Capitalism VS Socialism?

[Absinthe]

People here fail to understand that in history no system that has been tried has ever been successful in the first attempt, even democracy. The city state of athens was the the first democratic state and there you could vote for the execution of people you did not like.

Because communism has only been attempted once.

Ever.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Absinthe. Your babies. Now.

Precisly.

 

[Nemesis6]

AND IT WORKED FLAWLESSLY UNTILL THE EVIL WESTERN COUNTRIES POLLUTED THE MINDS OF THE PROLETARIAT WITH EXTREMIST CONCEPTS LIKE "freedom of speech"! You will not question the glory of communism again.

 

[PvtRyan]

No no no, you forget the real reason communism hasn't worked so far: it wasn't real communism, because obviously the Soviet Union wasn't a success and thus is can't have been real communism, and it's unthinkable the Soviet Union was an inevitable result from a concept that isn't at all flawed at its core!

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

"When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind."
- J. Krishnamurti, "Freedom from the Known"

 

[Mr Stabby]

I've never actually read the communist manifesto before, only summaries of the points it made. I started reading a free online version of it and found this excerpt

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones.

Are they implying technology only advances to keep the working man down? A plot by the international bourgeoisie to control the world, I hadn't realized Marxism was such a tinfoil hat ideology.

 

[kirovman]

Karl Marx has a turntable built into his grave now, so that he can spin with minimal effort.

 

[Nemesis6]

They should get those for all people suspected of having major political impact in the world. Like a "Coffin' Deluxe: Thinker's edition" package.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

They should get those for all people suspected of having major political impact in the world. Like a "Coffin' Deluxe: Thinker's edition" package.

Now with no squek! Spin round crazily in your grave with silence and style!

 

[Solaris]

This has turned into a good constructive debate, I admit, I didn't expect it.

All your ideas sound awesome but I think you have to be realistic. You are asking for a total overhaul of how our world is structured. And once you do that you must admit there will be a lot of problems with getting everyone on board. Do you honestly think people would be happy with the government telling them what they will do for the rest of their lives?

The best option is a mixed economy taking in the individual freedom of captialism and parts of government regulation and care for the poor from socialism.

Yes I am asking for international revolution, but I am beginning to believe it can be done through non-violent reform through the democratic systems that exist, at least where they do exist.

Also, I do not think the people would be happy having their professions dictated to them but I suggest no such thing. Many socialists have different ideas on how labor can be organized, but I see no reason to force people into a career, I think working life would be alot different that it is now, and hopefully people would want to use their skills to the maximum to pursue a rewarding and beneficial career. I do not think it is likely that we would experience a brain drain, education would be massively different than it is now, personally, I'd put Richard Dawkins in charge of it (there's a brilliant video of a lecture he does on how the education system is crap, if anyones interested I'll find a link for it), people would want to do intellectual things if they had the capacity for it.

Solaris, how would a freee and independant media exist in a socialist world? Without that democracy is doomed.

I see no reason why it couldn't, an idea of the top of my head would be that anyone could start a newspaper with their own resources and the more readers they acquire, the more resources the government give them, irrelevant of what the media says as long as it obeys certain limits like in todays society (no outright lies ect.)

Are they implying technology only advances to keep the working man down? A plot by the international bourgeoisie to control the world, I hadn't realized Marxism was such a tinfoil hat ideology.

He said absolutely nothing of the sort.

 

[No Limit]

Also, I do not think the people would be happy having their professions dictated to them but I suggest no such thing. Many socialists have different ideas on how labor can be organized, but I see no reason to force people into a career, I think working life would be alot different that it is now, and hopefully people would want to use their skills to the maximum to pursue a rewarding and beneficial career. I do not think it is likely that we would experience a brain drain, education would be massively different than it is now, personally, I'd put Richard Dawkins in charge of it (there's a brilliant video of a lecture he does on how the education system is crap, if anyones interested I'll find a link for it), people would want to do intellectual things if they had the capacity for it.

The problem I have is that I think you give humans way too much credit. I don't mean this as an insult so please don't take it that way but I think you have a really naive view of people's intellectual capacity and compassion. This is good for you in a way because you probably always see the glass as half full, unfortunately from what I've seen around me I can not have the same up beat attitude that you do, I wish I did. But if you were right I don't think Africa would be in the situation it is in today, I don't think people would be working in sweatshops all around the world, Iran would not be killing people for being gay, Saudi Arabia would share its oil profits with its people, Israel would include palestines in to its government and country, 2 nukes would not have been dropped on Japan, etc, etc, etc...

 

[Mr Stabby]

I see no reason why it couldn't, an idea of the top of my head would be that anyone could start a newspaper with their own resources and the more readers they acquire, the more resources the government give them, irrelevant of what the media says as long as it obeys certain limits like in todays society (no outright lies ect.)

You speak of people owning resources, surely private ownership of resources leads to trade which leads to capitalism. You can't have private property in socialism.

He said absolutely nothing of the sort.

They kinda did 'The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production'. Implies the methods of production are changing not due to technology advancing, but to allow the bourgeoisie a monopoly on running industry.

