Skip Navigation

You're viewing a single thread.

371 comments

  • By "socialism", are we talking:

    A. Worker-controlled economic system, or

    B. What American liberals think is socialism, which is just a capitalist system with welfare.

    • A.

    • Either.

    • Aka socdem vs demsoc

      • https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

        Social democracy is a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism[1]

        ^[1] Eatwell & Wright 1999, pp. 80–103; Newman 2005, p. 5; Heywood 2007, pp. 101, 134–136, 139; Ypi 2018; Watson 2019.

        • Today I learned that Socialism is when you do Capitalism in a nice way.

          Oh wait, no I didn't, because Capitalism and Socialism are completely different modes of Production.

          • No, they're not.

            They're economic systems, not modes of production.

            Today, you're still refusing to accept reality.

            It's right there before your eyes. You're too brainwashed to see it.

            • In your own words, they are economic systems. What do you call a system built on Capitalism, but with a slightly larger welfare net? Socialism? No, you call it Capitalism.

              You're calling me brainwashed for correctly pointing out that Capitalism is Capitalism, even if you dress it up nicely?

                • Believe me, I'm not conflating Capitalism with markets. Capitalism is a specific form of market economy by which individual Capitalists buy and sell Means of Production, or Capital, by which they can pay Workers to use and create commodities via wage labor.

                  Examples of Socialist market economies include Market Socialism, a form of Socialism built on competing worker-owned co-operatives.

                  Examples of Socialist Market Economies do not include Capitalist Social Democracies, because the primary defining feature of Social Democracies is Capitalism with generous social safety nets, a kind of "human-centric" Capitalism.

                  You on the other hand are making the misconception that Socialism is simply when the government does stuff. You're wrong, of course, as countless people here have pointed put.

                  Capitalism with regulation is still Capitalism. Socialism is when Workers share ownership of the Means of Production, simple as.

                    • I did define Capitalism, it's a market based system by which Capitalists buy and sell Capital and Pay Workers wages to produce commodities.

                      Please read any Socialist literature, you've gotten completely twisted into thinking Socialism is a nice form of Capitalism.

                      • I did define Capitalism, it’s a market based system by which Capitalists buy and sell Capital and Pay Workers wages to produce commodities.

                        I honestly almost suffocated. I laughed so hard I could barely breath, exactly like Risitas.

                        You seriously think you've "defined capitalism"? And to think you're doing it in the exact way that shows I'm correct in that you've conflated capitalism with market economies? :DDD I can't fucking believe this.

                        I'd like to keep pointing out how ridiculous this is, but I think you're like a 14-year old yank or something and I don't want to be that mean to kids.

                        Capitalism is defined by private ownership of industries and especially FOR PROFIT. (In case you were unaware, that's what the "capital" in "capitalism" means.) FOR PROFIT*. That's the main thing. Putting profit above everything, and being owned privately. The definition has nothing to do with "trading commodities and paying workers". I... honestly I'm just slightly in loss of words at your stupidity.

                        Here in Finland our railroads aren't private. Hell, there's not even one single privately owned liquor store in the country. We still use market economies. Which means you are allowed to sell your time to an employer who has a private business, in exchange for money. Unlike the US though, we don't even have a minimum wage set in the law. Why? Because our trade unions are so strong that there is a de facto minimum wage in all industries, so a de jure one isn't even needed.

        • In practice, social democracy takes a form of socially managed welfare capitalism

      • Nope.

        Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production.

        The Nordic Countries are in fact Social Democracies, not Socialist Democracies. Social Democracy is Capitalist in nature.

          • Your greatest source is misinterpreting a line in Wikipedia? You think that means your Capitalism is actually Socialism despite relying on Capitalism, because the welfare net is larger? Lmao

              • Your data is Wikipedia. That's it. Read perhaps any Socialist literature and you're immediately debunked.

                If Social Democracy was truly under Socialism, then the Workers of your country would own the Means of Production.

                A more accurate reading of what you are claiming is that Social Democracy takes influence from Marxism while rejecting the conclusions and thus the necessity for Socialism, instead relying on Capitalism.

                Tell me, plainly, how you can have Socialism with Capitalists and Capitalism. Or, does Nestlé not exist in the Nordic Countries?

                • "yOuR dAtA iS wIkIPeDiA"

                  No, it isn't.

                  Here's my source: Eatwell & Wright 1999, pp. 80–103; Newman 2005, p. 5; Heywood 2007, pp. 101, 134–136, 139; Ypi 2018; Watson 2019.

                  Want to go and read those books? No? I'm schocked.

                  The information from those books is listed on Wikipedia, yes. Are you so childish that you'll now pretend "you can't find real information on wikipedia"?

                  Weirdly enough, you don't have ANY sources for the things you pull out of your arse. Almost as if you didn't know what you were talking about and didn't HAVE any sources for your faulty claims, because like I said, you've conflated market economies and capitalism and think socialism equals communism, because you don't understand communism is just one form of socialism.

                  "How can you have socialism with capitalism"

                  Since I've already explained you keep conflating "capitalism" with "market economies", the question is then translated into "tell me, plainly, how can you have socialism and market economies", for which the answer is really quite simple for anyone literate. However, since you also conflate "socialism" with "communism", then the question becomes "how can you have communism with market economies", to which the answer is "you can't, since communism relies on planned economies instead of market economies".

                  That's where your confusion comes from.

                  Due to our good regulations because of our social demoractic, well governed economies, capitalist companies can participate, but they can't do the shenanigans they can do in less regulated markets. The degree of regulation is the question. Even the US doesn't have "pure" capitalism. Things like the antitrust laws are by definition socialist policies, but this doesn't mean the US is socialist in any way. It just means even they understand the necessity of regulation over "pure" capitalism, because "pure" capitalism is unsustainable as it leads to monopolies which then kill the economy.

