Capitalism vs. Communism

[Death Metal]

Capitalism vs. Communism.The question is what is better

Assuming you are talking pure capitalism vs pure communism, neither.

Third Way is better than both.

[4years]

How do you own something if you have no rights over its use/no control over it?

Through the state.

Then you don't own it, the state does. Which brings us back to state capitalism.

[Sibirsky]

No.

Then you're wrong.

socialism Pronunciation: /ˈsəʊʃəlɪz(ə)m/
Translate socialism into French | into German | into Italian | into Spanish
Definition of socialism
noun
[mass noun]
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
(in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

[The USOT]

How do you own something if you have no rights over its use/no control over it?

Through the state.

Which is not only irrelevant for a direct workplace, but from my understanding not applicable to the USSR due to control of the state body being centralised undemocratically in the hands of the few.

[Sibirsky]

Through the state.

Which is not only irrelevant for a direct workplace, but from my understanding not applicable to the USSR due to control of the state body being centralised undemocratically in the hands of the few.

Irrelevant to ownership.

[Mavorpen]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definitio ... /socialism

[4years]

I am assuming that publicly owned meant state owned.
Which is no communism or socialism. It is state capitalism, like a said ealier.

Capitalism requires a profit motive. Soviet enterprises had no profit motive. They were not capitalist.

Google state capitalism.

[Willam the Conqueor]

Which is not only irrelevant for a direct workplace, but from my understanding not applicable to the USSR due to control of the state body being centralised undemocratically in the hands of the few.

Irrelevant to ownership.

Yes.

[Inyourfaceistan]

A system where people are the product of their own merit. Everyone is held to the same standard, and private property serves as a reward for your labor.

Tell the government to f*** off

CAPITALISM FTW!!!!

[Mavorpen]

Capitalism requires a profit motive. Soviet enterprises had no profit motive. They were not capitalist.

Google state capitalism.

State Capitalism requites a profit motive. That doesn't refute Sibirsky in any way.

[Mavorpen]

A system where people are the product of their own merit. Everyone is held to the same standard, and private property serves as a reward for your labor.

That's communist.

[The USOT]

Which is not only irrelevant for a direct workplace, but from my understanding not applicable to the USSR due to control of the state body being centralised undemocratically in the hands of the few.

Irrelevant to ownership.

Then how does the state convey an individuals share of their labour value in the workplace? Because yes this is very relevant.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Through the state.

Then you don't own it, the state does. Which brings us back to state capitalism.

The state is supposedly made up of?
...The people/workers.

Now, variants of socialism likely exist wherein the state is denied as having any such authority or claim to represent the workers, but the variant practiced by the USSR and other such countries wherein the state took ownership in the name of the workers is and was a legitimate variant of socialism. One you can argue against, but it is socialism.

Don't blame us for the folks who have twisted your ideology. Come up with a term to accurately describe them that we can use that isn't blatant propaganda (like "state capitalism"). Something along the lines of Trotskyist or Marxist-Leninist would do nicely. I mean, we Capitalists had the decency to differentiate between laissez-faire and keynesian and the like, seems only fair you folks do the same

[4years]

Google state capitalism.

State Capitalism requites a profit motive. That doesn't refute Sibirsky in any way.

I was not trying to refute him I was trying to make him understand what he is talking about and it was a refernce to Sibirsky telling me to google socialism when the defination if socialism would support my point not Sibirsky's. Anyway ,soviet enterprises did have profit motive.

[Mavorpen]

Don't blame us for the folks who have twisted your ideology. Come up with a term to accurately describe them that we can use that isn't blatant propaganda (like "state capitalism"). Something along the lines of Trotskyist or Marxist-Leninist would do nicely. I mean, we Capitalists had the decency to differentiate between laissez-faire and keynesian and the like, seems only fair you folks do the same

[Sibirsky]

Capitalism requires a profit motive. Soviet enterprises had no profit motive. They were not capitalist.

Google state capitalism.

Fine.

"The term state capitalism has various meanings, but is usually described as commercial (profit-seeking) economic activity undertaken by the state with management of the productive forces in a capitalist manner, even if the state is nominally socialist."

What part of "there was no profit motive" did you miss?

[The USOT]

Then you don't own it, the state does. Which brings us back to state capitalism.

The state is supposedly made up of?
...The people/workers.

Which does not apply to the USSR, in which an oligarchy controled the state.

[Mavorpen]

I was not trying to refute him I was trying to make him understand what he is talking about and it was a refernce to Sibirsky telling me to google socialism when the defination if socialism would support my point not Sibirsky's. Anyway ,soviet enterprises did have profit motive.

What were these profit motives? Sure, they had a motive at the time (industrialize the fuck out of the country), but a profit motive? Not really.

[The Old States]

The idea of Communism is really good. It just never works in real life.

[Sibirsky]

State Capitalism requites a profit motive. That doesn't refute Sibirsky in any way.

I was not trying to refute him I was trying to make him understand what he is talking about and it was a refernce to Sibirsky telling me to google socialism when the defination if socialism would support my point not Sibirsky's. Anyway ,soviet enterprises did have profit motive.

They did not. That is partially why the nation was poor, and why the entire economy collapsed.

[Gaveo]

The idea of Communism is really good. It just never works in real life.

Thats why theres ns

[4years]

Then you don't own it, the state does. Which brings us back to state capitalism.

The state is supposedly made up of?
...The people/workers.

Now, variants of socialism likely exist wherein the state is denied as having any such authority or claim to represent the workers, but the variant practiced by the USSR and other such countries wherein the state took ownership in the name of the workers is and was a legitimate variant of socialism. One you can argue against, but it is socialism.

Don't blame us for the folks who have twisted your ideology. Come up with a term to accurately describe them that we can use that isn't blatant propaganda (like "state capitalism"). Something along the lines of Trotskyist or Marxist-Leninist would do nicely. I mean, we Capitalists had the decency to differentiate between laissez-faire and keynesian and the like, seems only fair you folks do the same

1. The USSR was not socialist. It claimed it was, but that claim does not make it socialist anymore than North Korea's claim to be democratic makes it a democracy. If you want we can say that North Korea has a legitimate variant of democracy, but I do not think that anyone is willin to say that.
2.State capitalism is a variant of capitalism that existed befoe the soviet union. It is not a propaganda term. If you want you can use the term stalinst to describe the USSR, which I mentioned, but the understandingis that stalinism in not socialism. There is an entire thread about that.
3. I am not blaming you for the stalinst, i am merely saying that you do not understand the differnce between stalinism and socialism. There is a differnce between guilt and ingorance, but maybe you do not understand that either.

[Mavorpen]

They did not. That is partially why the nation was poor, and why the entire economy collapsed.

I'm hoping he actually answers my question about these so called profit motives.

[Laval]

Somewhere in the middle is a good government. Too much of something = bad.

[Mavorpen]

2.State capitalism is a variant of capitalism that existed befoe the soviet union. It is not a propaganda term. If you want you can use the term stalinst to describe the USSR, which I mentioned, but the understandingis that stalinism in not socialism. There is an entire thread about that.

Still waiting on this proof it was state capitalist.