Socialism could have succeeded?

If I thought we could get away with it, I'd give you and all those socialists California. Couldn't do any worse than what they've done.

Canell said:

1. I can't stand severe cold, I need Sun and heat. Ever occurred to you, smarty pants?
2. Russian is not mother tongue. Nor is English.
3. Russian state and bureaucracy are terrible. America is better but getting a visa for both countries will be a challenge and I don't want to be a criminal.

Click to expand...

1. There are many places in the world you could live. You could live in the Amazon if you wanted to. You could live in Mongolia, you could live in Sahara. The climate is not going to stop you. Most communes are inside cities, and often they don't get closed down even though they steal public utilities.

2. Doesn't matter. If you live in these kind of places, then you won't need to speak Russian.

3. Bureaucracy doesn't matter. Very few nations are going to care about a group living in the forest, away from everyone else. There are already people living by themselves in the amazon, so that is clearly an option.

Just admit it, the reason you don't want to live in a commune away from everyone else, is because you are so used to modern life. Look aroud your house, how much did you or your friends make?

So, what is this monopolistic attitude "it's my country, my land, if you don't like it go to the Moon"? Should I remind you how Americans got their land?

Click to expand...

I do remember. Americans went to the moon!

Aunt Spiker said:

Most socialists are lazy whiners with a chip on their shoulder and holding a grudge against everyone who did succeed with the attitude of "If I don't have it neither can you"

. . . spoiled rotten brat montage.

Click to expand...

Aunt Spiker said:

No - I really think most socialists are bitter and seeking bringing everyone down to their level rather than uplifting others.

Click to expand...

Most capitalists like to make sweeping, holier than thou generalizations.

Aunt Spiker said:

But the tone of your post points to my previous assertion: bitter-socialist.

Click to expand...

When you insult people they tend to respond bitterly, wouldn't you say?

If I said most women are bitter and make less money than men because they are lazy and incapable of earning as much as most men, you might respond with some bitterness.

In a capitalism system - when we help others - what we try to do is give them the means to make something of their selves: educational support, temporary assistance, assistance finding jobs, quitting bad habits and other things that will hold them back.

Click to expand...

You mean you sell them these things.

Canell said:

P.S. Oh, I see you are in New Zealand. You have plenty of land. How about if we have the commune there, huh?

Click to expand...

I am not really up for that, but if you come down under, I'll find you a place to live. :lol:

Camlon said:

2. Doesn't matter. If you live in these kind of places, then you won't need to speak Russian.

I do remember. Americans went to the moon!

Click to expand...

Very funny, ha-ha-ha.
I'm warning you, I won't take ridicule or manipulation.

Camlon said:

I am not really up for that, but if you come down under, I'll find you a place to live. :lol:

Click to expand...

Ok, thanks. I'll consider that.

Gipper said:

And just what am I supposed to do with no money and lots of free time? Sleep? Watch flowers grow? Discuss the birds and the bees with my buddies over a cup of Taster's Choice?

The things I do take money. Football tickets aren't cheap (except when I went to U of M). Skiing is a rather expensive sport. Gas is three and a half bucks a gallon.

Click to expand...

So now you want other people to tell you what to do? :lamo

Gipper said:

Because eventually you'd lack viable ways to contribute. Of course, I keep forgetting that resources are unlimited, as is demand, so you could just work as much as you want because there will always be some use for whatever you make.

God bless the LTV, laughable as it is.

Click to expand...

Who ever said that resources are unlimited? WTF does the labor theory of value have to do with anything at all?

Gipper said:

Aw shucks. My heart bleeds for your proletarian dreams.

Click to expand...

Thank you comrade. Add another comrade to the list!

Gipper said:

ALL socialists are utopian socialists.

Click to expand...

Uhh no...... No.. Not at all...

Canell said:

About 22 years ago socialism gave up and started disintegrating. Do you think it could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way? You know, if capitalism didn't oppose and let it be?

