This is, of course, not the only factor that determines the longevity of a socialist government.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...
Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...
Moderator: PoFo Agora Mods
SSDR wrote:@SolarCross, To answer your three questions:
1. There were socialists in pre socialist countries like the Russian Empire, the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, or in the German Confederate Empire. Every person is different. Everyone has their own views. Socialists have been around for thousands of years, it's just that socialist politics were not commonly/collectively known until the 1800's, and people like Karl Marx coined it very famously. When socialism was collectively known in the 1800's, socialist political parties formed, attracting all of the unknown socialists like Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin, Erich Honecker, Margot Honecker and her socialist parents, Tito, or Walter Ulbricht. The socialist sides won the Russian Revolution, the Second World War, the Chinese Civil War, and the Cuban Revolution. Socialists do exist, like myself or others I just mentioned. But, there are more non socialists or even anti socialists than socialists. It is just that the socialists won the conflicts, allowing them to have coordination over the societies that they live in. Some people did want socialism. Others didn't. More didn't then did, even though the outnumbered ones who did won! The non socialists abused the socialist economies, and THAT IS WHAT DESTROYED SOME SOCIALIST COUNTRIES. Socialists are around today. We were around in the 20th century. We were around in the 19th century. Our side won, but non socialists abused our liberations because they needed oppression to motivate them to work.
2. Socialism can work IF THE PEOPLE in an examined society are socialist. And there are socialists in the world, like myself, or those who are in socialist parties through out the world. But not everyone is a socialist.
3. So that crime and capitalist explotation can be stopped. Socialism is also scientifically the most advanced political system because it allows the most personal freedoms for everyone, and that it is the most stable, thus reducing unreported mental illness.
If you have a capitalist population with the socialist economy, the socialist economy will fail. If you have a socialist population under a capitalist economy, then there will be a revolution.
@Hong Wu Yeah, but those motivators are oppressors. Slavery was used to motivate people to work. Religious rule was used to motivate people to work. Nazism was used to motivate people to work. Ultranationalism was used to motivate people to work. Family rule was used to motivate people to work. The more motivation one needs to work, the more enslaved they are, whether they support it or not.
SSDR wrote:@Hong Wu, "Life" doesn't oppress us. The system oppresses us. And some people need oppression for motivation because they lack real consciousness.
Hong Wu wrote:Just something to maybe add to the list of leftist oxymorons. In order for things to be diverse, they have to be different. If they're different, they're not the same and if they're not the same, they are by definition not completely equal with each other, right?
The best counter-argument I have been able to formulate to this is that diversity would lead to temporary inequality, which is supposed to be alleviated. I think however that this segways into another argument I made some time ago, which is that the metaphysics of progressivism has no feasible end in sight, thereby robbing it of any concept of the peak of all things (God, etc.) and therefore making every extant and possible being an inferior to future beings, creating an eternal chain of subservients.
Although very subtle, I do believe that this metaphysical presumption is vaguely realized through progressive's growing totalitarian tendencies.
SSDR wrote:Yeah I fucking hate when people emphasize social hierarchies. In my eyes, no one is above me for shits lol
SSDR wrote:@Hong Wu
Families share. But it's not "sharing" because the family faith is being used as a cover up. And that is what helps enslaves people into the family institution. Socialism is not religious logic. Socialism is personal freedom for each individual. Being free from slavery, religious rule, family, money, and class rule (Social Hierarchies).
Julian658 wrote:Socialism only works among those that share the same DNA. That is why people help each other in families. That is why socialism works in tiny tribes in the world, they are all related. Once there is no DNA in common socialism fails. This is evolution, we want to propagate our genes or the the same genes in our relatives. Most people rather help a sibling than a distant cousin because the sibling has more DNA in common.
Outside of the family structure socialism is by definition authoritarian and oppressive. What will the system do with a person that refuses to be a socialist? OPPRESS THAT PERSON INTO SUBMISSION. In the end atheist socialist replace deism with another religion that is more oppressive.
Pants-of-dog wrote:I doubt any of this is true.
Julian658 wrote:Socialism only works in very small tribes where everybody is related to each other. Look it up.
Julian658 wrote:Would you care to expand your point?
I suggest you read the book on evolution biology by Robert Sapolski.
Socialism only works in very small tribes where everybody is related to each other. Look it up.
Julian658 wrote:Ortega in Nicaragua is a fascist. Why would you call that socialism? He is more corrupt than Trump.
Cuba remains a 3rd world country.
You left out Venezuela and North Korea. Socialism is a great idea and Marx is very compelling in the analysis of capitalism. However, we need to find success.
You sure Chile was successful with its socialism? Allende's tenure had all sorts of economic issues. Lower exports, lower real wages. The economy was worse under him. In fact, I would argue that's what made it so easy for the CIA to over throw him. If he had managed the economy well, I think it would have been harder for the CIA to depose him. CIA's propaganda worked well because of the decline and cracks in the economy.
Julian658 wrote:Don’t get me wrong, socialism is very attractive and the analysis of Marx is correct. In a capitalist society workers are technically slaves. The problem with socialism is that the proposed solutions have not worked and hence socialists always say “that was not real socialism “ or they blame the empire for the failure of socialism. Winston Churchill said democracy is awful but there is nothing better out there. The same can be said about capitalism.
Pants-of-dog wrote:I doubt this. Please provide evidence for this claim.
And? Despite that, it has certain indicators that are at the same level or higher than for developed countries, like health care, education, and others.
But if socialism is bad because it has not lifted developing countries out of poverty, please note that almost all developing countries are capitalist and that has not worked either.
Venezuela is not socialist. It is a capitalist country with high levels of state intervention.
I do not know enough about NK to comment intelligently.
Rancid wrote:It only makes sense that you would be more socialistic when you are dealing with people you actually know (family, and close friends). It's a bit of a strong statement to say that socialism ONLY works in small tribes though. It could work on a larger scale if there were a massive change in global culture.
A real reformation of the Islamic religion would […]
So, what did antifa do in Portland? Please be sp[…]
How do you know that it is alarmist? Because i […]
All "rights" come from natural law. Even[…]