- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Capitalism is not the opposite of socialism in fact the people in the picture advocate for nordic style socialism which is very much capitalism based just with strong safety nets.
So… social democracy ?
Nordic Style socialism is actually called social democracy. Americans are somehow latching onto the term given to them by the right.
Hopefully they will realize that the best America has ever been outside of racial and social issues is when FDR was president who was basically a social Democrat, although he preferred the term progressive and new nationalist. The decades after his economic reforms were the greatest time in American history, and then the Republicans got power again with Nixon and started to dismantle all of it, by the time Regan was in office, he killed organized labor and cut taxes on corporations leading to the current situation of hyper Inflationary debt based economics.
This is exactly what needs to happen again. A bold progressive president who DGAF and builds some monumental new social programs and revives a strong welfare state, taking back the word “welfare” because it’s A GOOD thing to not watch your citizens starve to death in the street, and we once knew this.
Not Americans, American media which is all completely controlled by oligarchs.
Capitalism works best with strong rules in place to prevent psychopaths and sociopaths from expanding too large.
But those rules inevitably fail because under capitalism wealth always consolidates under the psychopaths and sociopaths. Like, there’s no way to have capitalism and not have that happen. It’s part of the fundamental structure of private ownership of capital.
That’s not just money, but any form of power (in every system over time). Fighting it seems to be the eternal struggle.
Limit the amount of capital that can be individually owned. Wealth cap. Sociopaths are going to sociopath, make it so they can’t have more money than a government and there wouldn’t be so many problems.
Ok, institute a wealth cap and the people who have hit it will just bide their time until people get complacent, then start exerting power to roll it back. It happens with every reform and regulation that put limits on private ownership of capital. What we really need is to abolish private ownership entirely.
Wealth cap paired with a wealth floor and UBI, and we’re really cooking.
Absolutely agree!
Fully agree. Capitalism with strong safety net and social oversight is a really good system.
- Social safety net promotes risk taking for businesses, grows economy and balances society against extremes
- Social oversight prevents entities from gaming the system. There has to be a human dungeon master behind every system as every system can be gamed and corrupted within the rules of it. So external oversight is needed.
People like to hate on capitalism but capitalism + social oversight is really the best system.
No it ain’t
Hard disagree. Any system that allows private accumulation of capital will create a class of wealthy individuals who then use their wealth to dismantle checks and balances. It’s inevitable.
I think that if you make enough things democratically controlled, and have a proper secret ballot, that you can prevent wealth accumulation from being able to subvert democratic will.
It doesn’t solve “tyranny of the majority”, tho.
nah take your tankie nonsense back to your gulag
Look at this genius who thinks calling someone a “tankie” automatically wins the argument.
This guy is a notorious pro-capitalist hog BTW
it does tho because you don’t feed trolls. That’s like internet 101
Did you know that despite only having 4.5% of the world’s population, the USSR held 25% of the world’s prison population? Oh wait, no. Those statistics are for the USA right now.
Who needs prisons when you have gulags, murder rooms and force famines :)
If you can keep it
Exactly! Every widget that sells well leads the inventor to think they can effectively run societies. How the hell does anyone make that leap?
From the American point of view anything that even dares to suggest the possibility that there might be limitations to corporations’ liberty to freely exploit and consume the population and their environment is communism, anarchy, heresy, and terrorism., and anathema to capitalism, democracy, and Freedom®(some limitations might apply).
I hope America tries a bit of socialism next because they clearly have the power to do so. The billionaires will not pack up and start leaving, I just don’t see that ever happening. Especially when there are clear examples in California that is outcompeting every other state despite having higher taxes and more social programs.
Due to history, many East-Europeans (and US apparently) seem to understand socialism as communist dictatorship, because soviet puppets liked to call themselves that.
if you say “democratic socialism” everybody seems to understand it more as the Nordic model.
Political propaganda really likes to use that confusion.
For me, it’s simply that socialism is a sliding scale.
Did you help out the grandmother that had fallen off her mobility device on the sidewalk? Congratulations, you’re partly SOCIALIST. She didn’t pay for that assistance and yet you gave her value anyway.
Until we start seeing some socialists in positions of power, passing socialist policies, I’m going to respectfully disagree.
They’re right that capitalism is out; but look around. Socialism isn’t in. Fascism is.
“Passing socialist policies” would require a majority in Congress. What you have right now, is a growing list of socialist politicians currently holding office. And they are having an impact on the direction things are heading.
Are you saying the white supremacists running the country are socialist?
You can totally have a “socialist worker’s party” that is actually anti-Marxist. You can also privatize some state-owned enterprises to maximize profits while still calling it a socialist party. Might as well abolish the unions while you’re at it. These labels are just marketing baits for luring in the working class.
The blueprint is out there, just look up the history of NSDAP, and you’ll see what I mean.
They’re right that capitalism is out
Is it? I haven’t seen a shortage of landlords and my bills keep getting delivered to the door on a regular schedule.
Fascism is.
Fascism is just imperialism returning to the core. We’re no longer doing the “Fuck Around” kind of capitalism. We are now in the “Find Out” portion of the economic model.
