Socialism Is Always Doomed to Fail

[Harry Bosch]

I don't think socialism failed. it just did not work in such a way to be pleasing to certain subsegments of the population used to a whole lot more than socialism would have given them. To say socialism failed because the Soviet Union fell apart is like saying republicanism and democracy failed because it didn't provide the former aristocracy with welath and power it had under the old regime. Me? Who cares about them. You could argue too democracy and republicanism failed because the first French Republic devolved back into a monarchy. You try new things, find out what works, find out what to do better next time. France has been a stable democracy and republic since the end of World War Two.

Russia wasn't anything like socialist and thus it's failure says nothing about socialism.

Rather, look at Zimbabwe and Venezuela for the reality of socialism.

We had the disaster in the USA of the Great Depression. And of course that hit hard in German and elsewhere. Do we then conclude capitalism is bad? We have the systems of the Scandinavian nations some call socialism that work rather well. So what represents socialism? Venezuela or Sweden? Zimbabwe was not socialism as per se. It was confiscation of white farms on the grounds that whites had dispossessed black farmers and that was theft being undone. whether that was correct or poorly handled is not really an issue of socialism. And we can point to the problems here in the USA with the poverty and incompetent systems of red Southern states, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Louisiana. Capitalism right wing style is not really that successful there is it? If it wasn't for large sums of money sent to these parasite states from the blue donor states we would have Venezuela happening there. Mismanagement isn't really about socialism vs capitalism.

Of course capitalism can lead to dramatic depressions and recessions that correct or cool down a heated market. But four or five years in a down capitalist economy is still far better than a lifetime in a socialist one for most people. The Scandinavian countries have bigger safety nets than the US. The Scandinavian countries still have recessions also, but their safety net blunts their impact and protects citizens better than the US system.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

We had the disaster in the USA of the Great Depression. And of course that hit hard in German and elsewhere. Do we then conclude capitalism is bad? We have the systems of the Scandinavian nations some call socialism that work rather well. So what represents socialism? Venezuela or Sweden? Zimbabwe was not socialism as per se. It was confiscation of white farms on the grounds that whites had dispossessed black farmers and that was theft being undone. whether that was correct or poorly handled is not really an issue of socialism. And we can point to the problems here in the USA with the poverty and incompetent systems of red Southern states, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Louisiana. Capitalism right wing style is not really that successful there is it? If it wasn't for large sums of money sent to these parasite states from the blue donor states we would have Venezuela happening there. Mismanagement isn't really about socialism vs capitalism.

Of course capitalism can lead to dramatic depressions and recessions that correct or cool down a heated market. But four or five years in a down capitalist economy is still far better than a lifetime in a socialist one for most people. The Scandinavian countries have bigger safety nets than the US. The Scandinavian countries still have recessions also, but their safety net blunts their impact and protects citizens better than the US system.

Life in socialist rural Sweden is better than life in capitalist rural Alabama. And if it was not for those blue donor states pouring money into Alabama, Alabama would soon collapse as a civilization. The situation in the deep red Southern states has been grim for decades now. And with experts like Arthur Laffer and like minded idiots advising anybody stupid enough to listen to them, it isn't going to get better any time soon.

Black Knight: "Tis but a scratch!"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Rather, look at Zimbabwe and Venezuela for the reality of socialism.

We had the disaster in the USA of the Great Depression. And of course that hit hard in German and elsewhere. Do we then conclude capitalism is bad? We have the systems of the Scandinavian nations some call socialism that work rather well. So what represents socialism? Venezuela or Sweden? Zimbabwe was not socialism as per se. It was confiscation of white farms on the grounds that whites had dispossessed black farmers and that was theft being undone. whether that was correct or poorly handled is not really an issue of socialism. And we can point to the problems here in the USA with the poverty and incompetent systems of red Southern states, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Louisiana. Capitalism right wing style is not really that successful there is it? If it wasn't for large sums of money sent to these parasite states from the blue donor states we would have Venezuela happening there. Mismanagement isn't really about socialism vs capitalism.

