Is it possible to have socialism without coercion by an authoritarian government? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15049571
Pants-of-dog wrote:Well, there is another thread derailed by @Finfinder‘s obsession with the Democrats.

POD:

You have made great contributions on this thread. My issues remain the same and are rather simple:

1. MAN seems less motivated to be creative and hard working in a socialist system--unless the workers are owners of the business. I love the concept of COOP, but this is freely allowed in any western capitalist democracy.
2. The second concern is freedom. I freely admit that we are under coercion as we are forced to pay part of our labor to the state in the form of taxes. I have no issues with helping those that are less fortunate, but the idea of doing this under coercion is not attractive. I suspect, the coercion would be MUCH greater in a socialist nation.

So there you have it. I am concern with quality of life and freedom. I demand little from the state. At most all I need is a police force and laws that protect private property and contracts.
#15049572
Finfinder wrote:Do you have anything to offer on this subject ?


Yes, many things. Including a knowledge about the difference between a centre right capitalist party, and actual experiments in democratic socialism. I also know what socialism means, which is why I know that the Democrats are not socialists.

For example, are you even aware that the US government (both parties!) has consistently tried destroying every democratic socialist movement in Latin America since the 1890s or so?

————————

Julian658 wrote:My issues remain the same and are rather simple:

1. MAN seems less motivated to be creative and hard working in a socialist system


I know the theory of why you believe this.

However, the fact that Cubans work just as hard (or harder) than US citizens disproves this.

--unless the workers are owners of the business. I love the concept of COOP, but this is freely allowed in any western capitalist democracy.


Not really, no. If a group of workers tried to seize control of the means of production, they would go to jail. To avoid this, they would have to buy the business from the owner. Effectively, they would have to buy the product of their own labour with more of their own labour.

2. The second concern is freedom. I freely admit that we are under coercion as we are forced to pay part of our labor to the state in the form of taxes. I have no issues with helping those that are less fortunate, but the idea of doing this under coercion is not attractive. I suspect, the coercion would be MUCH greater in a socialist nation.


I do not know why you suspect this. You have not provided any evidence or logic to support this claim.
#15049728
Pants-of-dog wrote:Yes, many things. Including a knowledge about the difference between a centre right capitalist party, and actual experiments in democratic socialism. I also know what socialism means, which is why I know that the Democrats are not socialists.

For example, are you even aware that the US government (both parties!) has consistently tried destroying every democratic socialist movement in Latin America since the 1890s or so?


Yes, I agree!





I know the theory of why you believe this.

However, the fact that Cubans work just as hard (or harder) than US citizens disproves this.


OK, maybe they do. But, they get paid much less. eventually they give up. They lose motivation.

Not really, no. If a group of workers tried to seize control of the means of production, they would go to jail. To avoid this, they would have to buy the business from the owner. Effectively, they would have to buy the product of their own labour with more of their own labour.


POD: It would be a crime to steal the property and work of another person. You and other socialists can pool resources and create your own business as a COOP. And you can make all the employees equal owners. NO ONE is stopping you from doing this. However, I get the impression you simply want to obtain the hard work of another person for yourself. You could open a MOM and POp restaurant or bakery and make everybody in town part owner. However, it seems you want to force the productive people to give you wealth. Do you see how bankrupt your idea is?
#15049744
Julian658 wrote:OK, maybe they do. But, they get paid much less. eventually they give up. They lose motivation.


No, they do not.

An old Cuban probably has a better work ethic than an old North American.

POD: It would be a crime to steal the property and work of another person.


Exactly. If socialists were to try to actually implement socialism, it would be seen as a crime and they would send the cops after us to shoot us or arrest us.

Just like in the other examples I mentioned.

By establishing capitalism as the only legal way to distribute resources, you effectively criminalise all other economies, including cooperative economies like socialism.

You and other socialists can pool resources and create your own business as a COOP. And you can make all the employees equal owners. NO ONE is stopping you from doing this.


Yes, you said that already.

And then I pointed out that while individual acts of cooperative economic behaviour are nice and all, they are not enough. Systemic change is required. By that I mean that the whole system has to change.

