this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
1004 points (81.0% liked)
Memes
44946 readers
2357 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Capitalism has far and away provides the best and most benefits to the people the problem is when Capitalism is allowed to run with no safety rails
Tbf the US has like 5 different unaffordable health insurance conglomerates while Cuba’s never had that freedom of choice
If by "the people" you mean a small percentage of elites then sure. And I expect the elites in society to put safety rails on their gravy train any day now.
Communism has far and away provided the best and most benefits to the people the problem is when Communism is allowed to run with corrupt leaders
Why do you believe that?
The vast majority of world poverty reduction that capitalists claim has been from China. But hey, maybe China is a capitalist economy but you just need a communist government to regulate it effectively.
Which seemed to stay on the rails for many decades...but with a global capitalist economy there is currently no authority which can keep multinational corpo's and billionaires on the rails. They live between the rules of any one country.
Not true we can and have broken up monopoly before Marxism is a defeatist ideology that has failed everywhere it has been tried because in spite of what it claims to bring control to the workers it actually takes control from them and transfers it to the state which is even worse than the capitalist
Yeah, and this is not a view of “the right” anymore. I know that leftism used to terminate with hard capitalism but if anyone is still advocating for that, I think they are on a different scale entirely. Being leftist these days is about proper environmental regulation, policies that encourage wealth equality, and using government to address the needs of the most vulnerable. It terminates at something like The Netherlands. Capitalism is no longer up for debate. Very little about foreign policy is either.
This is absolutely not the case, Socialism and Communism are more relevant than ever as the decay of Capitalism becomes more and more apparent. This is an incredibly "lib" take, so to speak.
I dunno, capitalist social democracies seem quite nice compared to socialist counties.
They are nice to live in, generally. They are also developed countries that can only exist due to the US's Military presence as a peacemaking force, and require economic Imperialism on their own part throughout less developed countries via companies like Nestlé in order to actually generate the wealth needed to provide for their generous Social Safety nets within Capitalism. Additionally, the Nordic countries are seeing skyrocketing disparity over time.
That’s somewhat either/or thinking when the emergent ideal is capitalism held in check by sane and compassionate social policies. You could call some of the latter socialistic if you want. But where in the world is Communism providing anyone a relevant alternative to the “decay” of capitalism? Capitalism is in its energetic teenage years still, in Asia, if you’ve noticed.
I would not call Social Programs "socialistic." For Asia, China is the dominating economy and is heading down the path of Socialism. Capitalist economies like South Korea and Japan are heading downward, with extreme rates of suicide, rising fascism, and massive disparity.
Communism itself isn't merely an "alternative" to Capitalism, it's the end result of the failures of Capitalism, after Socialism provides the ground for it to blossom from.
China embraced capitalism because it's economy was dead in the water. China has not ever been less socialist since the commies first took over.
Communism is a thought experiment and has no place in the real world.
China has stated intentions of becoming fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100, according to the CPC. Doesn't seem dead in the water to me.
Additionally, that's just China. In places where Capitalism has been on a steady decline, such as America, Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity among the masses. Capitalism is unsustainable and leads to massive inequality and inefficient allocation of resources, which leads to crisis.
Lol gotta love these takes from the sommunists
Gotta love not having an actual counter, so you just down vote and feign superiority. Be a little more self-aware next time, lol
China has only moved away from a state-run economy in the last 50 years, resulting in its current, larger and much more dynamic economy. It’s probably the world’s best current example of a country abandoning communism for capitalism, and reaping the benefits. There is wealth inequality, but fewer people are starving. All they’re keeping from their former regime is centralized single party political control.
Under economic Communism they proved over and over that a central government can’t command a entire set of industries and markets better than they can run themselves. People starved in the tens of millions finding this out. An uptick in suicide rates is nothing by comparison.
No, what they proved is it's hard as fuck to go from zero industry to the most industry when most of the world's wealthy want you to fail. Famine was and is a real societal threat and we forget that it happened regularly not that long ago.
There’s no way I’m going to let you characterize the Great Leap Forward as “famine happens.” That is absolutely criminal apologism.
Quick few things:
-The CPC brought in Capitalists to rapidly develop, while maintaining full control and refusing to let Capitalists control the state. That's why it's incredibly authoritarian there, to prevent the Capitalists from controlling the state. Socialism is supposed to come after Capitalism, not Feudalism.
-The CPC has stated intentions to become fully Socialist by 2050 and Communist by 2100.
-Even under Mao, they weren't "economically Communist." They still had a state, still had money, and still had classes. They were Socialist, and still are, just with more of a mixed market.
-Mao was an idiot, but it wasn't Socialism or Communism that caused the starvation. It started as a naturally occurring famine (the last of its kind in China, actually), but Mao responded so stupidly he told his men to kill Sparrows that were eating rice. Well, those Sparrows were holding the bugs back, and without the Sparrows the bugs ate far more rice. Is that Communism? When no Sparrows? Or one really stupid leader?
Finally, my eggs aren't all in the China basket. I'm not a massive China stan like some people here, I'm very critical of them. Socialism and Communism are gaining in popularity in other places where Capitalism is declining, such as America.