Click to expand...

Socialism is very much alive and well. Many socialist ideals have been incorporated into Capitalist societies as a supplemental component to benefit the unfortunate. Socialism in itself is not a great system, neither is capitalism, when it comes to very large societies. In small groups either one can work great, but in societies that range in the hundreds of millions, a hybrid system works pretty damn good to benefit the different social classes.

Aunt Spiker said:

Most socialists are lazy whiners with a chip on their shoulder and holding a grudge against everyone who did succeed with the attitude of "If I don't have it neither can you"

. . . spoiled rotten brat montage.

Click to expand...

And how many socialists have you met in your sheltered, parochial existence? Say what you will about me, I don't make sweeping generalizations about people that I've never come into contact with personally.

Graffias said:

And how many socialists have you met in your sheltered, parochial existence? Say what you will about me, I don't make sweeping generalizations about people that I've never come into contact with personally.

Click to expand...

LOL - I'm time warp back to 9-27-2011 and chastise my 31 year old self for you if that makes you feel better about it . . . but she won't listen to anyone - especially me.

In 2011 all supposed 'socialists' must have come across as nothing but a bunch of whining babies for me to be so harsh about it. :lamo

Canell said:

About 22 years ago socialism gave up and started disintegrating. Do you think it could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way? You know, if capitalism didn't oppose and let it be?

Click to expand...

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


Lol..



No. Socialism is a failed economic model. I'm not even completely pro capitalist and I accept that truth.



Even though I'm not rich I openly accept the universal truth that the problem with the world is not wealth but that there isn't enough wealth. Having rich people is good for poor people. Making it harder for rich people is an illusion. All you're really doing with Socialism is assuring the poor people stay in their class forever.

Canell said:

About 22 years ago socialism gave up and started disintegrating. Do you think it could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way? You know, if capitalism didn't oppose and let it be?

Click to expand...

Socialism by itself wouldn't work, neither would any system. The hybrid system we have has yielded some pretty good results so far, even with its faults.

Socialism is just government's excuse to control every facet of our lives. Talk about the death of individual liberties.

There are times, places and situations where competition is the most appropriate strategy and times, places and situations where cooperation is best. I expect that our hybrid capitalist-socialist system will continue with continuous rebalancing between the two strategies.

Socialism can succeed in a populace that is completely void of greed, avarice, ambition, and uniqueness.

In other words, it's perfect if you're a smurf...awful if you're a human.

I don't think people fully understand the failings of all previous attempts at socialism; it wasn't human nature of the population, it was human nature of the leading class. The guys who distribute the wealth are greedy, because people are greedy. Even if EVERY single citizen was greedy, but couldn't change the way the wealth is distributed, socialism would still work. Socialism has failed because we had humans in the mix, period. If we ran the distribution networks through automation, there wouldn't be anyway that human nature would influence the system. A new attempt that completely takes working out of the equation wouldn't breed resentment among workers. Capitalism is a great way to get people to think they're being paid fair for their work, even if they aren't. If work was completely separated from a living wage, or some form of wealth distribution, then all work would be voluntary. Most volunteers aren't resentful for not being paid, since that's the point of volunteering. How would someone resent being paid less than their work is worth, if they aren't expecting payment at all?

We are at the point where technological advances have made socialism a viable plan. A new society based on volunteerism could replace capitalism. There are some problems to solve; we should have some way to give an incentive to work for the public good and "a warm feeling" probably isn't enough. But, we could create non-wealth based incentives, such as first dibs on scenic views, or voting rights only for those that work, there are plenty of ways to reward work without paying people.

