Opinion on socialism?

by **Northwest Brazil** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:58 am

What do you guys think about socialism? Does it work? Does it not? Is it better than capitalism? communism? Any opinion or view about this economical structure.

by **Forster Keys** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:28 am

I'm surprised some of the NS ideologues haven't got on to this thread yet.

I'm a libertarian mixed economy socialist with radicalist sympathies.

by **North Suran** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:32 am

In before a torrent of Austrian School free market capitalists having a flame-war with hard-line Leninist-Marxist Socialists.

by **Innsmothe** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:33 am

Socialist-libertarian here.

by **Verdeguay** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:36 am

Depends on what kind of socialism we're talking about.

by **Georgism** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:37 am

I don't like it. Too radical.

by **Exemplis** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:40 am

Innsmothe wrote:Socialist-libertarian here.

Me too.

Northwest Brazil wrote:What do you guys think about socialism? Does it work? Does it not? Is it better than capitalism? communism? Any opinion or view about this economical structure.

Now, define 'better'.

by **Forster Keys** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:40 am

North Suran wrote:In before a torrent of Austrian School free market capitalists having a flame-war with hard-line Leninist-Marxist Socialists.

At least the Stalinist types are amusing.

by **Innsmothe** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:43 am

Northwest Brazil wrote:What do you guys think about socialism? Does it work? Does it not? Is it better than capitalism? communism? Any opinion or view about this economical structure.

Technically socialism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive.

by **Esternial** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 3:55 am

Northwest Brazil wrote:What do you guys think about socialism? Does it work? Does it not? Is it better than capitalism? communism? Any opinion or view about this economical structure.

It's like spices. Use too many and it may fuck up your entire dish.

by **Aynistan** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:05 am

Not only is it the quickest way to reduce a nation to poverty known to man, it is also potentially one of the most tyrannical forms of government as by the very nature of the ideology it is forced to violate many fundamental rights, distort interpersonal relations and deny many of the basic drives and behaviours that make us human.

by **Georgism** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:08 am

Innsmothe wrote:Technically socialism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive.

...

They're not?

by **Novograd IV** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:10 am

Aynistan wrote:Not only is it the quickest way to reduce a nation to poverty known to man, it is also potentially one of the most tyrannical forms of government as by the very nature of the ideology it is forced to violate many fundamental rights, distort interpersonal relations and deny many of the basic drives and behaviours that make us human.

source?

without mentioning the USSR

by **Koffiedik** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:12 am

Esternial wrote:
Northwest Brazil wrote:What do you guys think about socialism? Does it work? Does it not? Is it better than capitalism? communism? Any opinion or view about this economical structure.
It's like spices. Use too many and it may fuck up your entire dish.

Same with capitalism. Yes yes, it's not a government form i know

The truth is probably in the middle and stuff.

by **Awkies** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:12 am

One thing that I have noticed in NS is that if you start with a social mixed economy and continue to institute left-leaning economic policies (eg "this will be good except for the tax hike" choices on issues), your private sector dies.

It works much better if you build your economy up with hard-line capitalist policies THEN fix the issues that capitalism causes with social policies to restrict industry.

That said, I consider myself a social democrat on the economy. The free market system is useful for building wealth, but it's not perfect. You don't want a market where corporations have all the power and consumers have none. That's why you have to have strong regulation (eg, anti-competition laws, environmental regulations, some trade protection - though I would consider myself mostly free trade with regards to developed countries) to ensure your economy can still thrive.

by **Forster Keys** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:13 am

Aynistan wrote:Not only is it the quickest way to reduce a nation to poverty known to man, it is also potentially one of the most tyrannical forms of government as by the very nature of the ideology it is forced to violate many fundamental rights, distort interpersonal relations and deny many of the basic drives and behaviours that make us human.

Hyperbowl!

There are much quicker ways to reduce a nation to poverty, like taking out central control, destroying key infrastructure (like power and water), and sending a nation into anarchy.

True socialism isn't tyrannical. Perverted capitalism (military dictatoship/kleptocracy) I think could be just as bad.

As for the rights thing, that's a matter of opinion, depending on your own morals. Interpersonal relations? How so? The materialism and individualism created by modern society, which is anything but socialist, seems to be warping much of that, and what are these basic drives and behaviours?

Your name has nothing to do Ayn Rand by the way?

by **Koffiedik** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:25 am

Some human drives and behaviours:

-greed, competition, alpha-male stuff, rich-poor gap
-sharing, cooperation, equality, compassion

Now which set fits socialism best and which one a more free government?

by **Forster Keys** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:33 am

Koffiedik wrote:Some human drives and behaviours:

-greed, competition, alpha-male stuff, rich-poor gap
-sharing, cooperation, equality, compassion

Now which set fits socialism best and which one a more free government?

All human behaviour and drives should go unregulated by government! What could possibly go wrong?

by **Hresejnen** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:34 am

Considering the nations at the top of the HDI, doing brilliantly economically even in this climate, are (in)famous for their levels of individual freedom, and at the head of progressive legislation pertaining to everything from copyright to the environment all indisputably take some form of socialism, I think it would be pretty stupid to universally condemn center-left economics.

by **Noord Kekionga** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:43 am

It seems to be working well for Sweden...

by **Awkies** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:46 am

Hresejnen wrote:Considering the nations at the top of the HDI, doing brilliantly economically even in this climate, are (in)famous for their levels of individual freedom, and at the head of progressive legislation pertaining to everything from copyright to the environment all indisputably take some form of socialism, I think it would be pretty stupid to universally condemn center-left economics.

A strict capitalist would say that the HDI is not a proper measure of quality of life, as taxation and such affects the quality of life of the top 20% to bring up the undeserving bottom 20%.

That said, my country, Australia, has historically been centre-with-a-tiny-lean-to-the-left overall (depending on the years of government we trail from significantly left to centre-moderate-right), and consistently ranks up with the best of them on the HDI.

by **Aynistan** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:48 am

Novograd IV wrote:
Aynistan wrote:Not only is it the quickest way to reduce a nation to poverty known to man, it is also potentially one of the most tyrannical forms of government as by the very nature of the ideology it is forced to violate many fundamental rights, distort interpersonal relations and deny many of the basic drives and behaviours that make us human.

source?
without mentioning the USSR

Most obviously, look at the difference in the 70s and 80s between East and West Germany. Cuba, where even the government admits the system doesn't work. China, look at how their economy has developed since they ditched socialistic economic policies. Zimbabwe, where land redistribution and prince controls led to economic collapse. Syria, Egypt and Yemen also flirted with socialist economic policies in the 60s and 70s, and are the poorest countries in the region. Angola, Venezuela, Laos and Vietnam before they saw the light.... The fact most of these countries have ditched socialistic principles and are trying to catch up by allowing economic freedom to blossom says it all really.

Socialism. Doesn't. Work. It leads to economic and political basket cases, and that's before we even look at the biggest clusterfuck of them all.

by **Verdeguay** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:48 am

Noord Kekionga wrote:It seems to be working well for Sweden...

Sweden isn't socialist, it's social democratic.

by **Tekcirb** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:49 am

Radical Socialist Here

by **Verdeguay** » Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:51 am

Awkies wrote:A strict capitalist would say that the HDI is not a proper measure of quality of life, as taxation and such affects the quality of life of the top 20% to bring up the undeserving bottom 20%.

That said, my country, Australia, has historically been centre-with-a-tiny-lean-to-the-left overall (depending on the years of government we trail from significantly left to centre-moderate-right), and consistently ranks up with the best of them on the HDI.

Australia? Your flag says otherwise...impostor!