They tried so hard to make socialism a bad word. And non of their voters know one single thing of what it is.
Spoiler: it’s from the countries doing better than you.
The US should stop saying socialism = evil communism …
One can be social towards others without giving away all of one’s personal possessions and liberties…
Personal property exists under socialism and communism.
Private property does not. A factory cannot be privately held under communism. Roads belong to the people. Workers own the farms.
It’s not “our toothbrush, Comrade”
But you also don’t need a totalitarian state to regulate every last thing. There can be independence for those who work and manage the resources; you can still create a restaurant and be paid a high wage for managing it, coming up with new and innovative dishes etc.
The point is to remove the incentive to exploit for profit. It’s literally the root cause of every scam.
Communism without a dictatorship is yet to be seen at large scale. That would be interesting to compare.
And you also dont have to go ALL IN on communism. You can absoluty choose sectors, that will never be private, and have private sectors that will be regulated by giving the workers more power and owners much less.
There’s so many nuances.
Uh… People in China and North Korea are somehow doing better than me here in Finland? Why? Please do elaborate. Assuming you can.
Putting China and North Korea in the same booth shows how little you know about this subject.
Which one of those two is not a socialist country?
You realise the comment you’re replying to was targeted at Americans, yes?
It was made on an international forum.
Regardless of how America-centric imperialist the comment was, it was written to everyone because it’s on an international forum without specifying it was for residents of some specific country only.
What happens in the head of the person talking 8s not relevant. What is relevant is what they end up actually saying.
Something in the ballpark of 19 out of 20 people on our planet are other than US residents. It is not okay to write a comment with an assumption that the remaining 95 % don’t exist. There are US-only forums, and you can outright say that you’re addressing US residents only. Everything else is targeting everyone.
It’s a comment on an article about American politics, specifically referring to the issues mentioned in the article. Context is a thing.
On an international forum. If you’re talking on an international forum, you’re talking to an international audience. Behave that way.
Context is a thing.
They’re not going to answer your question. They never do. These people don’t know what socialism and communism is and in the same breath say that Republicans don’t know what socialism and communism is either.
These people think that programs that benefit the indigent or economically impaired are inherently socialist programs. They think that universal healthcare is socialism as well.
They don’t understand what a Republic is and they don’t understand the difference between private and public ownership of the means of production. They think that socialism will make everybody equal but don’t understand what equity is.
They think that Bernie Sanders and AOC are socialists and have no idea what a Democratic socialist is in the first place.
They don’t know anything so they cannot possibly answer your question.
“They”
“They”
“Them”
“The ‘other…’”
Are you calling them socialists because of their name, particularly NK? That’s part of the propaganda. They’re not, at least not in practice. The Nazi party did the same thing.
They are more socialist than anything else on this planet. And they are among the few countries that do call themself socialist.
There are no socialist countries on Earth, and have never been, as there’s always been at least some amount of private ownership. But North Korea is easily the country with the least private ownership, so that’s the one least far detached from socialism. It’s a bit ridiculous calling that one socialist, either. But if not even NK is socialist, then what does “socialist countries” even mean in that context?!
The claim was that socialism is “from the countries doing better than you.”
So, what are those countries that are doing better than Finland?
Europeans asking why colonized countries don’t have the riches they took from them will never not be funny.
Could you elaborate on what you refer to and mean with this, please?
Finland has social democrats / socialists who have been in power, right? And decent labor unions, I thought. Must admit, I assumed Finland was similar in politics to the other Nordics, but I’ll stand corrected if not.
No nordic country is socialist, though. Having a labour union does not turn a capitalist country into a socialist one. Having a social democrat party does not make a country socialism. It’s not “Socialist democratic party”, it’s “Social democratic party”. Their goal is not socialism and they are not doing socialist politics. They are doing nothing to end private ownership of property.
People in China and North Korea are somehow doing better than me here in Finland?
Depends heavily on who “people” are in either instance. There are absolutely people in China living happier, healthier, and more prosperous lives than folks out in Finland. There are NKians living better, too (although significantly fewer due to Finland’s position as a global north energy exporter). There are Chinese and Korean folks living worse, too, of course.
If you expand the question to all of Europe, relative to China/NK, then the numbers look even better for the East Asian states. Certainly, folks living in bombed-out Ukrainian border towns are doing a lot worse than their North Korean peers. And significantly worse than the folks living peaceful and prosperous lives in Chongqing or Shanghai. Middle Eastern refugees scraping by in Turkyie and Romania, or getting surrounded by angry mobs of protesters in some shitty apartment in the UK or France, are doing substantially worse. Elderly pensioners working into their 80s in countries like Bulgaria or Moldova are far worse off than their Chinese and NK peers, comfortably retired in their mid-50s.
For some reason, westerners have their view of these countries trapped in the early 90s and refuse to believe the intervening 30 year span has delivered any kind of social or economic progress. You can watch full reel-to-reel videos of people touring these countries and all you get back is “Potemkin Village! Fake News! Everyone is secretly starving just outside the focus of the cameras!” in the comments. Pure denialism. But its necessary to believe a country like Finland is the best any nation on earth can possibly be when your government is in the process of freezing university funding, cutting social welfare benefits, and fattening up its national security budgets.
