3 ms·
> Central planning in presence of hostile adversaries unrestricted by any ethical systems failed. This is what happens in any system that leans too much on cen
by chaostheory 3y ago
> Central planning in presence of hostile adversaries unrestricted by any ethical systems failed.
This is what happens in any system that leans too much on central planning. What we’re witnessing is just entropy ie late stage capitalist society in decline due to too much power being centralized. It’s not exclusive to capitalist economies. Historically, it’s even worse in primarily socialist economies because there are much less divisions of power from the start, where as in capitalist systems this happens over time. For this reason, the same decline happens much faster in primarily socialist systems.
The main flaw in thinking that socialism is better than capitalism, despite the clear results in the 20th century, is missing the fact that corrupt sociopaths don’t just disappear just because you changed the economic and political system; they adapt.
- bruce511 3y agoI don't know for sure, but I feel like you're possibly conflating socialism with communism? They are really quite different political models, although I'll grant you that both have a spectrum of examples. Equally capitalism, socialism and communism are all (somewhat) tangential to government organisation (single party, two party, multiparty, monarchy, dictator etc.) And I understand here that I'm painting with a very broad brush here - grouping some very dissimilar things together under the same terms while disregarding a lot of nuance)
- chaostheory 3y agoCommunism is just late stage socialism. Besides even if they were two separate things, by design in socialism nearly everything is centrally planned. Corruption just spreads much faster in systems where you centralize power from the start ie you want the groups running the media, producing goods, and managing the laws to be separate entities
- bruce511 3y agoI think we'll gave to agree to disagree there. In my understanding socialism and communism are two very different animals. Communism is about the absolute equality of all - no rich, no poor. Socialism is about caring for the poor, with no upper bound on the rich. In other words one squeezes from the top down. The other pushes from the bottom up.
- chaostheory 3y agoWhat you’ve just described are socialized safety net programs inside mixed capitalist economies. That’s not socialism. There is no private ownership in socialism. Consequently, there are no rich in that system. The “community” owns and produces everything.