Now a civil works program is not a bad idea. Roads, bridges, and just about everything else still needs to be repaired
Advertisement
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 24, 2018 8:54 am
by Kennlind » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:31 am
Hakons wrote:Which of these poll options have actually been implemented? Which of these poll options have worked in the long term?
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:34 am
by Dejanic » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:43 am
by Thermodolia » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:45 am
Dejanic wrote:Thermodolia wrote:Syndicalism is debatable about having been tried or existing long enough to actually know if it would work long term
It worked decently in Catalonia. But I personally think Syndicalism is largely pointless, at least when it comes to modern tertiary based economies with low union representation. For secondary based economies perhaps.
Bearing in mind Syndicalism isn't really an end game system, it was designed (at least in the Anarchist/CNT sense) to be a transitional system to eventual global Communism. It's more of a methodology to achieve Communism than an actual society, but I think where it has been implemented it seems to of been pretty successful; I just question its usefulness, at the very least in the highly developed third world.
by Soviet Lestland » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:46 am
BREAKING NEWS: Rations are given out by the military to civilian population.
by Nulla Bellum » Wed Jan 24, 2018 9:57 am
by Great Minarchistan » Wed Jan 24, 2018 11:39 am
by The Grene Knyght » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:17 pm
Great Minarchistan wrote:Thermodolia wrote:Now a civil works program is not a bad idea. Roads, bridges, and just about everything else still needs to be repaired
I'll honestly agree with you. However what Grene advocated was basically humans digging ditches as the scenario involved was automated labor.
[_★_]
(◕‿◕)
Currently
Reading
2015: x=-8.75,y=-6.56
2016: x=-8.88,y=-9.54
2017: x=-9.63,y=-9.90
2018: x=-9.88,y=-9.23
2019: x=-10.0,y=-9.90
2020: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
2021: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM
Portal Nationalist | Proletarian MoralistPRO: Socialism, Communism, Internationalism, Revolution, Leninism.
NEUTRAL: Anarchism, Marxism-Leninism.
ANTI: Capitalism, Liberalism, Nationalism, Fascists, Hyper-Sectarian Leftists.
by The Grene Knyght » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:22 pm
Taihei Tengoku wrote:The Grene Knyght wrote:What I mean is that, capitalism has created a paradoxical system where automation can be harmful to workers, because it's a system that requires work for the sake of work.
A worker works for the sake of producing a product, not to work. If you are laid off by a robot it is because you are no longer needed for the result. The big problem is that many of the recently unneeded workers cannot find ways to make themselves needed anymore.
[_★_]
(◕‿◕)
Currently
Reading
2015: x=-8.75,y=-6.56
2016: x=-8.88,y=-9.54
2017: x=-9.63,y=-9.90
2018: x=-9.88,y=-9.23
2019: x=-10.0,y=-9.90
2020: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
2021: x=-10.0,y=-10.0
FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM
Portal Nationalist | Proletarian MoralistPRO: Socialism, Communism, Internationalism, Revolution, Leninism.
NEUTRAL: Anarchism, Marxism-Leninism.
ANTI: Capitalism, Liberalism, Nationalism, Fascists, Hyper-Sectarian Leftists.
by MeeNMann » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:27 pm
by Aillyria » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:36 pm
Dejanic wrote:Thermodolia wrote:Syndicalism is debatable about having been tried or existing long enough to actually know if it would work long term
It worked decently in Catalonia. But I personally think Syndicalism is largely pointless, at least when it comes to modern tertiary based economies with low union representation. For secondary based economies perhaps.
Bearing in mind Syndicalism isn't really an end game system, it was designed (at least in the Anarchist/CNT sense) to be a transitional system to eventual global Communism. It's more of a methodology to achieve Communism than an actual society, but I think where it has been implemented it seems to of been pretty successful; I just question its usefulness, at the very least in the highly developed third world.
Conserative Morality wrote:If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?
......
Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist
West Oros wrote:GOD DAMMIT! I thought you wouldn't be here.
Well you aren't a real socialist. Just a sociopath disguised as one.
Not to mention that this thread split off from LWDT, so I assumed you would think this thread was a "revisionist hellhole".
by Dejanic » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:42 pm
Aillyria wrote:Dejanic wrote:It worked decently in Catalonia. But I personally think Syndicalism is largely pointless, at least when it comes to modern tertiary based economies with low union representation. For secondary based economies perhaps.
Bearing in mind Syndicalism isn't really an end game system, it was designed (at least in the Anarchist/CNT sense) to be a transitional system to eventual global Communism. It's more of a methodology to achieve Communism than an actual society, but I think where it has been implemented it seems to of been pretty successful; I just question its usefulness, at the very least in the highly developed third world.
I don't understand, you believe syndicalism is insufficient for tertiary economies, but communism is? How is that so? I don't see communism even working in secondary economic setting. How would you make communism, which is centrally planned, work in a tertiary economy?
by Dejanic » Wed Jan 24, 2018 12:51 pm
by Aillyria » Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:11 pm
Dejanic wrote:Aillyria wrote:I don't understand, you believe syndicalism is insufficient for tertiary economies, but communism is? How is that so? I don't see communism even working in secondary economic setting. How would you make communism, which is centrally planned, work in a tertiary economy?
Communism is a classless stateless moneyless society, it's not centrally planned, I shouldn't have to explain this it's politics 101. Read some of the links in the OP if you're a newb.