I went by hitchhiking through China from Khorgos to the Laotian border and was hosted by several local families in their homes on the way. I have seen more of Chinese everyday life than you have.
Your view of China has been trapped in Chinese propaganda.
And also: I would not say that the Chinese that are living a lavish life with a lot of luxury are living a socialist life. They might be an example of how “capitalism makes people happy”, but I don’t think that’s really correct either.
Your view of China has been trapped in Chinese propaganda.
Funny, because I was stuck in Hong Kong for a couple of weeks during the 2019 riots. Was it Chinese propaganda when the students were waving big “Trump 2020” banners?
I would not say that the Chinese that are living a lavish life with a lot of luxury are living a socialist life.
I wouldn’t say this about anyone. It’s not “luxury” if everyone’s enjoying it. That’s sort of the joke of socialism. It’s a basic standard of human comfort, not a lavish expression of artificial scarcity. One day you wake up and there’s cheap abundant cavier and 1 carat perfect clarity diamonds at bargain basement prices. Then they’re not delicacies reserved for the privileged elites anymore.
They might be an example of how “capitalism makes people happy”
Sure, if you ignore that the Maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.
When wealth isn’t being ruthlessly consolidated and surplus value vacuumed up from a powerless working class, its easy to walk down a main street in the Futain district and think “Wow, we’ve got Toys’R’Us in the states, too! I guess they’re just as capitalist as we are.”
Only problem is that Toys’R’Us doesn’t exist in the US anymore, on account of a leveraged buyout and subsequent bust-out of the business. Commercial practices that would get you run out of town on a rail in Beijing are how you get rich quick in the States.
It’s not “luxury” if everyone’s enjoying it.
Correct.
In the case of China it’s not enjoyed by everyone, though. A typical Chinese toilet is a huge hole in the ground with some kind of slabs of concrete over them, with a 15 cm wide slit between the slabs. You go stand on the two slabs and poop into the cavity underneath. There is typically a roof overneath. Homes often don’t have anything on the floors. Just bare concrete.The people living in opulence are not enjoying something everyone there has. They are enjoying something only the richest 0,5 % among their people has. China is a country where wealth is concentrated extremely strongly to the few.
Sure, if you ignore that the Maoist uprising against the landlords was the largest and most comprehensive proletarian revolution in history, and led to almost totally-equal redistribution of land among the peasantry.
That happened long before yesterday, though. If you look at decades such as 1970’s or 1980’s or even later, you’ll notice that whatever Mao was striving for, got eventually all undone.
In the case of China it’s not enjoyed by everyone, though.
The industrialization of scarce commodities significantly increases the number of consumers of the given good or service.
A typical Chinese toilet is a huge hole in the ground
It’s funny, because I’ve been in some shockingly fancy squatty-potty restrooms. Definitely took some getting used to. But that’s more a consequence of culture than economic necessity. And anything that’s been renovated in the last 30 years will have a handicap accessible stall with a sit-down toilet.
I feel like I’m talking to someone who spent six months in the West Virginia back country, trying to insist everyone in the US still uses the Outhouse. What you’re describing doesn’t exist in any of the massive high rise apartments thrown up all over the eastern seaboard. You’re discounting hundreds of millions of people.
The people living in opulence are not enjoying something everyone there has.
The people still living in rural backwaters are at the tail end of a massive upgrade to trade and travel. They received access to modern industrial farming and manufacturing back in the 80s and 90s. That’s why you don’t need a full third of the population manually planting rice anymore just to avoid a continent-spanning famine.
If you didn’t notice the big industrial combines and giant metal storehouses, nevermind the full electrification of the back country (a feat neighboring India, rural Latin America, Central Africa, and even parts of Eastern Europe have struggled to achieve) then you weren’t looking.
That happened long before yesterday, though.
It laid the foundation for a century of economic growth and prosperity. What you’re seeing today is the fruit of the revolutionaries’ labor.
whatever Mao was striving for, got eventually all undone.
China passed through an industrial revolution and changed the underlying economy from subsistence farms to a modern manufacturing and professional service-based economy. That’s not a reversal of the Long March. It’s the fondest dream of any well-read Marxist scholar.
Shorter working hours, high living standards, a more educated population, and a robust domestically owned and operated worker economy is Socialist stage of economic development that Marxists strive towards… until they get there and seek to go further.
Or as the republicans will call it: Anti-capitalism.
I actually like that term better. Hell yeah, anti-capitalism!
That makes you a terrorist in america.
Executive Orders only cover the executive branch of the US federal government.
They aren’t laws, they don’t create laws & they damn sure don’t override the Constitution.
And since when does that mean anything with this admin?
Nearly every time they’ve entered court room.
Fascists put on a big show of being all powerful & invulnerable, but it’s just that. Grow a spine and quit doing their work for them.
They have certainly have been found guilty of things; Since when has it led to consequences? Still in power. Still fucking shit up. Still having their illegal not-laws getting enforced by brownshits.
Like that matters anymore.
Neat!
Finally!
If you want the populace to support capitalism, the wealthy need to share the spoils voluntarily.
Finally!