 

[<RJMC>]

Yes I am asking for international revolution, but I am beginning to believe it can be done through non-violent reform

*audience laughs in the background*

I see no reason why it couldn't, an idea of the top of my head would be that anyone could start a newspaper with their own resources and the more readers they acquire, the more resources the government give them, irrelevant of what the media says as long as it obeys certain limits like in todays society (no outright lies ect.)

what if the goverment make theyr "own" list of outright lies?

for example if someone make a negative coment regarding the goverment that is true and all,them the goverment just wipe out the newspaper

for example if you say something negative about the goverment BAM they call you cia agent,desetabilizators,son of the devil..etc

 

[Nemesis6]

*insert speech about how true socialism isn't like that here* *add other posts commending the Venezuelan government for censoring the press here*

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

(there's a brilliant video of a lecture he does on how the education system is crap, if anyones interested I'll find a link for it)

Please do, richard dawkins = pwnt.

 

[phantomdesign]

<oops double post>

 

[phantomdesign]

It's sad that so many people have misconceptions of what socialism is. <snip>

It saddens me that people, surrounded by so much poverty in the world do not show the slightest bit of interest in an alternate economic system when under the current one, billions live in poverty. It depresses me. It's obvious capitalism isn't working, yet why are people so loyal to it, don't they read about sweatshops, children starving to death, factory workers burning to death because fire exits are closed ect.

Isn't this itself a misconception of capitalism? In the US people are either poor because of [1] choice [2] unusual and unpreventable harsh circumstances or [3] laziness.

A little socialism in a capitalistic society isn't all bad, allowing people to get back on their feet if they fall under category 2 above (harsh circumstances). More importantly certain collective economic projects (such as roads, water, and energy) that benefit all require a certain collective social economic contribution.

Socialism stifles societal advancement as incentives are extremely limited (burger flipper = nuclear physicist?) and opportunity / capacity to acquire necessary goods for large contributions to society (starting a company, creating jobs, introducing new technology / products, etc) is extremely difficult or quite simply impossible. The possibilities for abuse are very large; as the common person is unlikely to see fit to posses or use more valuable goods (like a Ferrari, gold, etc).

The evidence is in the results; which societies are on the leading-edge of technological and economic advancements?



The biggest issue for me is government control. A "fair" (everything equal) system requires significant governmental control. This implies that governments (politicians) know how to govern my life, money, productivity, resources, and property better than I do and are fully capable of doing so on a large scale.

 

[Flyingdebris]

Lets all live in a happy fairytale world where everyone is taken care of! :rollseyes
~or~
take responsibility over yourself and stop being so damn entitled.


The world doesn't owe you anything, zip, nada, zilch. If you want something, you have to work, fight, or take responsibility for it.

 

[No Limit]

Lets all live in a happy fairytale world where everyone is taken care of! :rollseyes
~or~
take responsibility over yourself and stop being so damn entitled.


The world doesn't owe you anything, zip, nada, zilch. If you want something, you have to work, fight, or take responsibility for it.

Sure. What an easy accomplishment when your country is in ruins from conflict, you don't have enough food or clean water to provide for your family, and you have virtually no way of getting out of that situation.

Some of you need to get out of daddy's wallet before you stop making such naive statements.

 

[The Monkey]

Check out John Rawls's works. I argee with most of what he wrote.

 

[phantomdesign]

Sure. What an easy accomplishment when your country is in ruins from conflict, you don't have enough food or clean water to provide for your family, and you have virtually no way of getting out of that situation.

Some of you need to get out of daddy's wallet before you stop making such naive statements.

Since I left "daddy's wallet" life has never been better.

A country being in ruins from conflicts is not reflective of capitalism or socialism (unless people destroyed it because of their economic ideals).

 

[No Limit]

Since I left "daddy's wallet" life has never been better.

Good for you. And I'm sure your daddy's wallet while you were on it had nothing to do with how good off you are now.

A country being in ruins from conflicts is not reflective of capitalism or socialism (unless people destroyed it because of their economic ideals).

I didn't say it did. It just seemed to me like you said we shouldn't care about them and instead they should lift themselves up by the bootstraps.

 

[phantomdesign]

Good for you. And I'm sure your daddy's wallet while you were on it had nothing to do with how good off you are now.


I didn't say it did. It just seemed to me like you said we shouldn't care about them and instead they should lift themselves up by the bootstraps.

yes & no. If I were to setup the system it would be something like this . . .

To recieve wellfare after the first 3 months you must do one of the following . . .
[1] Participate in a government-sponsored work program for at least 10 hours every week, and 90 minutes of classes on employment and trade-skills.
[2] Must perform some sort of regular employment at least 80 hours per month (divided into 1/2 month segments)
[3] Some medical condition prevents your employment.

Welfare benefits would also successively lessen over time for categories 1 & 2. After a certain period of time category 1's benefits would level off at approximately minimum wage untaxed (slightly higher in areas of higher cost of living) & people could work as many as 50 hours per week.

This could virtually eliminate unemployment, greatly reduce the tax-burden, ensure people aren't leaching the system, and produce some sort of return.

Feed a person for a day and they'll be hungry tomorrow, but give them the tools to feed themselves and they'll be well-fed for life.

 

[No Limit]

I think you are talking more about welfare in our own country which is fine, I'll stick to that.

Sure, I'm all for your plan. What about child care for their children? Will that be provided with your plan? How is all this going to be managed, a new government bureaucracy? What if a person really can't find a job that will hire them for that 80 hour requirement for whatever reason?

But even once all that is addressed this is just a pipe dream. The right wants to remove any kind of support structure while the left wants to keep throwing money at the problem without doing anything to fix the numerous problems. So for now I'll stick with what the left is doing. I think we only spend about $30 billion a year on welfare for the poor. If some people want to abuse the system and not do shit with their lives let them, it doesn't cost us that much as we have no problem with spending that much in Iraq in a month. This way at least the people that want to make something of themselves have some kind of support structure in place.