3 ms·
I agree with much of what you say. The only issue I have is that you can't ascribe any results (good or bad) to a single variable, or even two, like "wages" an
by robomartin 6y ago
I agree with much of what you say. The only issue I have is that you can't ascribe any results (good or bad) to a single variable, or even two, like "wages" and "capitalism". Life just doesn't work like that, nothing does.
> my parents' experience in Romania
> The actual result was that corrupt politicians sold those factories to corrupt investor
One of my neighbors is from Romania. I've had many very interesting conversations with her. She can't comprehend how it is that US youth are so in love with socialism and, some, Marxism. She says the same thing every time "if they only knew".
Another neighbor was from Czechoslovakia. Sadly passed away a number of years ago. I have a huge collection of old European and Eastern European stamps because of him. We also had lots of interesting conversations about life in the old country. Same kind of reaction to what has been evolving with US youth, disbelief.
A few friends are from a couple of former USSR republics. Once again, they say the equivalent of "if they only knew" and "we came here to escape what US kids and politicians are asking for".
My family travelled and lived extensively through Latin America, including living in Argentina before, during and after the military regime.
The problems you are talking about are not due to capitalism. They have to do with deeply entrenched cultures of corruption. Once they become "democratic" it takes decades, perhaps a generation or two, for people and politicians to think and behave as those in mature western democracies. I mean, in the USSR people had to cheat, lie and steal to live. As they migrated to other nations it was very common to see enclaves of ex-USSR residents continue to game the system and take advantage of everything, just as they had to back home. One of the most commonly known problems in the US was entire families taking advantage of our welfare system, even going as far as not declaring when family members died in order to continue to receive payments. They also worked for cash in order to appear unemployed and keep their benefits.
I go back to the same thing: Not a single variable problem.
Yes, capitalism has problems, nothing is perfect. We do need controls and rules in certain domains. While not perfect, we tend to do OK over time.
At some level it is very simple: Make a list of nations that elevated the standard of living of their population and how they did it. Create columns for any category you can think of: Capitalism, Socialism, Marxism, Dictatorship, etc. Now give us a list of nations that succeeded without capitalism. You can't. Capitalism has, quite literally, elevated billions of people from dirt-poor agrarian societies to the point of almost everyone in the US being able to walk around with a smart phone, have a smart TV, etc., etc., etc.. The first step is to be truly honest about what we are talking about. Nobody has found any alternatives that work better. Maybe one day someone will.
- tsimionescu 6y agoThe thing about Marxism and socialism as understood by people who've lived through the Soviet Union or the satellite states is that they've been exposed to just as much propaganda about their states being examples of Socialism and Marxism as the West has. It's just as wrong. They were also exposed to propaganda claiming that the state was democratic, but none of them believe that because they understand the word and know how different it was. But Socialism and Marxism had no pre-existing meaning for many people in Eastern Europe (pre-WW2, communism and socialism were prohibited from being openly preached in Romania, for example, under penalty of jail). They had no idea what these terms were supposed to mean, so they did believe that their states were failed socialist states, instead of realizing that not a single socialist ideal had ever been attempted, at least once Lenin took power. And so yes, to people like my parents the very word brings to mind images of their experience in the 'Socialist Republic of Romania', and of professors and newspapers trying to sell them on how good it was. They know far less of the history of socialist worker's unions that fought and won for the right to the 40 hour work week or for the right to strike and protest. Related to examples of successful socialist states, I can't give any. However, rather than debating the reasons for that, I will say that worker's cooperatives are a proven business model all over the world, so I don't see why it's impossible to imagine a successful economy based on co-ops instead of corporation. After all, at one point there were no successful modern democracies or capitalist states in the world, and the very idea seemed preposterous to many lovers of king and country. Anyway, I want to say that I have greatly enjoyed this thread of conversation!