However, I get the impression you simply want to obtain the hard work of another person for yourself. You could open a MOM and POp restaurant or bakery and make everybody in town part owner. However, it seems you want to force the productive people to give you wealth. Do you see how bankrupt your idea is?


As a democratic socialist (a pragmatic Allendista, to be specific), I would prefer if the people simply decided to adopt socialism peacefully. I understand that the wealthy few would not like it if we took their surplus wealth and gave it back to the people who actually created it. But if the majority vote in legislators who enact and enforce such laws, then why should we deny democracy for the benefit of the few?
#15049791
@Finfinder It should be noted that @Pants-of-dog only responds to arguments that he respects. He only responds to arguments that he considers founded on good evidence and historically grounded. So he doesn't respond to my arguments because he claims he doesn't consider them historically grounded, logical and well backed up by evidence. :lol:

The fact that he continually responds to your posts must mean that he has a very, very deep respect for what you say.
#15049829
Pants-of-dog wrote:
An old Cuban probably has a better work ethic than an old North American.


The old Cubans that came to Florida in the 60s were amazing. Within a few short years they were economically successful and earning the same as the Anglo population

Exactly. If socialists were to try to actually implement socialism, it would be seen as a crime and they would send the cops after us to shoot us or arrest us.


Nope, all you have to do is win elections and re-write laws.

By establishing capitalism as the only legal way to distribute resources, you effectively criminalise all other economies, including cooperative economies like socialism.


Nope, Chávez introduced socialism in Venezuela by winning elections. We all know the results. The only people that were helped were those in the gutter.

And then I pointed out that while individual acts of cooperative economic behaviour are nice and all, they are not enough. Systemic change is required. By that I mean that the whole system has to change.


IN other words you want the wealth of others for yourself. What will you do once the wealth is gone?

As a democratic socialist (a pragmatic Allendista, to be specific), I would prefer if the people simply decided to adopt socialism peacefully. I understand that the wealthy few would not like it if we took their surplus wealth


Otherwise, the guillotine would be useful!
#15049836
Julian658 wrote:The old Cubans that came to Florida in the 60s were amazing. Within a few short years they were economically successful and earning the same as the Anglo population


That is nice.

Back on topic: there is no evidence that people work less hard in socialist economies. The evidence we do have shows the opposite: that socialists work just as hard as, or harder, than anyone else.

Nope, all you have to do is win elections and re-write laws.


Yes, that is what I said when you accused me of being an authoritarian.

And that is the ideal way to implement socialism.

However, when we try to do that, the capitalists come and shoot us and try to throw us in jail.

Nope, Chávez introduced socialism in Venezuela by winning elections. We all know the results. The only people that were helped were those in the gutter.


No, this is historically inaccurate.

But that does not change the fact I brought up: capitalism has made it so that if anyone tries to live by another economic model, they will be punished by the law.

IN other words you want the wealth of others for yourself. What will you do once the wealth is gone?


If you are just going to keep making up this strawman about authoritarianism, then I have already won this debate.

Otherwise, the guillotine would be useful!


If you are just going to keep making up this strawman about authoritarianism, then I have already won this debate.
#15049852
Pants-of-dog wrote:
Yes, that is what I said when you accused me of being an authoritarian.


If you want a socialist state then you have to be authoritarian.

However, when we try to do that, the capitalists come and shoot us and try to throw us in jail.


Tovarish POD: In America or Canada you are free to associate with your socialist comrades and establish a commune where every is shared. You can also build a factory and and make everybody an owner. The question that begs an answer is why you lust after the wealth and property of fellow citizens? I understand you feel rich people make money of the poor and perhaps that is why you feel justified to confiscate the wealth of others.
#15049861
Julian658 wrote:If you want a socialist state then you have to be authoritarian.


You keep saying that.

Since I already provided evidence that socialism and democracy are compatible, and that this has happened in the past, you are objectively wrong.

Tovarish POD: In America or Canada you are free to associate with your socialist comrades and establish a commune where every is shared. You can also build a factory and and make everybody an owner.


Yes, you said that already.

And then I pointed out that while individual acts of cooperative economic behaviour are nice and all, they are not enough. Systemic change is required. By that I mean that the whole system has to change.

