4 ms·

>The position of the capitalist class, built on successful class warfare first against the pre-capitalist aristocracy and then against the working classes withi

>The position of the capitalist class, built on successful class warfare first against the pre-capitalist aristocracy and then against the working classes within capitalism, proves this to be false. Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better. Each implementation grew the class divides even more. So far China, I would say, is the most economically viable model due to their opening to international market practice. However, the party still controls it and divvies out the work to a select few. Their social credit system helps them determine who is more worthy by putting people in different categories... oh wait that's just a class system with extra steps. It's not a capitalist fault. It's a human fault. We've done it for not hundreds of years, but thousands upon thousands. Long before Adam's or Marx parents were a twinkle in anyone's nethers. Finding a scapegoat for problems you dont quite understand and refuse to research beyond a 10min youtube cartoon does not constitute as good logic.

AlexandrB 6y ago
Most socialist Scandinavian countries are doing better than the US by most measures of societal wellness (life expectancy, divorce rates, crime, etc).
- NoOneNew 6y ago
  Also extremely high dependence on oil. They are also not as socialist as people imagine. I think it was Sweden that implemented a bunch of socialist laws in the 70s, their econ tanked and they back peddled on a lot of it. The myth they're still as socialist remains today. Check out Norway's expenditure on welfare programs. It's like 136m euro or something like that per year. I researched this a year or two ago. Then check out how much their state oil brings in. I want you to do it so you can see for yourself how much "norway hates fossil fuels and capitalism". Because without the free market on oil, there would be zero Norwegian welfare system. Yes, Americans call the Scandinavians socialists, the same way dry rub BBQ pit masters call BBQ sauces the devil's abomination to food. It's either anachronistic hyperbole or just plain hyperbolic. Steps toward socialism sure, but we're not talking about comrade level stuff.
- nradov 6y ago
  Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    > Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets. That's what we're calling socialism nowadays (e.g. pretty much anything that's not laissez faire capitalism). That mushiness is what leads some people to think they can condemn social democracy with the example of Soviet central planning.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > That's what we're calling socialism nowadays It is (and even the more moderate forms found in other parts of the developed West including the US are) also what Karl Marx called “socialism”, though of a subtype (“bourgeois socialism”) of which he explicitly disapproved as doomed to reinforce and revert to, rather than defeat, the dominant system of his day which he labelled “capitalism”.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better I did. The “bourgeois socialism”, as Marx described it, of the reforms from the capitalism that Marx described to the modern mixed economy that has replaced it pretty much everywhere in the developed world. (Now, admittedly, Marx saw bourgeois socialism as ultimately doomed to reinforce or regress into capitalism, but, while there is always pressure from capitalists back toward classic capitalism, the doom he saw for it isn't clearly inevitable in practice.) Maybe you are confused because rather than “bourgeois socialism” people tend to still describe these regimes as simply “capitalist”, despite the extensive role of public institutions limiting private property rights and diverting the returns from private gains into providing public goods.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
josho 6y ago
> Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better. America has done everything in their power to destroy democratic populist movements. If you do your research you'll find that anytime a South or Central American country attempted democratic socialist movements they were destroyed by the CIA. This pattern has been repeated throughout the world. So, yeh, it is rare to find a successful socialist example because the largest capitalist economy destroys emerging socialist movements.

AlexandrB 6y ago

Most socialist Scandinavian countries are doing better than the US by most measures of societal wellness (life expectancy, divorce rates, crime, etc).

NoOneNew 6y ago
Also extremely high dependence on oil. They are also not as socialist as people imagine. I think it was Sweden that implemented a bunch of socialist laws in the 70s, their econ tanked and they back peddled on a lot of it. The myth they're still as socialist remains today. Check out Norway's expenditure on welfare programs. It's like 136m euro or something like that per year. I researched this a year or two ago. Then check out how much their state oil brings in. I want you to do it so you can see for yourself how much "norway hates fossil fuels and capitalism". Because without the free market on oil, there would be zero Norwegian welfare system. Yes, Americans call the Scandinavians socialists, the same way dry rub BBQ pit masters call BBQ sauces the devil's abomination to food. It's either anachronistic hyperbole or just plain hyperbolic. Steps toward socialism sure, but we're not talking about comrade level stuff.
nradov 6y ago
Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets.
- ardy42 6y ago
  > Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets. That's what we're calling socialism nowadays (e.g. pretty much anything that's not laissez faire capitalism). That mushiness is what leads some people to think they can condemn social democracy with the example of Soviet central planning.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > That's what we're calling socialism nowadays It is (and even the more moderate forms found in other parts of the developed West including the US are) also what Karl Marx called “socialism”, though of a subtype (“bourgeois socialism”) of which he explicitly disapproved as doomed to reinforce and revert to, rather than defeat, the dominant system of his day which he labelled “capitalism”.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better I did. The “bourgeois socialism”, as Marx described it, of the reforms from the capitalism that Marx described to the modern mixed economy that has replaced it pretty much everywhere in the developed world. (Now, admittedly, Marx saw bourgeois socialism as ultimately doomed to reinforce or regress into capitalism, but, while there is always pressure from capitalists back toward classic capitalism, the doom he saw for it isn't clearly inevitable in practice.) Maybe you are confused because rather than “bourgeois socialism” people tend to still describe these regimes as simply “capitalist”, despite the extensive role of public institutions limiting private property rights and diverting the returns from private gains into providing public goods.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

josho 6y ago

> Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better. America has done everything in their power to destroy democratic populist movements. If you do your research you'll find that anytime a South or Central American country attempted democratic socialist movements they were destroyed by the CIA. This pattern has been repeated throughout the world. So, yeh, it is rare to find a successful socialist example because the largest capitalist economy destroys emerging socialist movements.