Rethinking Marx

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
There are some things in this country which I believe would be better off if they were more socialized (not necessarily 100% socialization) than others. However, I am not comfortable with this guy's tone. There is most certainly a state of too much socialism just as there is a state of too much capitalism. Neither are pure evil and they are not pure innocence either. They are two ends of a spectrum. Both come with strengths and weaknesses. They both have problems. The idea is to take each individual case one at a time and decide what end of the spectrum it should lean more towards, but at no time should we universally lean towards a single end of that spectrum.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Spare us the references to USSR and other failed State Capitalist totalitarian failures. They have 0% relevance to this thread.

Sorry, no can do. That is the measuring stick of socialist policies.

What socialist policies did the ussr ever implement? Central planning would be about as close as you could get (which really isn't a socialist policy), otherwise it was just a military dictatorship with ideological pretensions.

Were factories, business, and land privately held in any meaningful fashion?
Anyways I think the point many of us are making is what you describe as a military dictatorship is what you get in the real world when a country adheres to socialism.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
cad, what the hell are you rambling about? Why do you keep going back to authoritarian communism, when that is not what he is talking about?

It would be like me prognosticating on the failures of free markets due to the failure of any anarcho-capitalist 'state' to succeed.

Socialism is a major tenant of the governing philosophy of every major developed country in the world, as are free markets. When each is used in the correct place, both can and have improved society.

In summary, stop being a reactionary tool.

Hello? why is it you socialists can't read? "I" don't keep bringing it up. "I" brought it up once, AFTER I stated why socialism fails. In response to that failing, socialism brings on authoritarianism to "survive" but it too eventually crumbles due to the same reasoning that socialism fails - HUMAN NATURE. Humans don't like being controlled. They have a drive to better themselves and provide more for THEMSELVES.

So coudl you please provide timelines for the following socialist countries to fail and HUMAN NATURE take over:

sweden
norway
france
germany
united states of america
canada
united kingdom


thanks, i look forward to whatever you plan to pass off as insight.

None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.
Socialism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.

Please refrain from telling people what Socialists think, you obviously have no clue from your postings in this thread, and this is just another example.

What is "pure" anyhow? You are speaking of Anarchism, which is a whole other subject and not related to Democratic Socialism which is what this thread is about.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.
Socialism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


Well, to be fair, this is also true:

Capitalism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


The real answer is what I stated above I think.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.
Socialism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


Well, to be fair, this is also true:

Capitalism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


The real answer is what I stated above I think.

See I dont think it is capitalism as much as free unregulated anarchist markets.
Private ownership of property, wealth, and means of production can work within a totalitarian state as much as anarchy. Probably better due to the state having the ability to regulate the markets.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: Genx87



Private ownership of property, wealth, and means of production can work within a totalitarian state as much as anarchy. Probably better due to the state having the ability to regulate the markets.


Fascism failed also, which is what you are speaking of.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.
Socialism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


Well, to be fair, this is also true:

Capitalism no matter how perfect the scenario will fail. The number 1 reason why? human nature.


The real answer is what I stated above I think.

Did I start a thread advocating some Capitalistic wet dream?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: Genx87



Private ownership of property, wealth, and means of production can work within a totalitarian state as much as anarchy. Probably better due to the state having the ability to regulate the markets.


Fascism failed also, which is what you are speaking of.

Fascism failed as much as socialism did. Meaning parts of it are still alive today though it rarely dominates a nation like it did 70 years ago.

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.

Please refrain from telling people what Socialists think, you obviously have no clue from your postings in this thread, and this is just another example.

What is "pure" anyhow? You are speaking of Anarchism, which is a whole other subject and not related to Democratic Socialism which is what this thread is about.

lol, you post something slobbering all over socialism and you don't even know what socialists think? Buahahahahaha.... Try studying the subject so you don't look like even more of a fool.
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: Genx87


Fascism failed as much as socialism did. Meaning parts of it are still alive today though it rarely dominates a nation like it did 70 years ago.

Socialist aspects of societies benefit workers and in the long run prosperity/education/health of the population, what has Fascism brought?
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


lol, you post something slobbering all over socialism and you don't even know what socialists think? Buahahahahaha.... Try studying the subject so you don't look like even more of a fool.