The question that begs an answer is why you lust after the wealth and property of fellow citizens? I understand you feel rich people make money of the poor and perhaps that is why you feel justified to confiscate the wealth of others.


If you are just going to keep making up this strawman about authoritarianism, then I have already won this debate.

Anyway, it is also a historical fact that when a country did vote for socialism, the capitalists overthrew the elected government and put in a capitalist dictatorship.
#15049869
Pants-of-dog wrote:You keep saying that.

Since I already provided evidence that socialism and democracy are compatible, and that this has happened in the past, you are objectively wrong.



Yes, you said that already.

And then I pointed out that while individual acts of cooperative economic behaviour are nice and all, they are not enough. Systemic change is required. By that I mean that the whole system has to change.



If you are just going to keep making up this strawman about authoritarianism, then I have already won this debate.

Anyway, it is also a historical fact that when a country did vote for socialism, the capitalists overthrew the elected government and put in a capitalist dictatorship.


Tovarish POD: It is not about winning or losing. A free dialog is about trying to learn something new and understand the other side.
I freely admit that capitalism is imperfect and that it cannot alter the natural alignment of talent and competence of humans. There will always be exceptional people that rise to the top, well to do professionals, average earners, low income earners, and bottom dwellers. That is the nature of the beast POD. Your system cannot change the human condition.
#15050013
Julian658 wrote:It is not about winning or losing. A free dialog is about trying to learn something new and understand the other side.
....


I would love to learn new things, but so far, this conversation has been limited to things I already know.

What have you learnt?
#15050036
Pants-of-dog wrote:I would love to learn new things, but so far, this conversation has been limited to things I already know.

What have you learnt?


That most on the left believe that wealth is a zero sum gain. IN other words if a rich person makes money he must have stolen that money from a poor person. :knife:

That profit is theft and exploitation. :knife:

That intelligence and creativity is the same as a line worker doing a mindless job at the assembly line. :knife:

That poverty is increasing worldwide instead of going down. :knife:


There is much more.
#15050040
Julian658 wrote:That most on the left believe that wealth is a zero sum gain. IN other words if a rich person makes money he must have stolen that money from a poor person. :knife:


Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

A rich person can money without having stolen it from anyone. By working.

That profit is theft and exploitation. :knife:


Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

Not all profit is theft and exploitation. Just the profit that the capitalist makes by exploiting the work of others.

That intelligence and creativity is the same as a line worker doing a mindless job at the assembly line. :knife:


Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

In fact, no one except you said anything even remotely like that. This is not something you learnt in this thread, but instead is a preconceived notion that you brought into this discussion and have not unlearned, despite the fact that it is wrong.

That poverty is increasing worldwide instead of going down. :knife:


Poverty should have ended decades ago, as we had the resources and technology to do so by the 1970s at the latest. I know you think this is a brag about capitalism, but it is actually a fail.

There is much more.


Really?

Answer this:
Is it possible to have socialism without coercion by an authoritarian government?

Yes or no?
#15050044
Pants-of-dog wrote:
Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

A rich person can money without having stolen it from anyone. By working.



Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

Not all profit is theft and exploitation. Just the profit that the capitalist makes by exploiting the work of others.



Then you learnt something incorrectly, since no one argued that.

In fact, no one except you said anything even remotely like that. This is not something you learnt in this thread, but instead is a preconceived notion that you brought into this discussion and have not unlearned, despite the fact that it is wrong.



Poverty should have ended decades ago, as we had the resources and technology to do so by the 1970s at the latest. I know you think this is a brag about capitalism, but it is actually a fail.



Really?

Answer this:
Is it possible to have socialism without coercion by an authoritarian government?

Yes or no?



The reason you keep seeing strawmen and nonsense is that what they have is religion.

This has not a thing to do with economic science.

A lot of them are parroting the Austrian School, although they prob don't know that, either.

The Austrians are fake political science that pretends to be about economics. It's old school Red Scare anti-communism. That that world is gone doesn't seem to have occurred to them.

I'm still waiting for the punchline. Ahh, t[…]

"More than 500 legal scholars have signed on […]

Trump and Russiagate

1) They do prosecute members of Congress, which[…]

"the most puzzling development in politic[…]