4 ms·

Can you elaborate on differences/similarities between that system being a "corrupt, inefficient pile of BS" driven by propaganda, vs the socialistic "government

Can you elaborate on differences/similarities between that system being a "corrupt, inefficient pile of BS" driven by propaganda, vs the socialistic "government should take care of everyone, by redistributing wealth" prominently posted in HN discussions (a la "guaranteed basic income", "reduced work weeks", "free healthcare/education/etc", "everyone has a right to _____ which others earned", etc - all requiring a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take, all sounding wonderful but crushingly impossible in implementation a la USSR)? (Obviously I'm biased, but I am trying to make an earnest question. Russian communism sounded great too, even as you note: your parents still fall for the propaganda. Wish I could ask in a more neutral tone, but it's an inherently divisive subject.)

yc1010 11y ago
It was never communism back in USSR, it was authoritarianism where all power flowed to the Kremlin marching under the Socialist banner, 30 years its the same shit but to the tune of Nationalism. The economy still remains resource extraction bound (more so now), corruption goes all the way to the top (see Sochi). One quote from my mother sums it up when we moved here in middle of 90s when she learned that in Europe this thing called welfare exists "So we were building Socialism for 70 years, and they had it here all along" BTW they didnt fall for propaganda back then, it was mocked if anything, but the modern take on it by the Russian state controlled media is actually incredible to behold in how it works, hell just look at some of the replies above that my post attracted to see it in action.
wolf550e 11y ago
A given level of technology allows a county with given resources (e.g. petroleum, good engineers, conquered peoples being exploited far away, etc.) to have some total amount of wealth. The ruling class will give the bottom 99% some part of the wealth (not 99%, but hopefully 50%) to keep them subdued. The closer technology is to Star Trek's replicators, the more realistic free housing, food, utilities are. In such a society, people are by default artists, not farmers or workers. The people who becomes doctors and teachers and do not get compensated by their patients or students, need to be compensated by the government which needs to have something people want. In the USSR, people spent most of their money, time and energy just hustling for the basic necessities. Note: I was born in Leningrad, but know of life there only from my parents.
ajuc 11y ago
Working electricity, sewers, courts, police, and road netowork all require "a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take" on the same level that free healthcare and university education do. I was a kid in 80s in communist Poland. It was shitty place, with a lot of absurd propaganda nobody (including the people making a living spewing it, or beating up the protesters) believed. Free education and healthcare had nothing to do with it. Main differences between communism and modern social democracies: - independent organisations were banned or discriminated, now they are encouraged - people were paid to spy on each other with the REAL money (you couldn't buy a car in a month with any amount of money, but if you told the right person that your neighbor listens to radio free europa and prints leaflets - you could get one no problem) - think this one through - no matter how good brain surgeon or rocket scientist or nobel prize writer you are - you won't get a car unless you wait for 10 or 20 years. Spying on your neighbors (or knowing the right people and doing them favours) can solve this in a week. Consider the incentives this sets up throught the whole society. - there was just one employer (the state) - social trust was nonexistent - you could only trust your family - you had to apply for a permission to leave the country, and often when they gave you that permission you had to sign with secret service that you are a spy - so they can later blackmail you with it I see no reason to think policies like free education till M.A. are in any way connected to these problems, since Poland had free education and healthcare both now and during communism, yet we don't do the bad things I listed anymore. For the record - I didn't downvoted you and I don't understand why somebody woulld do that for asking a question. BTW: free university education seems like much better than paid, because as a kid you work harder in school for better grades to go to better university. As a kid of poor parents in system with paid universities you just can't work hard enough to go to Harward (well there are stipends I guess, so they do see this problem). As a parent it works too - in paid system you spend more time at work to afford better education for your kids. In free system - you teach your kids more so they get better grades and go to a better university. IMHO it's obvious which system sets up the incentives better.
ctlby 11y ago
I laughed when I read this, but there is indeed a difference. Here, a meaningful portion of your confiscated earnings is distributed to your fellow citizens. Moreover, the means of confiscation is predictable, as is the degree. In Russia, you'll get fleeced just the same. However, your money will primarily line the pockets of those doing the taking.

yc1010 11y ago

It was never communism back in USSR, it was authoritarianism where all power flowed to the Kremlin marching under the Socialist banner, 30 years its the same shit but to the tune of Nationalism. The economy still remains resource extraction bound (more so now), corruption goes all the way to the top (see Sochi). One quote from my mother sums it up when we moved here in middle of 90s when she learned that in Europe this thing called welfare exists "So we were building Socialism for 70 years, and they had it here all along" BTW they didnt fall for propaganda back then, it was mocked if anything, but the modern take on it by the Russian state controlled media is actually incredible to behold in how it works, hell just look at some of the replies above that my post attracted to see it in action.

wolf550e 11y ago

A given level of technology allows a county with given resources (e.g. petroleum, good engineers, conquered peoples being exploited far away, etc.) to have some total amount of wealth. The ruling class will give the bottom 99% some part of the wealth (not 99%, but hopefully 50%) to keep them subdued. The closer technology is to Star Trek's replicators, the more realistic free housing, food, utilities are. In such a society, people are by default artists, not farmers or workers. The people who becomes doctors and teachers and do not get compensated by their patients or students, need to be compensated by the government which needs to have something people want. In the USSR, people spent most of their money, time and energy just hustling for the basic necessities. Note: I was born in Leningrad, but know of life there only from my parents.

ajuc 11y ago

Working electricity, sewers, courts, police, and road netowork all require "a dominating government taking what isn't theirs to take" on the same level that free healthcare and university education do. I was a kid in 80s in communist Poland. It was shitty place, with a lot of absurd propaganda nobody (including the people making a living spewing it, or beating up the protesters) believed. Free education and healthcare had nothing to do with it. Main differences between communism and modern social democracies: - independent organisations were banned or discriminated, now they are encouraged - people were paid to spy on each other with the REAL money (you couldn't buy a car in a month with any amount of money, but if you told the right person that your neighbor listens to radio free europa and prints leaflets - you could get one no problem) - think this one through - no matter how good brain surgeon or rocket scientist or nobel prize writer you are - you won't get a car unless you wait for 10 or 20 years. Spying on your neighbors (or knowing the right people and doing them favours) can solve this in a week. Consider the incentives this sets up throught the whole society. - there was just one employer (the state) - social trust was nonexistent - you could only trust your family - you had to apply for a permission to leave the country, and often when they gave you that permission you had to sign with secret service that you are a spy - so they can later blackmail you with it I see no reason to think policies like free education till M.A. are in any way connected to these problems, since Poland had free education and healthcare both now and during communism, yet we don't do the bad things I listed anymore. For the record - I didn't downvoted you and I don't understand why somebody woulld do that for asking a question. BTW: free university education seems like much better than paid, because as a kid you work harder in school for better grades to go to better university. As a kid of poor parents in system with paid universities you just can't work hard enough to go to Harward (well there are stipends I guess, so they do see this problem). As a parent it works too - in paid system you spend more time at work to afford better education for your kids. In free system - you teach your kids more so they get better grades and go to a better university. IMHO it's obvious which system sets up the incentives better.

ctlby 11y ago

I laughed when I read this, but there is indeed a difference. Here, a meaningful portion of your confiscated earnings is distributed to your fellow citizens. Moreover, the means of confiscation is predictable, as is the degree. In Russia, you'll get fleeced just the same. However, your money will primarily line the pockets of those doing the taking.