4 ms·

USSR tried putting workers and peasants before the entrepreneurs and elites. Didn’t turn out well

by option 5y ago

joshsyn 5y ago
It seems like the so-called progressives want to take a stab at solving socialism again by making everyone miserable.
- option 5y ago
  Yes, it blows my mind that in the last century not one, but 2 countries have been divided in half producing as perfect AB-test of capitalism vs socialism as one could imagine and people still think socialist economy is a great idea. Not to mention dozens of other socialist countries which produced nothing but misery for their people.
  - joshsyn 5y ago
    Exactly, mob ruling never works. No matter how extreme length you go to prove it. So many examples, but somehow either they don't learn the history or this time it will be different. They are most the ignorant and the irresponsible. Most normal people just want freedom to work, freedom to trade and pursue their own interests and helping those in their circles, not being enslaved to everyone else.
    - imtringued 5y ago
      >Most normal people just want freedom to work, freedom to trade and pursue their own interests and helping those in their circles, not being enslaved to everyone else. Then they should welcome negative interest rates because that is exactly what they do.
      - joshsyn 5y ago
        Thats totally a different discussion and don't see how that is related. Monetary supply/control is a centrally planned policy.
  - gmadsen 5y ago
    I really don't think the only options are US style socialism for the elites and austerity for the rest versus USSR totalitarianism. Just look at any other developed country in the world to see more reasonable social welfare programs
    - option 5y ago
      this is false dichotomy invoked every time in discussions like these. Totalitarianism is a property of political system, not economic one. South Korea was not democracy by any stretch of imagination for quite some time. China is totalitarian but very capitalist in most of their economy, hence their success. Also - do not confuse socialism (as in economic system) and social democracy (political system).
      - gmadsen 5y ago
        I didn't give a dichotomy, I called out one. A straw man was given that any sort of reform is paramount to big S Socialism which """has failed every time its been tried""" Political systems are not separate from economic ones.
kube-system 5y ago
The USSR failed not because they had an economic agenda of equality. They failed because their system of governance wasn’t capable of actually accomplishing those goals. The USSR just replaced one class of elites with another.
- option 5y ago
  It failed because the idea of “the means of production owned by the state” does not work.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  They failed because their roadmap did not include a workable route to the equality they wanted. Their roadmap led that their system of governance. Why did their roadmap lead there? Essentially, because it was against human nature. It turns out that "work for the good of all mankind" doesn't motivate as well as "work for the good of yourself and your family". They had to add "work for the good of all mankind, or be punished" in order for the system to work at all. Now, the really interesting question: Will any system that has an agenda of economic equality end in the same place? Can any system have that as a goal, and produce a system of governance that isn't (approximately) equivalent to the USSR version? I suspect that the answer is no. If your humans have the same human nature as the humans of the USSR, then you wind up running into the same problems that the USSR ran into. If your system doesn't account for human short-sightedness, selfishness, greed, and laziness, it isn't going to work in the real world.
  - Pokepokalypse 5y ago
    > Essentially, because it was against human nature. I've heard this counterargument against socialism/communism for a long time, and it always sounds like a form of "magical thinking" to me. Asserting the tautology that "humans are naturally greedy" when if you know any actual humans, you know this is not true. Short-sightedness, selfishness, greed, and laziness are all easily handled by a functioning criminal justice system, and public education system. At least in THIS country, we willfully subverted and destroyed these institutions, over a long period of time. For various reasons, but mostly because the haves wanted it this way. The same happened in the USSR. A few entitled and already very wealthy people are greedy. Most of the rest of us will ACT greedy when they've been deprived of basic necessities by a crooked and rigged system. But by and large, most people are not inherently greedy.

USSR tried putting workers and peasants before the entrepreneurs and elites. Didn’t turn out well

by option 5y ago

USSR tried putting workers and peasants before the entrepreneurs and elites. Didn’t turn out well

joshsyn 5y ago

It seems like the so-called progressives want to take a stab at solving socialism again by making everyone miserable.

option 5y ago
Yes, it blows my mind that in the last century not one, but 2 countries have been divided in half producing as perfect AB-test of capitalism vs socialism as one could imagine and people still think socialist economy is a great idea. Not to mention dozens of other socialist countries which produced nothing but misery for their people.
- joshsyn 5y ago
  Exactly, mob ruling never works. No matter how extreme length you go to prove it. So many examples, but somehow either they don't learn the history or this time it will be different. They are most the ignorant and the irresponsible. Most normal people just want freedom to work, freedom to trade and pursue their own interests and helping those in their circles, not being enslaved to everyone else.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    >Most normal people just want freedom to work, freedom to trade and pursue their own interests and helping those in their circles, not being enslaved to everyone else. Then they should welcome negative interest rates because that is exactly what they do.
    - joshsyn 5y ago
      Thats totally a different discussion and don't see how that is related. Monetary supply/control is a centrally planned policy.
- gmadsen 5y ago
  I really don't think the only options are US style socialism for the elites and austerity for the rest versus USSR totalitarianism. Just look at any other developed country in the world to see more reasonable social welfare programs
  - option 5y ago
    this is false dichotomy invoked every time in discussions like these. Totalitarianism is a property of political system, not economic one. South Korea was not democracy by any stretch of imagination for quite some time. China is totalitarian but very capitalist in most of their economy, hence their success. Also - do not confuse socialism (as in economic system) and social democracy (political system).
    - gmadsen 5y ago
      I didn't give a dichotomy, I called out one. A straw man was given that any sort of reform is paramount to big S Socialism which """has failed every time its been tried""" Political systems are not separate from economic ones.

kube-system 5y ago

The USSR failed not because they had an economic agenda of equality. They failed because their system of governance wasn’t capable of actually accomplishing those goals. The USSR just replaced one class of elites with another.

option 5y ago
It failed because the idea of “the means of production owned by the state” does not work.
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
They failed because their roadmap did not include a workable route to the equality they wanted. Their roadmap led that their system of governance. Why did their roadmap lead there? Essentially, because it was against human nature. It turns out that "work for the good of all mankind" doesn't motivate as well as "work for the good of yourself and your family". They had to add "work for the good of all mankind, or be punished" in order for the system to work at all. Now, the really interesting question: Will any system that has an agenda of economic equality end in the same place? Can any system have that as a goal, and produce a system of governance that isn't (approximately) equivalent to the USSR version? I suspect that the answer is no. If your humans have the same human nature as the humans of the USSR, then you wind up running into the same problems that the USSR ran into. If your system doesn't account for human short-sightedness, selfishness, greed, and laziness, it isn't going to work in the real world.
- Pokepokalypse 5y ago
  > Essentially, because it was against human nature. I've heard this counterargument against socialism/communism for a long time, and it always sounds like a form of "magical thinking" to me. Asserting the tautology that "humans are naturally greedy" when if you know any actual humans, you know this is not true. Short-sightedness, selfishness, greed, and laziness are all easily handled by a functioning criminal justice system, and public education system. At least in THIS country, we willfully subverted and destroyed these institutions, over a long period of time. For various reasons, but mostly because the haves wanted it this way. The same happened in the USSR. A few entitled and already very wealthy people are greedy. Most of the rest of us will ACT greedy when they've been deprived of basic necessities by a crooked and rigged system. But by and large, most people are not inherently greedy.