• JasSmith
    link
    fedilink
    31 year ago

    You’re wrong. Socialism objectively provides a higher physical quality of life to its citizens when compared to capitalism at an equal level of development.

    That’s a pretty big switcheroo there. Communism isn’t socialism, and the socialism as described in the link is called democratic socialism. I.e. democracy with redistribution. Which all Western countries practise. Your link reinforces my premise.

    The notion that there are no corruption issues in capitalist countries is also bizarre.

    Nobody claimed that. You keep making up straw men. We’d have a more productive discussion if you just replied to what I wrote.

    20million people die to easily preventable things under capitalism around the world every single year.

    That the rate of hunger has dropped precipitously while population has exploded in the most impoverished regions is testament to the incredible achievement of capitalism. Child mortality is at an all time low. You’re arguing that because things aren’t perfect, capitalism is bad. Clearly the world isn’t so black and white. No system of resource allocation is perfect, least of all communism.

    But really this isn’t about capitalism. It’s about politics. We can choose to tax people more and redistribute locally and abroad. We choose that when we vote. Capitalism just ensures we have lots of resources and products and services.

    • Move to lemm.ee
      link
      -1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s a pretty big switcheroo there. Communism isn’t socialism, and the socialism as described in the link is called democratic socialism. I.e. democracy with redistribution. Which all Western countries practise. Your link reinforces my premise.

      This is ideological illiteracy. Socialism is the transitionary stage between capitalism and communism. All communist states have been socialist states because no society has progressed far enough to reach communism.

      Nobody claimed that. You keep making up straw men. We’d have a more productive discussion if you just replied to what I wrote.

      The implication was that it is worse in communist countries.

      That the rate of hunger has dropped precipitously while population has exploded in the most impoverished regions is testament to the incredible achievement of capitalism. Child mortality is at an all time low. You’re arguing that because things aren’t perfect, capitalism is bad. Clearly the world isn’t so black and white. No system of resource allocation is perfect, least of all communism.

      Take China out of that data and it practically flatlines. It has not improved in capitalist countries, China is responsible for almost all of it.

      But really this isn’t about capitalism. It’s about politics. We can choose to tax people more and redistribute locally and abroad. We choose that when we vote. Capitalism just ensures we have lots of resources and products and services.

      If that were fucking possible under capitalism it would ALREADY BE HAPPENING. The parties presented to you under BOURGEOISE DEMOCRACY are BOURGEOISE parties. They are not parties of the people, they are parties of the bourgeoisie and the entire system is designed to maintain that. When your only options are parties of the bourgeoisie the outcome is that the winner represents the bourgeoisie.

      The only solution to this problem is to overthrow the existing bourgeoise democracy and install a proletarian democracy instead, the result of which being that all the parties under the proletarian democracy represent the proletariat. This is what a socialist state is institutionally. The antithesis of a capitalist state institutionally.

      • JasSmith
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        This is ideological illiteracy. Socialism is the transitionary stage between capitalism and communism. All communist states have been socialist states because no society has progressed far enough to reach communism.

        You claim me to be “ideologically illiterate,” then go on to agree with me that socialism isn’t communism. That doesn’t speak well of your reading comprehension or intentions.

        The implication was that it is worse in communist countries.

        I didn’t make any claims about corruption. My claims are with outcomes, which I maintain are worse under communism.

        Take China out of that data and it practically flatlines. It has not improved in capitalist countries, China is responsible for almost all of it.

        Child mortality has trended down over the last century in almost every capitalist nation, not just China. Even the really corrupt African nations.

        If that were fucking possible under capitalism it would ALREADY BE HAPPENING.

        No, and this is the central argumentative failure under this dogma. Maybe people just don’t want mass redistribution? Maybe what you want isn’t what everyone else wants? Is that really so hard to accept as a possible reality? The Frankfurt School accepted this in the 1930s under the premise that “people’s lives are just too good under capitalism to ever want to move to communism.”