                  This is why for example I can actually drink my tapwater and eat raw eggs that don't even have to be refrigerated. This is why the quality of all products here is higher, and why it's more expensive for companies like Nestle to try their bullshit here, which is why they mostly aim for developing countries. To avoid the regulation that comes with properly functioning social democracy.

                  • If Socialism is Capitalism with more regulations, is the United States Socialist too? It has plenty of regulations, more than Social Democracies do in many areas, in fact. Are you going to tell me that every country is actually Socialist if it doesn't have a laissez Faire Capitalist economy, even if it uses Capitalism as the primary mode of production?

                    You want a source? Marx's Capital. Read it, you might learn something, even if accidentally.

                    Social Democracy absolutely takes influence from Marxism, that's perhaps what the source you list may be referring to, however the place where Social Democrats fight with Socialists on is Social Democrats believe Capitalism can be harnessed and benefited from, instead of needing to transition to a worker owned economy.

                    I am not confusing Capitalism with markets, again, Wikipedia defines Market Socialism as a market based economy of competing worker-owned entities. Your own source, against you! Ha.

                    Similarly, I am not confusing Socialism with Communism. Communism is a Post-Socialist society, one that is Stateless, Classless, and Moneyless. Communism is indeed one form of Socialism, as is Syndicalism, as is Anarchism, as is Council Communism, as is Market Socialism.

                    Please, stop making a fool of yourself.

                      • Oh, believe me, it's a good-faith gotcha. Anyone who thinks one of the most Capitalist countries on the planet is Socialist has no idea what they are talking about.

                        I am well-aware of the concept of mixed economies. As an example, a truly centrist economy would have 50% of industry owned and controlled by workers, and the other 50% would be owned and controlled by Capitalists. Social Democracies lean heavily in the side of Capitalists and as such are Capitalist.

                        Capitalism is indeed self-defeating, that's why the Nordic Countries are seeing steady rises in disparity and sliding of Worker protections, held largely at bay by strong unions. My hope is that one day the Nordic unions will take control and ownership of industry a la Syndicalism and finally become a group of actual Socialist countries.

                        Yes, the US has regulations. These do not make it more Socialist, rather, these regulations are often bought and paid for by large Corporations to cement their power as Capitalists.

                        What part of my analysis makes it so "obvious" to you that I haven't read Capital, despite everything I have stated thus far being in line with it, and everything you've stated being firmly against it?

                        Fair enough, many fields have been influenced by Marxism, but what I'm specifically stating is that Social Democrats agree with initial marxian analysis and see that there is benefit for working class power, but disagree with his conclusions, and thus prefer to direct Capitalism to benefit workers.

                        I have already explained how you've misinterpreted that same sentence multiple times: Social Democracy seeks to directly existing liberal Capitalist frameworks for the benefit of all, while maintaining existing power structures and hierarchies.

                        Explain to me exactly why you think Socialism is polite Capitalism. You keep thinking Socialism is mere government regulation, when it is in fact worker ownership. You cannot have Socialism with Capitalists, if you still have a business owner but the business is regulated, it's still Capitalist!

                        You're extremely incoherent for a right-winger, even by right-winger standards.

      • There are specific definitions and I'm sticking to them. If your economy has capitalists controlling companies with workers trading their labor for a wage underneath them, then it is capitalist, full stop.

        Unless your economy is full of co-ops or something. I don't know the common typical structure for a nordic company.

        • You haven't even read a single "basic definition" my man.

          Here's one :

          Socialism

          Dictionary

          Definitions from Oxford Languages

          socialism

          noun a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned OR REGULATED by the community as a whole.

          If your economy has capitalists controlling companies with workers trading their labor for a wage underneath them, then it is capitalist, full stop.

          Youre refusing (or unable, lol) to understand that "capitalism" does not equal market economies.

          Selling things doesn't mean capitalism. Trading goods doesn't mean capitalism. Owning a company doesn't mean capitalism. Having companies with workers doesn't mean capitalism.

          Jesus fucking God I'm tired of explaining concepts that my 8 year old niece could google and learn by her self in five minutes

          "unless you have a planned economy you're not socialist"

          Yeah, exactly the point I'm making. Brainwashed morons think socialism means full planked economy, when it's no such thing.

          Fucking spend 2 min on Google, is it so much to ask?

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

          Fucking perpetuating shitty 70's red scare propaganda mf sides are hurting.

          • I said nothing about a planned economy, now you're putting words in my mouth.

            Ever hear of libertarian socialism?

            Edit: I get the feeling we are talking about the same thing using different terms...

              • If you're going to continue to insult me and gaslight me, we are done here. Have a good day.

                • How am I "gaslighting" you?

                  You literally said "Unless your economy is full of co-ops or something [it's not socialist]".

                  You're referring to the collectives of the Soviet union. A distinct feature of PLANNED ECONOMIES.

                  "I never anything about a planned economy."

                  Yes, you did. And now you're pretending you didn't. Like pretending reality isn't what it actually is. Trying to convince me something that happened didn't happen. Is there a word for behaving like that...?

                  • Why do you think a co-op can only ever possibly exist in an authoritarian soviet type system? My power company is a co-op.

                    Here, I'll help you:

                    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative

                    Nothing in there except a tiny blurb about the Soviet Union as far as I can see. A soviet "worker's council" is not a cooperative.

                    • And where exactly do you live? Is it a socialist state, then?

                      Don't pretend like you weren't implying Soviet style collectives.

                      • Don’t pretend like you weren’t implying Soviet style collectives.

                        Why do you believe this? I'm a fuckin' anarchist for christ sake. I already mentioned libertarian socialism once.

      • How is fascism in your country btw? Seems that capitalism has it fine to me.

371 comments