Socialists are not against bettering yourself, it is against bettering yourself at the expense of your fellow man. You need a Marx refresher my friend.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
I also believe that certain kinds of socialism can work in ways that are really beneficial in some countries such as Denmark, but those same practices wouldn't not fare very well here in the states.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


lol, you post something slobbering all over socialism and you don't even know what socialists think? Buahahahahaha.... Try studying the subject so you don't look like even more of a fool.

Socialists are not against bettering yourself, it is against bettering yourself at the expense of your fellow man. You need a Marx refresher my friend.
That doesn't address what I stated and you replied to.
None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.

 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: Xavier434
I also believe that certain kinds of socialism can work in ways that are really beneficial in some countries such as Denmark, but those same practices wouldn't not fare very well here in the states.

It could, if and when we ever have a economy not based off exploitation of cheap labor which props up Capitalism (domestic -historically slaves) or foreign (sweatshops in China for example)
 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

That doesn't address what I stated and you replied to.
None of those are pure socialism and each one of those is capitalistic which socialists think is unfair and concentrates weath and power.

Define your idea of "pure Socialism" then, without defining Communism/Leninism.

The problem here is your definition of Socialism is utterly flawed, and this is probably because your knowledge is light on Marx and heavy on Limbaugh. ;)
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: Genx87


Fascism failed as much as socialism did. Meaning parts of it are still alive today though it rarely dominates a nation like it did 70 years ago.

Socialist aspects of societies benefit workers and in the long run prosperity/education/health of the population, what has Fascism brought?

That is debateable. You think the modern welfare state that put generations of people on the govt tit is beneficial to society? In what way? Govt interjecting itself into private markets, driving up the costs, and crowding out private industry is beneficial to whom? And govt creating industry that the markets dont want and forcing people to pay for it via taxation is great in what respect?

Socialism in mixed market countries has its place. I wont defend tenents of fascism because quite frankly I dont believe in either idelogies. I prefer open markets with govt oversight to keep those markets fair for everyone involved.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: Genx87

I prefer open markets with govt oversight to keep those markets fair for everyone involved.

Thanks for admitting it finally Comrade.

Can I get a Internationale hallelujah!

Socialist markets were not open, nor fair. So sorry to burst your bubble if you think I was agreeing with you about socialism.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: Carmen813
Cad,
I think arguing that socialism will fail because of human nature is awfully short-sighted given that our banking system just failed due to human greed. Not saying your stance is without merit, but I think that's a pretty terrible example to use, especially right now.
No, it's a good example and is not mutually exclusive with parts of capitalism failing, too.

Socialism has been tried and is still being tried. The history is voluminous on its ineffectiveness.

 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
I prefer open markets with govt oversight to keep those markets fair for everyone involved.


That is what I want to for the most part. There are cases where I believe more socialization would be better though. Health care is one of them, but even with that I don't think that socialized health care being the only option is the right way to do it.

The hardest part surrounding all of this stuff is proper use of enforcement and accurate checks and balances.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: Genx87


Socialist markets were not open, nor fair

Back to the USSR strawman again?

Back to reality again.

Further I believe you wanted to say "red herring" and not "strawman".

 

Steeplerot

Lifer
Mar 29, 2004
13,051
6
81
Originally posted by: Genx87

Back to reality again.

The USSR has been gone for almost 2 decades, question is, when will you come to reality?

The cold war is over, what works best always wins, and Democratic Socialism is the defacto standard of the civilized world to varying degrees, regardless of what Limbaugh tells you Socialism means.

Welcome to the post-cold war era!
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed
Originally posted by: Genx87

Back to reality again.

The USSR has been gone for almost 2 decades, question is, when will you come to reality?

The cold war is over, what works best always wins, and Democratic Socialism is the defacto standard of the civilized world to varying degrees, regardless of what Limbaugh tells you Socialism means.

Welcome to the post-cold war era!
And of the civilized world, how are the economies doing in those countries that are more socialist than the US?

Socialism is no progression, it's a very predicable and inevitable (assuming some extraneous force doesn't come in to unseat everything), over time, point a society will reach. You can see in any number of western countries government grow and grow and grow. There are increasing numbers that depend on government benefits and given how much sloth humans tend toward the results are always the same.