Skip Navigation
192 comments

  • "No, no, they tries to tricks us, precious [capitalism]! They wants to take you from us, stop you from helping us, precious, gollum!"

  • But the talking head on Fox told me what to think about socialism, using no facts or common sense.

    What am I supposed to do? NOT believe them?

  • the fear for good, is the fear for change or admitting they where wrong. it is pride, as well as lazyness, combined with stupidity and weakness. because weakness is not how strong one seems(or lack there of) but weakness, is how little a person would be their real self, as well as how much they assume that in order to be strong they need to supress others so they are in a worse state than them. supressing people is a sign of the weak, because they are blinded and can only destroy.

  • It had everything to do with human greed.

    As long as there is the suggestion or possibility, no matter how remote that anyone of us can become enormously wealthy, we won't want to change the system.

  • Capitalism sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats, and socialism also sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats.

    Remember Stalin and his style of socialism? Just because one hell sucks doesn’t mean another hell is better.

    The only type of socialism which has made any kind of sense in recent times is the Nordic Model.

    Edit let’s not kid ourselves about the “greatness” of socialist countries when China has 50% poverty rate

    https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poverty-rate-by-country

    Here’s also a great article on how everyday life was like in the Soviet Union, https://shs.cairn.info/article/E_ANNA_682_0305?lang=en

    • Capitalism doesn't suck because of individual bad actors, but systemic issues. Competition naturally results in monopolization and the death of competition, and rising disparity. In addition, the tendency for the rate of profit to fall results in businesses and corporations seeking to move production abroad, to over-exploit and under-develop countries in the Global South by paying poverty wages. This extends to IMF loans, as well.

      Socialism doesn't have these same problems. No, it isn't some perfect system, such a claim would be absurd. However, collectivization of Capital and producing with the aim of fulfilling needs, rather than pursuit of profit, helps to eliminate the excesses of Capitalist exploitation. In addition to the reduction in exploitation, central planning is very efficient once competition stagnates.

      It's funny that you bring up the Nordic model, Nordic countries are seeing withering safety nets, (and are Capitalist, not Socialist) which in turn are generally funded from the same hyper-exploitation of the Global South in the form of brutal IMF loans and unequal exchange. The Safety Nets themselves came as concessions towards strong internal labor organization and the strong safety nets of the neighboring USSR, who had free high quality healthcare, education, and more. Now that the USSR is gone, the safety nets have been withering.

      I wouldn't say decaying Imperialist ethno states are a "good" model to look towards.

      • I mean, every country to date has been an ethnostate of one type or another, with the exception of what America wanted or purported to be. I’d add Canada and Australia to that as well. Have a look at these socialists states, which one isn’t centered around a dominant ethnicity? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states. So I don’t think using the label of “ethnostate” to disparage democratic counties is justified.

        Second, I agree that the global south is heavily exploited, but that seriously discounts successful countries in BRICS or East Asia. We need to understand why those countries succeeded, and others could not, and a lot of the failures of global south actors have to do with corruption and lack of solidarity with each other. Granted, imperial powers instigated instability in every continent, but it didn’t work many times, especially in East Asia. Africa is a great example of failing to realize its potential, a unionized Africa would be a force to reckon with. The “global south” needs to stop blaming convenient scapegoats for many of its own problems. You can’t be like, oh once we fix greed everything will be okay! How do you ever propose to fix greed? Even if the whole world agrees to be socialist, examples like Stalins USSR show us that greed exists to corrupt any economic and political model. It’s disingenuous to say otherwise.

        I am not saying we have to be capitalist, I am saying it’s disingenuous to say that greed occurs because of capitalism, and not the other way around. You don’t have to dismantle the whole world to start taxing wealthy people at a higher rate, and start using those funds in a sensible way like they do in the Nordic model.

    • Remember Stalin and his style of socialism?

      No. Cuz I wasn't alive at that time.

      But yea, I did read about it in This Soviet World, Soviet Democracy, Russian Justice, and Blackshirts and Reds

    • It's worth responding to your edit in a separate comment.

      First, China. That data shows 45% living under $10 a day, and has no data provided on the "poverty rate" column. Not only are you misreporting by 11%, but you are conveniently reporting the wrong data. Essentially, you reported the wrong quantity for the wrong quality. Furthermore, this data is half a decade old, when we know 3 years ago China completed a mass poverty aleviation campaign and over the course of around a decade uplifted 800 million people out of poverty.

