3 ms·

The capitalism vs socialism debate was settled in the 1980s, and so was the value of free enterprise. It is odd that the debate should keep being brought up...

The capitalism vs socialism debate was settled in the 1980s, and so was the value of free enterprise. It is odd that the debate should keep being brought up... However, the terms should also be clearly defined in such poll because indeed the average person may have their own understanding, not least in the US. Judging by the comments even people on HN have no understanding of "socialism" and are trying to shoehorn an idealist view of "a better society" into the term, or they cannot accept that "socialism" does not work.

Avicebron 2mo ago
People really need to give up the cold war, the failures of "end of history" thinking are directly related to all of the economic problems we have today. We could do - have done - much worse than implementing some good sense social safety net measures. Especially as people advocate for AI and using it to replace/disempower employees.
- mytailorisrich 2mo ago
  > People really need to give up the cold war, the failures of "end of history" thinking are directly related to all of the economic problems we have today. That's irrelevant to the point. The 1980s did settle the capitalism vs. socialism debate. The USSR and, perhaps more consequentially, China effectively abandonned socialism because it failed and acknowledged that capitalism, free enterprise, and the free market was what worked. The "end of history" is the belief (proved wrong if not naively wrong from the start) that this would lead to everyone being "friends" under a Western-style liberal democracy. > We could do - have done - much worse than implementing some good sense social safety net measures. I don't understand what you are getting at unless you consider that socialism = "social safety net measures", which it isn't but, as mentioned, it seems that many in the US think it is... Reading the comments it does seem that many don't understand the meaning of "socialism" (or seem to think that the passing of time somehow changes things) even on HN so polls to the general public are completely meaningless. But ask people if the prefer to live in North America or Western Europe vs Eastern Europe/China pre-80s and you'll get a much clearer picture of what the real sentiment is... East Germany had to build a wall to keep people IN, after all.
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    The USSR had nothing to do with socialism (it was a feudal dictatorship) and it's debatable whether China is now capitalist.
    - cholantesh 2mo ago
      I quite regularly read weird characterizations of the USSR, but 'feudal dictatorship'?
  - tw04 2mo ago
    China doubled down, what on earth are you talking about? Every major corporation in China has a party member in a position of power to direct what the company does. And many of them have state ownership. https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/reassessing-role-state-ownership-chinas-economy https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/reassessing-role... https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/arc-of-the-chinese-economy/state-ownership-in-china/64E108B734D0819AF683B477AF4BC88D https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/arc-of-the-chinese-...
    - inigyou 2mo ago
      Which isn't what any socialist would call socialism. But it is what many capitalists would call socialism.
      - vintermann 2mo ago
        Common ownership of the means of production is what I call socialism. Public welfare isn't technically part of it, but it's hard to imagine a state where we don't have it if power is at all evenly distributed. Central planning is orthogonal to the whole thing... credit institutions and corporations do a hell of a lot of centralized planning.
    - mytailorisrich 2mo ago
      State ownership of many companies is not the same as socialism. China has state capitalism and private capitalist enterprises, and free enterprise with robust free markets overall. These are the main reforms that allowed it to thrive after the catastrophe of socialism under Mao. Even basic stuff like farmers being allowed to sell surplus freely for profit and at market prices only became allowed in 1978. China now has the second largest number of millionaires in USD after the US.
miyoji 2mo ago
The 1980s was almost 50 years ago, and history continues to move. 50 years before the 1980s, during the Great Depression, the narrative was the opposite. The Soviet Union was invincible with a growing economy while every capitalist country on earth had been plunged into a devastating depression. Adopting social programs was the only way capitalism survived that decade at all. In the 1930s, "socialism" won. In the 1980s, "capitalism" won. Scare quotes because neither was really the thing. Something else is going to win in the 2030s. The story is never over, despite what Francis Fukuyama would have you believe.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

Avicebron 2mo ago

People really need to give up the cold war, the failures of "end of history" thinking are directly related to all of the economic problems we have today. We could do - have done - much worse than implementing some good sense social safety net measures. Especially as people advocate for AI and using it to replace/disempower employees.

mytailorisrich 2mo ago
> People really need to give up the cold war, the failures of "end of history" thinking are directly related to all of the economic problems we have today. That's irrelevant to the point. The 1980s did settle the capitalism vs. socialism debate. The USSR and, perhaps more consequentially, China effectively abandonned socialism because it failed and acknowledged that capitalism, free enterprise, and the free market was what worked. The "end of history" is the belief (proved wrong if not naively wrong from the start) that this would lead to everyone being "friends" under a Western-style liberal democracy. > We could do - have done - much worse than implementing some good sense social safety net measures. I don't understand what you are getting at unless you consider that socialism = "social safety net measures", which it isn't but, as mentioned, it seems that many in the US think it is... Reading the comments it does seem that many don't understand the meaning of "socialism" (or seem to think that the passing of time somehow changes things) even on HN so polls to the general public are completely meaningless. But ask people if the prefer to live in North America or Western Europe vs Eastern Europe/China pre-80s and you'll get a much clearer picture of what the real sentiment is... East Germany had to build a wall to keep people IN, after all.
- inigyou 2mo ago
  The USSR had nothing to do with socialism (it was a feudal dictatorship) and it's debatable whether China is now capitalist.
  - cholantesh 2mo ago
    I quite regularly read weird characterizations of the USSR, but 'feudal dictatorship'?
- tw04 2mo ago
  China doubled down, what on earth are you talking about? Every major corporation in China has a party member in a position of power to direct what the company does. And many of them have state ownership. https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/reassessing-role-state-ownership-chinas-economy https://sccei.fsi.stanford.edu/china-briefs/reassessing-role... https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/arc-of-the-chinese-economy/state-ownership-in-china/64E108B734D0819AF683B477AF4BC88D https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/arc-of-the-chinese-...
  - inigyou 2mo ago
    Which isn't what any socialist would call socialism. But it is what many capitalists would call socialism.
    - vintermann 2mo ago
      Common ownership of the means of production is what I call socialism. Public welfare isn't technically part of it, but it's hard to imagine a state where we don't have it if power is at all evenly distributed. Central planning is orthogonal to the whole thing... credit institutions and corporations do a hell of a lot of centralized planning.
  - mytailorisrich 2mo ago
    State ownership of many companies is not the same as socialism. China has state capitalism and private capitalist enterprises, and free enterprise with robust free markets overall. These are the main reforms that allowed it to thrive after the catastrophe of socialism under Mao. Even basic stuff like farmers being allowed to sell surplus freely for profit and at market prices only became allowed in 1978. China now has the second largest number of millionaires in USD after the US.

miyoji 2mo ago

The 1980s was almost 50 years ago, and history continues to move. 50 years before the 1980s, during the Great Depression, the narrative was the opposite. The Soviet Union was invincible with a growing economy while every capitalist country on earth had been plunged into a devastating depression. Adopting social programs was the only way capitalism survived that decade at all. In the 1930s, "socialism" won. In the 1980s, "capitalism" won. Scare quotes because neither was really the thing. Something else is going to win in the 2030s. The story is never over, despite what Francis Fukuyama would have you believe.

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]