The Great Depression is nothing compared to Venezuela and Zimbabwe.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

We had the disaster in the USA of the Great Depression. And of course that hit hard in German and elsewhere. Do we then conclude capitalism is bad? We have the systems of the Scandinavian nations some call socialism that work rather well. So what represents socialism? Venezuela or Sweden? Zimbabwe was not socialism as per se. It was confiscation of white farms on the grounds that whites had dispossessed black farmers and that was theft being undone. whether that was correct or poorly handled is not really an issue of socialism. And we can point to the problems here in the USA with the poverty and incompetent systems of red Southern states, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Louisiana. Capitalism right wing style is not really that successful there is it? If it wasn't for large sums of money sent to these parasite states from the blue donor states we would have Venezuela happening there. Mismanagement isn't really about socialism vs capitalism.

Of course capitalism can lead to dramatic depressions and recessions that correct or cool down a heated market. But four or five years in a down capitalist economy is still far better than a lifetime in a socialist one for most people. The Scandinavian countries have bigger safety nets than the US. The Scandinavian countries still have recessions also, but their safety net blunts their impact and protects citizens better than the US system.

Life in socialist rural Sweden is better than life in capitalist rural Alabama. And if it was not for those blue donor states pouring money into Alabama, Alabama would soon collapse as a civilization. The situation in the deep red Southern states has been grim for decades now. And with experts like Arthur Laffer and like minded idiots advising anybody stupid enough to listen to them, it isn't going to get better any time soon.

Black Knight: "Tis but a scratch!"

But Sweden isn't Socialist. In general the mans of production are in private hands. A Safety Net does not Socialism make.

 

[dismal]

Life in socialist rural Sweden is better than life in capitalist rural Alabama.

What are you imagining is so different about Sweden and Alabama that one is "socialist" and the other is "capitalist"?

And, how is it in anyway limited to the "rural" parts?

Based on my understanding, Sweden and Alabama seem far more alike in the laws they operate under than they are different. And as far as I know there are no material differences in the laws in the rural areas and the urban parts.

 

[Elixir]

What are you imagining is so different about Sweden and Alabama that one is "socialist" and the other is "capitalist"?

One is in Sweden - a socialist country. The other is in the US - a capitalist country, and more so in "red" states like AL

as far as I know there are no material differences in the laws in the rural areas and the urban parts.

Exactly the point. The difference is visually striking though. I've been in rural AL, and this is a fair representation IME:

Rural Alabama

Don't know if this is a fair representation of rural Sweden... willing to consider that Google is a lib'rul tool of the kornspeerisee of the Sweden Chamber of Commerce trying to make commies look good... but I'd need evidence. Otherwise I consider this fair:

Rural Sweden

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Sweden still has the means of production in private hands. They are by definition not a socialist country. A social safety net is not the definition of socialism.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Life in socialist rural Sweden is better than life in capitalist rural Alabama.

What are you imagining is so different about Sweden and Alabama that one is "socialist" and the other is "capitalist"?

And, how is it in anyway limited to the "rural" parts?

Based on my understanding, Sweden and Alabama seem far more alike in the laws they operate under than they are different. And as far as I know there are no material differences in the laws in the rural areas and the urban parts.

A lot of right wingers have been slobbering about Sweden and Scandinavian "socialism" for decades. Whether it's really socialism or not, they get that from our fanatic right and have been as long as I can remember.

Rural? Because here in America, our rural areas of the Southern states have become pretty much shitholes. If not for food stamps and other government help these areas would be like Mexico. The Southern red state ultra-conservative capitalism boosters don't seem to be able to figure out what to do about all of this. In Congress, the GOP has a solution. Slash food stamp programs and the safety net.
Excellent thinking! Ayn Rand would approve. I have seen several recent news stories on the plight of the rural areas of the South so it was on my mind. These areas are in an economic death spiral. Nobody seems to care. MAGA? MAGA my ass!

 

[bilby]

Sweden still has the means of production in private hands. They are by definition not a socialist country. A social safety net is not the definition of socialism.

Which means of production?

