How do you explain science to an evolutionist or economics to a socailist?

@JoeyFoxx Pleas ...... show ..... a .... case ...... where ..... socialism ..... has ..... ever ..... worked ........ money. Trying to find short words for you to understand.

@hippyjoe1955 Paris Commune, Ukrainian Free Territory, Revolutionary Catalonia, EZLN, Rojava.

@basilfawlty89 Worked so well the people starved to death. Amazing samples.

@hippyjoe1955 there was no starvation in any of those examples. The starvation in Ukraine wasn't under the free territory. It was twenty years later long after Makhnos forces were removed.

@hippyjoe1955 Rojava still exists and has no famine. Literally what are your sources?

@hippyjoe1955 for that matter there's no starvation under the EZLN either and exists today.

For the record, I’m not defending socialism. I am merely pointing out the weakness of your strawman position.

Socialism fails not due to economics, but due to psychology.

Sorry this nuance was too challenging for you to grasp.


@hippyjoe1955

@JoeyFoxx As the noted economist Hayek observed, "If socialists understood economics they wouldn't be socialists". He is right and you are wrong. Socialism is a failure where ever it is tried because of economics. The problem being 'experts'. A test was performed where a group of people with no expertise in the field were asked to estimate the weight of a bull. Afterwards a group of cattlemen (experts in the field) were asked to do the same thing. The group of people's answered were averaged and they came within 5 lbs of the actual weight of the bull. The experts were at least (most were more) than 200 lbs off in their estimate. So it is with socialists who rely on 'experts' to control their economy. The experts are wrong and the economy floundered but had enough people been given the chance to make their own choices in the economy the economy would blossom.

@hippyjoe1955 It seems no matter how many times we say it, some people still dont know the difference between Socialism and Communism. Communism is about the means of production. Socialism is about regulating business to keep it honest and ethical and taxing the "Capitally advantaged" and redistributing that money into social programs for all. like hospitals schools and needed infrastructure. Socialism and Capitalism are meant to run in harmony with each other.

@whowasthatmaskedman not really. What you call socialism is social democracy. It's still capitalism but with government intervention and welfare. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. Communism is a stateless, classless moneyless society where property is owned collective by the community.

@hippyjoe1955 your position is to reference a book published in the 1940’s where Hayek’s predictions of extreme socialist tyranny have never come true...

Interesting perspective.

(Note that Communism and Socialism are not the same thing)

Also note that while Hayek was an economist, he literally uses many references to psychology throughout his book.

Do you actually pay attention to the things you post?

@basilfawlty89 "Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management, as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity."
Please note that last part. "Citizen ownership of equity" Like a share market.. This is to distinguish it from the Feudal system or an Oligarchy where
"the people" are excluding from ownership.
I hope that settles the matter.

@whowasthatmaskedman which proved my point. What people call socialism is actually social democracy. It's still capitalism. Actual socialism is worker owned, worker managed.

@basilfawlty89 NO ITS NOT!! READ THE WIKIPEDIA ENTRY!!