Are these still Socialist Nations?

[Glasgia]

Failure.

^^^[/quote]

Well aren't you two open-minded individuals....

Failure.

Seriously, give a definition. Back up what you're saying.

[Charlesia]

Russia doesn't label itself as socialist whatsoever.
China is becoming massively westernised, so I could see that being questioned.
Not too sure about Vietnam, though. It's also being quite westernised lately.

I don't see the connection. The Soviet Union was culturally Western (nobody cares about Tatars or Yakuts) and still Socialist.

[The Republic of American Freedom]

Russia's run by an oligarchy, not by the mob.

There's a difference?

The Oligarchy isn't necessarily breaking the law, because they are the law.

[Baltenstein]

There's a difference?

The Oligarchy isn't necessarily breaking the law, because they are the law.

Hence the saying, in America you can break the law, but in Russia, law breaks you.

[Napkiraly]

China is state capitalist. Far from socialist.
Russia is run by the mob, a pretty damn capitalist thing.
Vietnam, ehh, maybe. I haven't researched enough to really say anything to the contrary, but I think it's a stretch.

If there's any socialism in the world, it's in the Nordic Countries, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark. They are all fairly socialist in practice.

Having strong welfare states =/= socialism.

[Rutthenia]

Russia's run by an oligarchy, not by the mob.

There's a difference?

Of course. It's ruled by a group of wealthy oil tycoons, not filthy mobsters.

[Rutthenia]

Russia doesn't label itself as socialist whatsoever.
China is becoming massively westernised, so I could see that being questioned.
Not too sure about Vietnam, though. It's also being quite westernised lately.

I don't see the connection. The Soviet Union was culturally Western (nobody cares about Tatars or Yakuts) and still Socialist.

By 'westernised', I mean 'capitalist influence', considering a majority of capitalist governments originated/evolved in the West. Hell, I'm pretty sure Russia was capitalist in the short period between the end of Imperialism and the beginning of Communism.

[Kvatchdom]

I don't see the connection. The Soviet Union was culturally Western (nobody cares about Tatars or Yakuts) and still Socialist.

By 'westernised', I mean 'capitalist influence', considering a majority of capitalist governments originated/evolved in the West. Hell, I'm pretty sure Russia was capitalist in the short period between the end of Imperialism and the beginning of Communism.

No. Russia only struck it's industrialization during USSR.

[The Felnian Colonies]

The Oligarchy isn't necessarily breaking the law, because they are the law.

Hence the saying, in America you can break the law, but in Russia, law breaks you.

With guns and polonium.

I don't see the connection. The Soviet Union was culturally Western (nobody cares about Tatars or Yakuts) and still Socialist.

By 'westernised', I mean 'capitalist influence', considering a majority of capitalist governments originated/evolved in the West. Hell, I'm pretty sure Russia was capitalist in the short period between the end of Imperialism and the beginning of Communism.

Yeah, it was. The Russian Republic was just an effort to decide what the new government would be, but Lenin had other plans so he took over and over the course of the next twenty years he and Joe set out to kill, enslave or exile everyone opposed to their rule.

[United Tables]

Of all socialist nations since 1917, only North Korea still adheres to the classic definition of such. Cuba also is a good one, although it is a bit more liberal - in the sense that it allows more economical freedom. Yet not as much as Vietnam, which essentially has a mixed economy system.

Herargon

Look how good North Korea is doing.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

I don't see the connection. The Soviet Union was culturally Western (nobody cares about Tatars or Yakuts) and still Socialist.

By 'westernised', I mean 'capitalist influence', considering a majority of capitalist governments originated/evolved in the West. Hell, I'm pretty sure Russia was capitalist in the short period between the end of Imperialism and the beginning of Communism.

That period could be better described as "pure chaos".

[The Republic of American Freedom]

Of all socialist nations since 1917, only North Korea still adheres to the classic definition of such. Cuba also is a good one, although it is a bit more liberal - in the sense that it allows more economical freedom. Yet not as much as Vietnam, which essentially has a mixed economy system.

Herargon

Look how good North Korea is doing.

Cue all the Socialists saying North Korea isn't Socialist but “Juche".

[Rutthenia]

By 'westernised', I mean 'capitalist influence', considering a majority of capitalist governments originated/evolved in the West. Hell, I'm pretty sure Russia was capitalist in the short period between the end of Imperialism and the beginning of Communism.

No. Russia only struck it's industrialization during USSR.

I wasn't talking about industrialisation.

[Rutthenia]

Failure.

^^^

Well aren't you two open-minded individuals....

Failure.

Seriously, give a definition. Back up what you're saying.

Socialism is a failed system. It seemed great on paper, but completely fell flat on its face in practice. I can't name a single country labelling itself as "socialist" that hasn't violated their people's rights, had brutal dictators in charge, or mass-murdered (or "disappeared") much of its opposition.

[MERIZoC]

Russia

No

China

No

and Vietnam

lolno

[MERIZoC]

If we define socialism as public ownership of the (majority of the) means of production, then I'm not aware of any socialist nation that remained so beyond their formative years. China certainly hasn't been socialist since Deng's reforms, Russia definitely not since the latter Glasnost reforms and I'd argue that they abandoned socialism with Stalin's assumption of power through sweeping Lenin's proto-democratic economic system under the table.

This has never been so appropriate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

A no true scotsman isn't something you can claim any definition is guilty of.

[Radiatia]

Well of course there's the Obama Administration...

No, no, I'm just kidding but it still amuses me how people in America think he's a socialist.

[The Wolfussian Colony of Oceania]

How would you define socialism?

Failure.

Lel you sound like Liberty Prime

[Setgavarius]

^^^

Well aren't you two open-minded individuals....



Seriously, give a definition. Back up what you're saying.

Socialism is a failed system. It seemed great on paper, but completely fell flat on its face in practice. I can't name a single country labelling itself as "socialist" that hasn't violated their people's rights, had brutal dictators in charge, or mass-murdered (or "disappeared") much of its opposition.

I see that what you name socialism is bad, but I don't know how that worked exactly.

Well of course there's the Obama Administration...

No, no, I'm just kidding but it still amuses me how people in America think he's a socialist.

If it's the state giving money to anyone but hard-working idiots of the majority ethnic group, it's socialism, truth and logic be damned.

[The Republic of American Freedom]

Failure.

Lel you sound like Liberty Prime

Embrace Democracy or be Eradicated!

[Washington Resistance Army]

Failure.

Lel you sound like Liberty Prime

COMMUNISM IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF FAILURE!

As per the OP, Russia doesn't even claim to be socialist.

[Risottia]

The countries in question are Russia, China, and Vietnam.

Considering how in those countries the private property of the means of mass production is both allowed and rather widespread, no, those countries aren't socialist.

[Tafhan]

Russia? Lolnope
China? Blatantly capitalist. They only hang on to the brutal authoritarianism and pomp Mao provided because it suits their needs.
As for Vietnam, I don't know.

[Tafhan]

Of all socialist nations since 1917, only North Korea still adheres to the classic definition of such.

Yes. The Proletariat are definitely doing the ruling there. And Wealth is definitely distributed as equally as possible.

[Rhomaia]

Of all socialist nations since 1917, only North Korea still adheres to the classic definition of such.

Yes. The Proletariat are definitely doing the ruling there. And Wealth is definitely distributed as equally as possible.

It's irony! *Audience laughs aloud*