      Furthermore, 10 dollars gets you far more in different parts of China than the wealthier coastal cities, who were the first to be developed more thoroughly. Given that a century ago China was among the poorest countries in the world, its progress has been astounding overall, and in the more rural inland areas have been a major focus in the last decade. Unlike more developed countries, China is still a developing country, and as such despite its rapid improvement has a long way to go before every area is like one of the more developed tier 1 cities.

      Secondly, the USSR. Not only is this article from a Private Christian College, it does't contradict that, again, wealth disparity shrank to one of the lowest in the world while maintaining some of the highest rates of economic growth in the world, free, high quality education and healthcare were provided, literacy rates more than tripled to the highest in the world, science, technology, culture, and even sports flourished. Life expectancy doubled, and despite having much of their housing destroyed by the Nazi invasion in WWII, they quickly built the now stereotyped "soviet bloc" housing to house as many people as possible.

      All the article really seems to say, therefore, is that society wasn't perfect, which nobody here has said. It does not make the case that the Socialist system was worse than the semi-feudalism of before or the Capitalism it is today, rather, it just said some degree of corruption existed but in a way that was far less than it was before or after Socialism.

      The fact that you are either intentionally or unintentionally reporting wrong numbers for wrong metrics that are already outdated as some "gotcha" for countries that began as some of the poorest on the planet, and use the fact that the aren't like the Nordic Countries, that have spend centuries pillaging and looting the Global South and had centuries longer to develop, is dishonest and ill-informed. I suggest reading Super Imperialism by Hudson if you want to take a modern (2021 is the latest revision) look at the way the Global North, and specifically the US, rob and loot the world.

      • I can’t take anything you’re saying seriously because it’s just delusional, I am sorry.

        Why do I say what you’re saying is delusional. Look, you’re opining about some made up thing I said (btw, I said 50% as a rough figure looking at the color bar, it’s 45.8%), but you’re neglecting that the many, many capitalists nations have MUCH LESS POOR PEOPLE PER CAPITA than China. So what exactly am I supposed to do, take their way of governance as something to aspire to? No, thank you. I am not anti-social and I hope better for others.

        Stalin’s USSR proved that elitism and greed infects all economic tools and social ideologies. We also see this in China because no one is effectively allowed to own their home, the land is leased by the government. So consider this, if socialists like Stalin care so much about people, and the CPP is the modern equivalent of an anti-capitalist (not pure socialist) state, then what do you do with the 45.8% people making $10 per day (the US is at a hellish 2.2%). Why hasn’t China fixed their poverty by now?

        In Stalins USSR, why were there bread lines for the common folk while their leaders had caviar and chocolate.** I am sure that’s because they weren’t “real” socialists, and I am sure you’ll do better!

        Let’s also remember, that Stalin stole properties from the gentry, and made them mixed housing, but he and his family still lived in mansions. These are historical facts, just because you don’t like the people who say them doesn’t erase them from existence or history.

        https://hum54-15.omeka.fas.harvard.edu/exhibits/show/russian_dacha/joseph-stalin-s-dacha--the-ric

        I also find it hilarious that communists will preach socialism to those who reside in capitalist countries, completely neglecting that converting to Stalin or China type socialism will make the average American poorer because at least 60% of Americans actually own their own property, the land is not leased. So power to the minority 40% or 2.2% making less than $10 per day? The revolution surely will be great for the majority!

        I am not saying there aren’t things to fix, I just find the communists and socialists arguing with such passion and zeal and sophistry to be inherently disingenuous.

        Wealth per citizen by country, fyi: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

    • They were state capitalists. Most revolutionaries that win fall into the same trap, let's change everything everywhere at all once. Don't like farm structures? Fuck it, invent a new system and enforce it violently. And that same thing we're seeing GOP Trumpist about to do right now. Purge the ranks. Again and again and again. Fascism is a death cult that devalues life. It never lasts long.

      • State Capitalism went away when they transitioned away from the NEP and went for a more collectivized economy. I think you need to brush up more on theory.

  • Most people just want to be left alone and socialism is the farthest thing from being left alone. They say there is no private property in socialism but really you become the property.

    • Wanting to be "left alone" is more a consequence of the alienation caused by the Capitalist system, humans are very social animals. No idea what you mean by "becoming the property," that doesn't make any sense.

      • We're social with small groups of people not governments or people we have never met. I'm a person by the way, a social one, so I am speaking from experience.

    • That's a clear projection

    • what is your definition of socialism and what makes you say "you become the property"?

192 comments