In the end, it's really the only kind of economy that can be sustainable over the long-term. Modern capitalism is becoming a bit of a pyramid scheme of just finding more ways for people to consume what companies make. With so much of our economy based on consumables and non-essential services, we're on the fast track to inflation-ville. When you look at how the Federal Reserve Bank is just printing money for the sake of consumerism, you know our money isn't actually based on anything stable. It will continue to inflate and will one day reach critical mass. So, if you really think capitalism is working, why is inflation so rampant? I might be wrong, but I assume that an economy that doesn't lead to inflation, wouldn't lead to inflation; yet, our commercialism has led to a rather steep inflation rate. Our inflation rate is it's own proof that our economy isn't working. I just don't see how anyone can really claim this is a strength of capitalism. Here's a CPI graph for laughs and cries;

I am a social democrat and I don't think socialism could work. Socialism could only work in the absence of greed/envy/selfishness and sadly, humans will always be greedy/envious and selfish, it is on our nature and for that reason alone (with a lot of other reasons) socialism can not work IMHO.

It depends on if you mean full socialism or not, I'd argue that we have a fair amount of socialism now, therefore it never really dies out completely (and never really accomplished anything good)

I think our socialized fire protection, policing, water, sewage, airport, garbage, and road maintenance services work pretty well. The public transportation could be better, but its a lot cheaper than the private alternatives.

Hard Truth said:

I think our socialized fire protection, policing, water, sewage, airport, garbage, and road maintenance services work pretty well. The public transportation could be better, but its a lot cheaper than the private alternatives.

Click to expand...

What world are you living in?

911 calls go unanswered | WWAY NewsChannel 3 | Wilmington NC News
Report Sees Investment Shortfall for Water Infrastructure - NYTimes.com
Fewer U.S. Bridges Being Repaired, One in Nine Still "Structurally Deficient" - WNYC

I can tell you that most airports, though the property is owned by the city, county and/or state, the runways, buildings and personnel are paid through the user fees collected by the local businesses, lease agreements and taxes on fuel and tickets. Very few airports require tax money from the local population in the form of property, sales or income tax. They are essentially privately run and managed.

One interesting tidbit about Karl Marx that almost all non white socialists today are not fully aware or versed on is that Karl Marx was a German racialist or in the most moderate terms a European racialist in the extreme. Marx's endall Communist Mecca after Socialism was only attainable by Europeans and Marx was not at all shy about this view in his writings, nor was Engel.

If most Africans and Amerindians knew this they'd stay about as far away from Marxist ideology as a fly to a flame. Then again that's the great irony of 'Consumer politics' isn't it? Nobody really knows the history and authors writings of the ideologies they now profess to follow.



That all said, I agree that capitalism is the way. I also agree that capitalism needs a 10-25% state buffer to prevent trust fund kids who aren't their innovative parents from sitting around a foreign policy room and starting nuclear wars after watching Fox News or MSNBC.


I do accept that there does need to be a state 'Buffer Class' to the capitalist class to prevent destruction of the greater society by essentially delusional, out of touch rich kids with a big bank account and no perspective.


One thing's for sure. Going to Polo matches and visiting Singapore penthouses does not connect little Joey with his countrymen's perspectives in the slightest.

Canell said:

About 22 years ago socialism gave up and started disintegrating. Do you think it could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way? You know, if capitalism didn't oppose and let it be?

Click to expand...

We actually have a mix-breed system in the US. Part capitalism, part socialism. Both are needed. We just haven't worked out the bugs to decide how to mix the two appropriately.

Canell said:

About 22 years ago socialism gave up and started disintegrating. Do you think it could have succeeded if capitalism wasn't standing on the way? You know, if capitalism didn't oppose and let it be?

Click to expand...

I think the biggest blow that came to communism was the soviet union and the control it was able to exercise over communist ideology outside it's state entity. Think of it as a self interested political entity that was able to exercise a level of orthodoxy over what people viewed as communism, and defund, de legitimize, and remove elements that it viewd as subversive to it. In fact, I think one of the big turning moments for the US communist parties (where they lost most of their membership), was in response to Stalin signing his peace pact with Hitler.

Kind of signaled the end for the movement as an ideal