4 ms·

> It's totally possible for a capitalist society to prioritize things like human rights, etc. over profits through political and social means. I believe that

> It's totally possible for a capitalist society to prioritize things like human rights, etc. over profits through political and social means. I believe that is what most people would call socialism. When taken at its root idea anyway.

CharlesColeman 7y ago
> I believe that is what most people would call socialism. When taken at its root idea anyway. No, it could also be the society's moral system. For instance, take a hypothetical capitalist society where the shame and stigma of violating human rights is very strong. A business owner there would likely refuse to violate them even if it's very profitable, because doing so would make him a pariah, no "socialism" required.
- IX-103 7y ago
  > A business owner there would likely refuse to violate them even if it's very profitable, because doing so would make him a pariah, no "socialism" required. So in other words it would not be profitable, no?
- chillacy 7y ago
  It only takes one person desperate enough or psychopathic enough to do it.
  - shijie 7y ago
    I doubt one person’s negative actions could destroy an entire society’s moral foundations wholesale. Not even Hitler or Jesus did that.
    - GalacticDomin8r 7y ago
      It's quite clear Hitler and Jesus's followers changed the course of world events at a very large scale.
tehjoker 7y ago
Sort of. Socialists contend that the mechanical logic of the system makes that impossible, so the economic system must be refounded on the material basis of the political power of the majority - worker control of the economy / democratic control of the economy. Those two ideas go hand in hand.
msla 7y ago
Socialism is all about worker ownership of business, often mediated through the state. Morality doesn't enter into it.
- krapp 7y ago
  You're confusing socialism with communism. Socialism is a political philosophy, whereas communism is one specific (but not the only possible) implementation of that philosophy. Socialism is also intended to be a criticism of and attempt to redress the immorality of capitalism, so morality does enter into it, at least in theory.
  - msla 7y ago
    Socialism as it's understood now is a specific plan for replacing Capitalism, tied to a specific theory of history, not just a philosophy. At the level of implementation, it isn't morality, it's economics and politics. There might be morality behind it, but there's morality behind all actions, to some extent.
    - ataturk 7y ago
      That is very succint. I would also add that the current setup is about concentration of power and wealth and that what we call "socialism" is really just a thinly veiled propaganda campaign designed to suppress dissent. Social programs never solve any problems, they just keep the masses from rioting. Except in France.
    - krapp 7y ago
      Many modern capitalist governments, including the US, employ socialist programs with no intention of overturning capitalism itself. And the entire thesis behind socialism is that it's morally superior to capitalism, in a similar way that free software is argued as being morally superior to proprietary software.
      - msla 7y ago
        The entire thesis behind Socialism is that it's inevitable. That's the entire point of Historical Materialism.
swebs 7y ago
>I believe that is what most people would call socialism. Like China?
- all2 7y ago
  Do you mean China is socialist? Or that the Communist party is calling the US socialist? Or something else?
  - swebs 7y ago
    The first one, obviously. https://i.imgur.com/g3hv45O.png https://i.imgur.com/g3hv45O.png

CharlesColeman 7y ago

> I believe that is what most people would call socialism. When taken at its root idea anyway. No, it could also be the society's moral system. For instance, take a hypothetical capitalist society where the shame and stigma of violating human rights is very strong. A business owner there would likely refuse to violate them even if it's very profitable, because doing so would make him a pariah, no "socialism" required.

IX-103 7y ago
> A business owner there would likely refuse to violate them even if it's very profitable, because doing so would make him a pariah, no "socialism" required. So in other words it would not be profitable, no?
chillacy 7y ago
It only takes one person desperate enough or psychopathic enough to do it.
- shijie 7y ago
  I doubt one person’s negative actions could destroy an entire society’s moral foundations wholesale. Not even Hitler or Jesus did that.
  - GalacticDomin8r 7y ago
    It's quite clear Hitler and Jesus's followers changed the course of world events at a very large scale.

tehjoker 7y ago

Sort of. Socialists contend that the mechanical logic of the system makes that impossible, so the economic system must be refounded on the material basis of the political power of the majority - worker control of the economy / democratic control of the economy. Those two ideas go hand in hand.

msla 7y ago

Socialism is all about worker ownership of business, often mediated through the state. Morality doesn't enter into it.

krapp 7y ago
You're confusing socialism with communism. Socialism is a political philosophy, whereas communism is one specific (but not the only possible) implementation of that philosophy. Socialism is also intended to be a criticism of and attempt to redress the immorality of capitalism, so morality does enter into it, at least in theory.
- msla 7y ago
  Socialism as it's understood now is a specific plan for replacing Capitalism, tied to a specific theory of history, not just a philosophy. At the level of implementation, it isn't morality, it's economics and politics. There might be morality behind it, but there's morality behind all actions, to some extent.
  - ataturk 7y ago
    That is very succint. I would also add that the current setup is about concentration of power and wealth and that what we call "socialism" is really just a thinly veiled propaganda campaign designed to suppress dissent. Social programs never solve any problems, they just keep the masses from rioting. Except in France.
  - krapp 7y ago
    Many modern capitalist governments, including the US, employ socialist programs with no intention of overturning capitalism itself. And the entire thesis behind socialism is that it's morally superior to capitalism, in a similar way that free software is argued as being morally superior to proprietary software.
    - msla 7y ago
      The entire thesis behind Socialism is that it's inevitable. That's the entire point of Historical Materialism.

swebs 7y ago

>I believe that is what most people would call socialism. Like China?

all2 7y ago
Do you mean China is socialist? Or that the Communist party is calling the US socialist? Or something else?
- swebs 7y ago
  The first one, obviously. https://i.imgur.com/g3hv45O.png https://i.imgur.com/g3hv45O.png