Certainly not all of them:

http://www.government.se/government-policy/state-owned-enterprises/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Government-owned_companies_of_Sweden

 

[Axulus]

We had the disaster in the USA of the Great Depression. And of course that hit hard in German and elsewhere. Do we then conclude capitalism is bad? We have the systems of the Scandinavian nations some call socialism that work rather well. So what represents socialism? Venezuela or Sweden? Zimbabwe was not socialism as per se. It was confiscation of white farms on the grounds that whites had dispossessed black farmers and that was theft being undone. whether that was correct or poorly handled is not really an issue of socialism. And we can point to the problems here in the USA with the poverty and incompetent systems of red Southern states, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Louisiana. Capitalism right wing style is not really that successful there is it? If it wasn't for large sums of money sent to these parasite states from the blue donor states we would have Venezuela happening there. Mismanagement isn't really about socialism vs capitalism.

Of course capitalism can lead to dramatic depressions and recessions that correct or cool down a heated market. But four or five years in a down capitalist economy is still far better than a lifetime in a socialist one for most people. The Scandinavian countries have bigger safety nets than the US. The Scandinavian countries still have recessions also, but their safety net blunts their impact and protects citizens better than the US system.

Can you be a little more specific on how their system better blunts the impact of recessions on their citizens? In the US, unemloyment insurance, which ends up being approx 60% of the wage earned, lasted for up to 73 weeks in the previous recession. There were also plenty of programs to get people's mortgage balances reduced to the new (lower) value of their home.

What more should the US system of have in place for recessions to better blunt the impact? 60% for up to 73 weeks seems reasonable to me.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Unfortunately, "socialism" to many on the right means a government that has the audacity to actually work for the people.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Unfortunately, "socialism" to many on the right means a government that has the audacity to actually work for the people.

Yep. For good reason, socialism has a terrible reputation. So, the right calls any social spending socialism. So, Warren Buffet is a socialist because he wants more affordable college! But the greater mystery is why so many on the left have adopted this definition.

 

[Bomb#20]

Unfortunately, "socialism" to many on the right means a government that has the audacity to actually work for the people.

Yep. For good reason, socialism has a terrible reputation. So, the right calls any social spending socialism. So, Warren Buffet is a socialist because he wants more affordable college! But the greater mystery is why so many on the left have adopted this definition.

Not really a mystery. They know more affordable college is popular, and they hope by calling that "socialism" its popularity will rub off on collective ownership of the means of production. Fudging the definition is in the mutual interest of both extremes; it's only moderates who benefit from having people use the word correctly.

 

[untermensche]

Public education is socialism.

A 40 hour week is socialism.

Roads and bridges are socialism.

Parks are socialism.

Museums are socialism.

Capitalism is about a few accumulating as much as possible at the expense of all others.

It is about a few living like kings by keeping all the rest in a man-made jungle of dog eat dog.

Capitalism is about exploitation.

It pollutes everything. Everything is stained by it's immorality and worship of greed.

The cure for the disease called capitalism is democratic socialism.

 

[Axulus]

Public education is socialism.

A 40 hour week is socialism.

Roads and bridges are socialism.

Parks are socialism.

Museums are socialism.

Capitalism is about a few accumulating as much as possible at the expense of all others.

It is about a few living like kings by keeping all the rest in a man-made jungle of dog eat dog.

Capitalism is about exploitation.

It pollutes everything. Everything is stained by it's immorality and worship of greed.

The cure for the disease called capitalism is democratic socialism.

So a government paying for any public service whatsoever is socialism? Nazi Germany was therefore socialist because the government paid for all sorts of stuff? Why do you wish to butcher the definition of socialism in that manner?

 

[coloradoatheist]

Public education is socialism.

A 40 hour week is socialism.

Roads and bridges are socialism.

Parks are socialism.

Museums are socialism.

Capitalism is about a few accumulating as much as possible at the expense of all others.

It is about a few living like kings by keeping all the rest in a man-made jungle of dog eat dog.

Capitalism is about exploitation.

It pollutes everything. Everything is stained by it's immorality and worship of greed.

The cure for the disease called capitalism is democratic socialism.

Got the first half right, the second half completely wrong.

 

[dismal]

What are you imagining is so different about Sweden and Alabama that one is "socialist" and the other is "capitalist"?

