialism doesn’t fail, nor is always organized into communes, and “socialist democrats” describe socialists.
Things need to change and sitting on our hands and saying that changing the system in any way won’t work is extremely counter productive.
Also, it has become clear that capitalism can’t maintain democracies for all that long. It’s not a stable system. The few accrue wealth and property and create oligopolies which destabilize the systems we depend on, leading to the slow decline of social and liberal democracies worldwide. Capitalism needs to go.
Edit: Basically what I’m saying is that you don’t know the definitions of the words you are using. “Communist states” are largely not communist. They are often state capitalist or some degree of a planned economy. The workers don’t own squat. Most socialists I know don’t argue in favor of anything similar to china or the soviet union, but actual democratic socialist states. While many want revolutions we also generally work towards reforms and unionizing since a revolution requires some popular support.
All positive aspects of liberal states are socialist policies implemented by socialist politicians or forced through by unions. Usually unions. I therefore personally favor forms of socialism that lean into the union part such as syndicalism. Might be worth having a look at that if you want to learn what socialism is.
if it doesn’t work, then why would america try their best to shut socialism down? seriously if you need a test and you’re in the uk, I can hook you up with a therapist
The U.S is just concerned for the people there.
They obviously have good intentions.
Okay, name one that worked.
name one that wasn’t immediately bitch slapped by the uk/us/cia
Exactly, we’re agreeing.
Removed by mod
Socialism and capitalism aren’t diametrically opposed. Functionally socialism is just capitalism + egalitarianism. If capitalism can go to the moon… socialism prevents everyone from drowning. They aren’t mutually exclusive.
I agree that socialism “doesn’t scale”, but that’s due to the nature of markets. TLDR you simply cannot trade globally without the mechanics of capitalism coming into play. Like the beginning section of Karl Marx book was explaining how the economics of one region could directly cause a famine in a completely separate region.
IMO communism will only work in a society that enacts it peacefully. A violent revolution inevitably costs skilled individuals and inherently creates detractors. 90% of the challenges in a capitalist society will still exist in a communist one. The less traumatic the transition the better positioned society is for immediate success.
Most socialists are against capitalism while a lot of them ooh and ahh over a coffeemaker they just got off amazon. The people bitching here in this thread are using capitalism to do it. I really think we can have a world where communities and the government help each other, it doesn’t have to be like it is now. It actually has been pretty good in some portions of the last 100 years. Definitely not perfect though. A democracy sucks, but it’s the best option there is.
You hate capitalism, yet you participate in it. I am very intelligent
Democracy is a terrible form of government; until you consider the alternatives.
Removed by mod