        • Move to lemm.ee
          link
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You claim me to be “ideologically illiterate,” then go on to agree with me that socialism isn’t communism. That doesn’t speak well of your reading comprehension or intentions.

          Two sides of the same coin. Socialists all understand that socialism is the transitionary stage between capitalism and communism.

          I didn’t make any claims about corruption. My claims are with outcomes, which I maintain are worse under communism.

          Prove it. I cited research that shows you are wrong, you’re simply ignoring the facts.

          Child mortality has trended down over the last century in almost every capitalist nation, not just China. Even the really corrupt African nations.

          Wow one data point! Incredible. Now do deaths from starvation, lack of clean water and curable disease. 20million die per year.

          No, and this is the central argumentative failure under this dogma. Maybe people just don’t want mass redistribution? Maybe what you want isn’t what everyone else wants? Is that really so hard to accept as a possible reality? The Frankfurt School accepted this in the 1930s under the premise that “people’s lives are just too good under capitalism to ever want to move to communism.”

          Holy shit your argument is “I don’t want these people to live so it’s ok”. Colonial brained monster.

          • JasSmith
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Two sides of the same coin. Socialists all understand that socialism is the transitionary stage between capitalism and communism.

            We continue to agree: they are not the same. Particularly democratic socialism.

            Prove it. I cited research that shows you are wrong, you’re simply ignoring the facts.

            The cited research relied on national reported statistics in its methodology. North Korea just isn’t a reliable source. Neither is China; which, by the way, is also classified as a socialist country. Further, the researchers normalised income, which radically altered the conclusion. Without doing that, the capitalist countries win by a country mile. You would have known that had you actually read the study you cited.

            To defend my premise, I would like like to cite all former and current communist countries, including:

            Korea, Democratic Peoples Rep. (North Korea)
            Armenia
            Azerbaijan
            China
            Georgia
            Kazakhstan
            Kyrgyzstan
            Laos, Peoples Democratic Republic
            Mongolia
            Nepal
            Tajikistan
            Tibet
            Uzbekistan
            Vietnam
            Armenia
            Azerbaijan
            China
            Georgia
            Kazakhstan
            Kyrgyzstan
            Laos, Peoples Democratic Republic
            Mongolia
            Nepal
            Russia
            Tajikistan
            Tibet
            Turkmenistan
            Uzbekistan
            Vietnam
            Europe
            Albania
            Belarus
            Bosnia & Herzegovina (Yugoslavia)
            Bulgaria
            Croatia (Yugoslavia)
            Czech Republic (Czechoslovakia)
            Estonia
            Finland
            Germany (German Democratic Republic)
            Greece
            Hungary
            Latvia
            Lithuania
            Macedonia, FYR (Yugoslavia)
            Moldova
            Montenegro (Yugoslavia)
            Poland
            Romania
            Serbia (Yugoslavia)
            Slovakia (Czechoslovakia)
            Slovenia (Yugoslavia)
            Spain
            Ukraine
            Angola
            Ethiopia
            Mozambique
            Colombia
            Cuba
            Nicaragua
            Peru

            Most of these countries are doing much better since eliminating communism. The data is irrefutable.

            Wow one data point! Incredible. Now do deaths from starvation, lack of clean water and curable disease. 20million die per year.

            I literally cited global hunger rates. I encourage you to read my comments above to refresh your memory.

            Global access to clean water has been trending up for more than a century.

            Child deaths from pneumonia.

            Diarrheal deaths in children.

            Disease burden from communicable, maternal, neonatal & nutritional diseases.

            I could do this all day, but you made the claim. Let’s see some evidence that capitalist nations do worse than communist nations.

            Holy shit your argument is “I don’t want these people to live so it’s ok”. Colonial brained monster.

            Once again, creating straw men. No one argued for killing anyone. Do you do his because your argument is weak? Does that normally work for you?