4 ms·

> I’ve heard that, under socialism, workers would vote on who they want to be managers... I grew up under socialism and wanted to mention that author "heard" v

> I’ve heard that, under socialism, workers would vote on who they want to be managers... I grew up under socialism and wanted to mention that author "heard" very, very wrong. Under socialism, the Party bosses will decide who will be the managers. The person's qualifications and achievements will be largely taken into consideration, together with their loyalty to the Party, who their parents are, friends in high places who vouched for them, favors that need to be returned, etc... Not that much different from the capitalism. The process author describes, is what happens when you are thinking to become a socialist society. Everything looks fantastic then. But actual socialism comes with removal of democratic safeguards and somewhat totalitarian government (how else would you confiscate private property from citizens?). Once the new, socialist, management is in place, they quickly realize that it's nice to be at the top. Next, they turn their attention to the authors like this (who threaten their permanent place at the top) and quickly "dispose" of them. There is a sweet irony in this process, but it is of little consolation for the rest of the population, who will suffer for the next 70 yrs until the country goes back to the capitalism.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
> The person's qualifications and achievements will be largely taken into consideration, together with their loyalty to the Party, who their parents are, friends in high places who vouched for them, favors that need to be returned, etc... Not that much different from the capitalism. One's loyalty to the Party is not often taken into consideration under capitalism.
malermeister 5y ago
This actually happened in Yugoslavia - keyword "worker self management". I'm not denying your experience, there were lots of terrible regimes calling themselves socialist, but it's wrong to generalize from that.
- g42gregory 5y ago
  I am not familiar with the particulars of the Yugoslavia's "worker self management". But I can certainly say how Yugoslavia socialist experiment ended: 1. Brutal civil war with lots of people dead and country spitting apart. 2. All individual sub-countries going back to the capitalist system.
  - malermeister 5y ago
    All of that was due to ethnic tensions tho, not relevant to this conversation. All those countries have a lower standard of living now than they did before the breakup of Yugoslavia.
7sidedmarble 5y ago
I could just as easily say 'under capitalism, you are presented with the illusion of democratic choice at the ballot, but in reality the constituency of our elected officials is mainly the capital-owning class' But that's not really engaging with the concepts of capitalism anymore. Sometimes that's perfectly fine. But it's a little lazy to fall back on instead of defending the merits of capitalism as an ideology.
- g42gregory 5y ago
  Yes, there is corruption in capitalist society, no question. And corruption can reach the point where it's no longer a free capitalist society. But I think what people do not understand is the Socialism is a totalitarian society to begin with. You can't have one without the other. All of our leaders were "democratically" elected. We have one choice at the ballot and you can vote Yes or No. You place your "secret" ballot (filled out in a closed booth!) into a separate "Yes" box or "No" box in full public view of election officials, who just signed you in and have pen and paper in their hands. Our leaders enjoyed an overwhelming public support as a result. This is Socialism.
  - malermeister 5y ago
    Versus in the capitalist US where you have two parties to choose from, both of which are owned by the same lobbyists and neither of which ever changes anything meaningful. You have the grotesquely evil option and the controlled opposition getting voted in on the platform of not being grotesquely evil. Neither of them gets anything useful done. Meanwhile what little choice is left is getting undermined by gerrymandering and voter suppression. Yay capitalist democracy?
    - sharemywin 5y ago
      In all fairness I read an article that said about 60% of the time the wealth get congress to act in their favor versus about 30% of the time for the majority.
  - 7sidedmarble 5y ago
0x4d464d48 5y ago
"The person's qualifications and achievements will be largely taken into consideration, together with their loyalty to the Party, who their parents are, friends in high places who vouched for them, favors that need to be returned, etc... Not that much different from the capitalism." Bingo. At a macro level ideology has little to nothing to do with policy decisions compared to protecting the power of those who are already empowered/priveleged. ... which is par for the course given human history really.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

> The person's qualifications and achievements will be largely taken into consideration, together with their loyalty to the Party, who their parents are, friends in high places who vouched for them, favors that need to be returned, etc... Not that much different from the capitalism. One's loyalty to the Party is not often taken into consideration under capitalism.

malermeister 5y ago

This actually happened in Yugoslavia - keyword "worker self management". I'm not denying your experience, there were lots of terrible regimes calling themselves socialist, but it's wrong to generalize from that.

g42gregory 5y ago
I am not familiar with the particulars of the Yugoslavia's "worker self management". But I can certainly say how Yugoslavia socialist experiment ended: 1. Brutal civil war with lots of people dead and country spitting apart. 2. All individual sub-countries going back to the capitalist system.
- malermeister 5y ago
  All of that was due to ethnic tensions tho, not relevant to this conversation. All those countries have a lower standard of living now than they did before the breakup of Yugoslavia.

7sidedmarble 5y ago

I could just as easily say 'under capitalism, you are presented with the illusion of democratic choice at the ballot, but in reality the constituency of our elected officials is mainly the capital-owning class' But that's not really engaging with the concepts of capitalism anymore. Sometimes that's perfectly fine. But it's a little lazy to fall back on instead of defending the merits of capitalism as an ideology.

g42gregory 5y ago
Yes, there is corruption in capitalist society, no question. And corruption can reach the point where it's no longer a free capitalist society. But I think what people do not understand is the Socialism is a totalitarian society to begin with. You can't have one without the other. All of our leaders were "democratically" elected. We have one choice at the ballot and you can vote Yes or No. You place your "secret" ballot (filled out in a closed booth!) into a separate "Yes" box or "No" box in full public view of election officials, who just signed you in and have pen and paper in their hands. Our leaders enjoyed an overwhelming public support as a result. This is Socialism.
- malermeister 5y ago
  Versus in the capitalist US where you have two parties to choose from, both of which are owned by the same lobbyists and neither of which ever changes anything meaningful. You have the grotesquely evil option and the controlled opposition getting voted in on the platform of not being grotesquely evil. Neither of them gets anything useful done. Meanwhile what little choice is left is getting undermined by gerrymandering and voter suppression. Yay capitalist democracy?
  - sharemywin 5y ago
    In all fairness I read an article that said about 60% of the time the wealth get congress to act in their favor versus about 30% of the time for the majority.
- 7sidedmarble 5y ago

0x4d464d48 5y ago

"The person's qualifications and achievements will be largely taken into consideration, together with their loyalty to the Party, who their parents are, friends in high places who vouched for them, favors that need to be returned, etc... Not that much different from the capitalism." Bingo. At a macro level ideology has little to nothing to do with policy decisions compared to protecting the power of those who are already empowered/priveleged. ... which is par for the course given human history really.