Socialism probably is the fairest policy to adopt...
But what happens when humanity fails to progress in an environment devoid of competition?
36-40, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
trocovor · 36-40, M
A faulty assumption underlies your question: in reality, socialism doesn't mean we stop competing; it just means every worker competes, and not for the privilege of eating or for obscene luxuries, but for status and prestige, which is what the top performers in any field compete for anyway. Furthermore, empirically socialism hasn't in fact lead to no innovation and technological stagnation, despite what american propaganda often claims.
GardenSage · 36-40, M
@trocovor remind me who the last successful socialist was....
GardenSage · 36-40, M
Socialism took on capitalism at its own game- competition- and clearly lost
trocovor · 36-40, M
if you ever want to have a serious conversation about the relative merits of capitalism and socialism, hmu, but i'm not about to engage with someone who's obviously speaking in bad faith, can't contemplate that what he's been told all his life is false, and on top goes about it with this fetid "HA PWNED YOU" attitude.
GardenSage · 36-40, M
@trocovor seriously... who? The Nordic Nations?
Their means of production aren’t controled by the state. Economically, they’re capitalists and their government officials will quickly point that out too.
Their means of production aren’t controled by the state. Economically, they’re capitalists and their government officials will quickly point that out too.
trocovor · 36-40, M
@GardenSage have a good time