One is in Sweden - a socialist country. The other is in the US - a capitalist country, and more so in "red" states like AL

as far as I know there are no material differences in the laws in the rural areas and the urban parts.

Exactly the point. The difference is visually striking though. I've been in rural AL, and this is a fair representation IME:

Rural Alabama

Don't know if this is a fair representation of rural Sweden... willing to consider that Google is a lib'rul tool of the kornspeerisee of the Sweden Chamber of Commerce trying to make commies look good... but I'd need evidence. Otherwise I consider this fair:

Rural Sweden

This is a non-answer.

What are the laws rural Sweden has (or doesn't have) that rural Alabama has (or doesn't have) that make one "socialist" and one "capitalist".

A quick check of wikipedia suggest Sweden does not even come close to the dictionary definition of socialism, so I assume you're freestyling on word meanings here. It seems pointless to have this discussion if you can't explain what you mean when you assert things without support.

 

[Elixir]

One is in Sweden - a socialist country. The other is in the US - a capitalist country, and more so in "red" states like AL



Exactly the point. The difference is visually striking though. I've been in rural AL, and this is a fair representation IME:

Rural Alabama

Don't know if this is a fair representation of rural Sweden... willing to consider that Google is a lib'rul tool of the kornspeerisee of the Sweden Chamber of Commerce trying to make commies look good... but I'd need evidence. Otherwise I consider this fair:

Rural Sweden

This is a non-answer.

What are the laws rural Sweden has (or doesn't have) that rural Alabama has (or doesn't have) that make one "socialist" and one "capitalist".

A quick check of wikipedia suggest Sweden does not even come close to the dictionary definition of socialism, so I assume you're freestyling on word meanings here. It seems pointless to have this discussion if you can't explain what you mean when you assert things without support.

I don't have a dog in this race, dismal. And yeah - it looks to me like the actual real differences balance out, while most of the perceived differences are outgrowths of definitions contrived to support political rhetoric. Sweden's government more fully subsidizes health care, education, public transportation etc. Lower taxes in the US mean that Americans have more discretionary income to spend on stuff like multiple cars (which I understand to be a relative rarity in Sweden).
I think both could benefit from leaning a more in the other's direction.
FWIW, I'd rather live in rural AL than in Sweden!

 

[untermensche]

Public education is socialism.

A 40 hour week is socialism.

Roads and bridges are socialism.

Parks are socialism.

Museums are socialism.

Capitalism is about a few accumulating as much as possible at the expense of all others.

It is about a few living like kings by keeping all the rest in a man-made jungle of dog eat dog.

Capitalism is about exploitation.

It pollutes everything. Everything is stained by it's immorality and worship of greed.

The cure for the disease called capitalism is democratic socialism.

So a government paying for any public service whatsoever is socialism? Nazi Germany was therefore socialist because the government paid for all sorts of stuff? Why do you wish to butcher the definition of socialism in that manner?

I don't think the defining feature of the Nazi regime was it's socialism.

But of course there were many Germans the regime cared about and provided with social services.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Public education is socialism.

Yes, the means of production (schools) are in public (government) hands.

A 40 hour week is socialism.

Absurd.

Roads and bridges are socialism.

Parks are socialism.

Museums are socialism.

In many cases, yes.

Capitalism is about a few accumulating as much as possible at the expense of all others.

It is about a few living like kings by keeping all the rest in a man-made jungle of dog eat dog.

Capitalism is about exploitation.

It pollutes everything. Everything is stained by it's immorality and worship of greed.

The description of how a modern Marxist views the goal of Capitalism, not a definition of capitalism. That is because you are incapable of telling the difference between Feudalism and Capitalism.

What you are looking at is called a "Mixed Economy."

Marx wasn't 'anti-capitalist' in the way the term is used by the McDonald's-trashing activists of today. Marx believed capitalism has brought about untold progress and prosperity. In the Communist Manifesto (1848), he and Engles wrote about how capitalism had shown 'what man's activity can bring about' and had 'accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts and Gothic Cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that put in the shade all former exoduses of nations and crusades'. But Marx also believed that time was up for capitalism and that it was imperative for society to move on to the next level, communism.