View Poll Results: Do you think socialism could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way?

Voters
104. You may not vote on this poll
  • Don't know

    3 2.88%
  • Don't care

    3 2.88%
  • Absolutely

    10 9.62%
  • I think it could

    16 15.38%
  • I think it couldn't

    17 16.35%
  • No way

    55 52.88%
Page 29 of 51 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 502

Thread: Socialism could have succeeded?

  1. #281
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    So you think that, in a socialist/communist society and economic structure, nobody will seek to be the leader of the pack with regard to both money and power?

    Capitalism exists (and thrives) because it caters to basic human instinctual impulses and desires. To think you can quell it would make you massively Orwellian (thus proving my point), or painstakingly ignorant to basic human psychology.

  2. #282
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    So you think that, in a socialist/communist society and economic structure, nobody will seek to be the leader of the pack with regard to both money and power?
    Why do you think that in a socialist society there will be no hierarchy?

  3. #283
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Because society is classless in socialism. The mere existence of a hierarchy dispels it.

  4. #284
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    In socialist and communist regimes, those who display traits of avarice, ambition, and lust will seek to excel above the crowd through excessive means, at which point the collective will have to use an iron fist grip to placate what they would perceive as a "threat". To think that mankind would live robotically like Smurfs is just ludicrous. By sheer human nature, these systems would have to be incredibly authoritarian to pull the tallest weeds down to the ground.
    The same thing could be said of capitalist regimes. Many of the worlds most repressive regimes have had capitalist economies
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #285
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Because society is classless in socialism. The mere existence of a hierarchy dispels it.
    I see claims like this a lot, large generalizations about socialism... that run contrary to what actual socialists say. A hierarchy has nothing to do with class, so long as the higher members of that hierarchy have controls on them, so that they cannot abuse that position. You know, checks and balances. Just because the Soviets didn't do that doesn't mean that lack of checks is an inherent part of socialism.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  6. #286
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Because society is classless in socialism. The mere existence of a hierarchy dispels it.
    Not in my socialism.

  7. #287
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha
    The same thing could be said of capitalist regimes. Many of the worlds most repressive regimes have had capitalist economies
    Not arguing that, except the last half of the first statement. I'm saying that capitalism gives an acceptable outlet to people who display those humanistic traits, and that they don't get squashed just for succeeding.

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale
    I see claims like this a lot, large generalizations about socialism... that run contrary to what actual socialists say. A hierarchy has nothing to do with class, so long as the higher members of that hierarchy have controls on them, so that they cannot abuse that position. You know, checks and balances. Just because the Soviets didn't do that doesn't mean that lack of checks is an inherent part of socialism.
    It has nothing to do with the old Soviet style. Hierarchial castes tend to resist "checks and balances" because that ultimately rests at a level where people are not above nor below one other. To be hierarchial is to be allowed position above others, and not subject to their powers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell
    Not in my socialism.
    Right. It's just not feasible in libertarian socialism or anarcho-syndicalism. Authoritarian socialism is more than possible.

  8. #288
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Not arguing that, except the last half of the first statement. I'm saying that capitalism gives an acceptable outlet to people who display those humanistic traits, and that they don't get squashed just for succeeding.
    The last half was true and some people deserve to have their motives squashed. There's nothing wrong with that which is why even libertarians agree with the premise, if not all the applications

    The desire for power is a part of human nature. No political or economic system will eliminate it. Systems should be (IMO) judged by how they deal with it.. Capitalism deals with it by empowering those with authoritarian tendencies; not the best way of dealing with authoritarianism
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #289
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    A completely anti-authoritarian system will never exist (anarchy). If it does, it's worse than capitalism, socialism, communism, fascism...every -ism out there. Nobody wins in anarchy.

    Increased money will create some authoritarian tendencies, but it doesn't mean that it is permanent. In a governmental authoritarian structure, a position, cabinet, or council retain all power unwavering. In a meritocratic corpocracy, power is not only achieve or earned, but it's defended. Because you're in power today doesn't mean you're in power tomorrow. It's that competition that is the ultimate check and balance system.

    You'll never hear me on here saying that capitalism is libertarian. I will say, however, that it is more libertarian than many other systems.

  10. #290
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Socialism could have succeeded?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    A completely anti-authoritarian system will never exist (anarchy). If it does, it's worse than capitalism, socialism, communism, fascism...every -ism out there. Nobody wins in anarchy.

    Increased money will create some authoritarian tendencies, but it doesn't mean that it is permanent. In a governmental authoritarian structure, a position, cabinet, or council retain all power unwavering. In a meritocratic corpocracy, power is not only achieve or earned, but it's defended. Because you're in power today doesn't mean you're in power tomorrow. It's that competition that is the ultimate check and balance system.

    You'll never hear me on here saying that capitalism is libertarian. I will say, however, that it is more libertarian than many other systems.
    I was with you for the first paragraph, but you totally blew it in the 2nd and what follows.

    Money doesn't create authoritarian tendencies, but it does give people the power to act on their own authoritarian tendencies. IMO, this is the main flaw with capitalism.

    And as far as permanence goes, nothing is permanent; Everything changes. Eventually, we're all dead.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

Page 29 of 51 FirstFirst ... 19272829303139 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •