This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Socialism - collectivism, for the greater good etc is where a few people think they know better than everybody else at everything. A few people think they know how to run the entire economy - exactly what needs to be produced and at what quantity and price. A few people think they know exactly what job and profession you should do, what you should be taught in school, who you should associate with and what your own values should be.
In a free society people are responsible for their own lives and take decisions they believe are best for them. In a free economy the global mass of people decide what is produced and quantities etc - this makes sense because people know what they want and need and it leads to a better allocation of goods and services so supermarket shelves don't end up empty etc (which is a feature of socialist countries - they always lack even basics!) Think Soviet Union, NAZI party in Germany, DPROC, Cuba, Venezuela etc. Socialism has a dirty history from start to now has killed and impoverished millions, it's a rotten, antiquated system where the state plays God. It's not just a dirty word it's a dirty system.
In a free society people are responsible for their own lives and take decisions they believe are best for them. In a free economy the global mass of people decide what is produced and quantities etc - this makes sense because people know what they want and need and it leads to a better allocation of goods and services so supermarket shelves don't end up empty etc (which is a feature of socialist countries - they always lack even basics!) Think Soviet Union, NAZI party in Germany, DPROC, Cuba, Venezuela etc. Socialism has a dirty history from start to now has killed and impoverished millions, it's a rotten, antiquated system where the state plays God. It's not just a dirty word it's a dirty system.
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
@similarexperience Lol Your first paragraph describes private enterprise exactly.
Economics and freedom are not synonyms.
And as for socialism you seem to have just randomly lumped together every "bad" country you could think of.
And the whole "personal responsibility" bullshit is a great way to blame the victim when the system screws them over. The oligarch who owns the business you work for decides to offshore, well it is your fault for not working for 59 cents an hour.
Economics and freedom are not synonyms.
And as for socialism you seem to have just randomly lumped together every "bad" country you could think of.
And the whole "personal responsibility" bullshit is a great way to blame the victim when the system screws them over. The oligarch who owns the business you work for decides to offshore, well it is your fault for not working for 59 cents an hour.
@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow -I’m not sure I entirely agree with your analysis – the difference is that in free economies with private businesses – individuals – (not politicians) – freely decide how to run their business. Businesses are private property, that can freely choose who they employ, what their own company values are etc. People are free to disagree with a companies practises and company free to employ people accordingly – freedom of association etc!
In socialism the state decrees who's employed and what values are for everybody. Private property rights are set aside for the ‘greater good’ for the collective (‘public’ ownership, ‘worker owned’ whatever the branding).
Now, the waters get muddied, because things are never just as simple as “socialist” or “capitalist”. You find degrees of both systems in many countries. You find big “capitalist” corporations that seem to dominate the market – often they get big public contracts, have sweetheart tax deals and receive tax payer subsidies – this is probably the kind of ‘private enterprise’ you are thinking of which is really crony capitalism.
Economics are freedom are not TOTALLY synonymous but there is a freedom to make your own economic decisions without coercion that is worth having!
Is there anything good about those countries I listed? Are there any ‘good’ socialist countries? The Nordic model you say? - well once again we enter the muddy waters of socialism by degrees.
“Oligarch who owns the business” - sounds like crony capitalism to me at work. I don’t like that either – its all just swamp creatures of government using their authority to enrich themselves at others expense and call it fair capitalism.
In socialism the state decrees who's employed and what values are for everybody. Private property rights are set aside for the ‘greater good’ for the collective (‘public’ ownership, ‘worker owned’ whatever the branding).
Now, the waters get muddied, because things are never just as simple as “socialist” or “capitalist”. You find degrees of both systems in many countries. You find big “capitalist” corporations that seem to dominate the market – often they get big public contracts, have sweetheart tax deals and receive tax payer subsidies – this is probably the kind of ‘private enterprise’ you are thinking of which is really crony capitalism.
Economics are freedom are not TOTALLY synonymous but there is a freedom to make your own economic decisions without coercion that is worth having!
Is there anything good about those countries I listed? Are there any ‘good’ socialist countries? The Nordic model you say? - well once again we enter the muddy waters of socialism by degrees.
“Oligarch who owns the business” - sounds like crony capitalism to me at work. I don’t like that either – its all just swamp creatures of government using their authority to enrich themselves at others expense and call it fair capitalism.
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
@similarexperience That is a nice myth they might tell you on in high school business class but that is not the reality of the situation and never has been.
And your "analysis of socialism is mostly cold war propaganda. And look up the origins of private property. It literally started with the wealthy seizing public land and unilaterally declaring themselves the owners of it and demanding taxes from the public.
Furthermore monopoly and corruption is the natural endpoint for capitalism. That is literally what the game Monopoly was designed to illustrate.
Freedom, democracy and capitalism are more often then not diametrically opposed. And if you don't think capitalism is coercive you are not paying attention.
They were just a random selection of nations you don't like and have nothing to do with anything. Furthermore you lumped together fascism with socialist nations. And yes there are good socialist nations. The nordic model is a social democratic system and has nothing to do with socialism.
Crony capitalism is capitalism. Dispense with the fictional distinctions. Monopoly and corruption of government is and always will be the natural result of capitalism. This is not even controversial. We have literally 300 years of proof of that.
And your "analysis of socialism is mostly cold war propaganda. And look up the origins of private property. It literally started with the wealthy seizing public land and unilaterally declaring themselves the owners of it and demanding taxes from the public.
Furthermore monopoly and corruption is the natural endpoint for capitalism. That is literally what the game Monopoly was designed to illustrate.
Freedom, democracy and capitalism are more often then not diametrically opposed. And if you don't think capitalism is coercive you are not paying attention.
They were just a random selection of nations you don't like and have nothing to do with anything. Furthermore you lumped together fascism with socialist nations. And yes there are good socialist nations. The nordic model is a social democratic system and has nothing to do with socialism.
Crony capitalism is capitalism. Dispense with the fictional distinctions. Monopoly and corruption of government is and always will be the natural result of capitalism. This is not even controversial. We have literally 300 years of proof of that.
basilfawlty89 · 31-35, M
@similarexperience actually you're quite wrong. Socialism is not the government owning stuff or telling you what to do. There have been stateless forms of socialism. A worker's cooperative is a form of socialism with no government ownership. The business is collectively owned and managed by the workers. This is what socialism actually is. Its just extending democracy to the workplace. How is more democracy bad?
JimboSaturn · 51-55, M
@similarexperience Again that is communism , not socialism.
JimboSaturn · 51-55, M
@basilfawlty89 Like Picturesofabettertomorrow said, this is cold wary anti-communist propaganda. They got so scare of the Soviets the saw communism everywhere.
PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M
@JimboSaturn It is actually a simplistic version of Leninism. Lenin believed the most practical way to implement socialism was to nationalize things under a government run by a vanguard party which would oversee the transition from capitalism,to socialism and eventually to communism. The plan was also phase out the government as certain aspects of it no longer became necessary. It was literally the first theory on a government that was intended to bring about it's own obsolescence.