Do you know the roots of syndicalism? What its purpose is? It's literally a method on which to achieve Communism, that's how the CNT saw it and how revolutionary Syndicalists throughout history have seen it. It isn't Syndicalism vs Communism.
Conserative Morality wrote:If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?
......
Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist
West Oros wrote:GOD DAMMIT! I thought you wouldn't be here.
Well you aren't a real socialist. Just a sociopath disguised as one.
Not to mention that this thread split off from LWDT, so I assumed you would think this thread was a "revisionist hellhole".
by Great Minarchistan » Wed Jan 24, 2018 1:43 pm
MeeNMann wrote:I guess we should try out all of these economic systems just to see if they work. Imagine having a island with stranded people and force an economy on them, I would help pay for that. It's the only real way to figure out these things
by Dejanic » Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:30 pm
Aillyria wrote:Dejanic wrote:Communism is a classless stateless moneyless society, it's not centrally planned, I shouldn't have to explain this it's politics 101. Read some of the links in the OP if you're a newb.
Do you know the roots of syndicalism? What its purpose is? It's literally a method on which to achieve Communism, that's how the CNT saw it and how revolutionary Syndicalists throughout history have seen it. It isn't Syndicalism vs Communism.
I should clarify myself, I'm am not new to socialism. I am aware of the origins of both syndicalism and communism. I assumed you were a normal "communist" in the Leninist sense. But by your reaction, you're perhaps and anarcho-communists? The syndicalism I espouse isn't based on moving towards communism. I don't view communism as possible in an advanced economy for the very reasons you list, it is stateless and moneyless, the notion of "post-scarcity".
My primary influences are market socialism, mutualism, and Ricardian socialism on economy form, while my social class relation views and action theory are more aligned with Sorel's works.
by Orostan » Wed Jan 24, 2018 3:40 pm
Great Minarchistan wrote:Orostan wrote:
And you were wrong? Tsarist Russia suffered more with the Russo-Japanese War than USSR did with the WW2.
It was a small economy already, so small damages do great things proportionally. The facts are out there: The GDPpc fell 19.1% following Russo-Japanese War against 17.6% following World War II. For someone who has stated that the harm for Tsarist Russia due to such war was nowhere as bad as USSR with WW2 you are blatantly wrong.
Are you trying to just dismiss the facts that you don't like? Tsarist Russia suffered more with Russo-Japanese War than what USSR did with WW2, not "nowhere as much".
Interesting thing, since the Roman Empire suffered the collapse while it existed, while USSR passed the harsh times to the newly-formed Russia.
Empirically wrong. The USSR started to stagnate in the late 1970s and from then on started to grow as fast as a chicken flying:
Nonetheless, the USSR started the recession, and even if you blame market capitalism on it's depression, not doing the reforms would imply USSR be worst off than modern Russia:
“It is difficult for me to imagine what “personal liberty” is enjoyed by an unemployed hungry person. True freedom can only be where there is no exploitation and oppression of one person by another; where there is not unemployment, and where a person is not living in fear of losing his job, his home and his bread. Only in such a society personal and any other freedom can exist for real and not on paper.” -J. V. STALIN
Ernest Hemingway wrote:Anyone who loves freedom owes such a debt to the Red Army that it can never be repaid.
Napoleon Bonaparte wrote:“To understand the man you have to know what was happening in the world when he was twenty.”
Cicero wrote:"In times of war, the laws fall silent"
by Aillyria » Wed Jan 24, 2018 3:57 pm
Dejanic wrote:Aillyria wrote:
I should clarify myself, I'm am not new to socialism. I am aware of the origins of both syndicalism and communism. I assumed you were a normal "communist" in the Leninist sense. But by your reaction, you're perhaps and anarcho-communists? The syndicalism I espouse isn't based on moving towards communism. I don't view communism as possible in an advanced economy for the very reasons you list, it is stateless and moneyless, the notion of "post-scarcity".
My primary influences are market socialism, mutualism, and Ricardian socialism on economy form, while my social class relation views and action theory are more aligned with Sorel's works.
I'm somewhere in-between a Trot and a Luxembourgist, so I am a Leninist but not in the Stalinist sense. I believe in a planned economy under Socialism, but primarily based around decentralised worker control, with state control in significant sectors like healthcare and defence.
I don't view Communism (as in higher stage Communism) possible right now, but I believe it is possible, and inevitable once material conditions progress through Socialism (lower stage Communism). Do you believe as such? If so, how do you view such a transition arising through Ricardian Socialism and market utilisation?
Conserative Morality wrote:If RWDT were Romans, who would they be?
......
Aillyria would be Claudius. Temper + unwillingness to suffer fools + supporter of the P E O P L E + traditional legalist
West Oros wrote:GOD DAMMIT! I thought you wouldn't be here.
Well you aren't a real socialist. Just a sociopath disguised as one.
Not to mention that this thread split off from LWDT, so I assumed you would think this thread was a "revisionist hellhole".
by Great Minarchistan » Wed Jan 24, 2018 4:00 pm
Orostan wrote:1- The USSR seems to have had multiple periods of stagnation followed by growth
Orostan wrote:and the trend near the end of the USSR's life was started in the 1960s but interrupted by slow growth and stagnation sometimes. On this graph near the late 80s we see stagnation due to Gorby's Market reforms.
Orostan wrote:In addition this is GDP per capita - which is not always a good measurement to use.
Orostan wrote:The big "recession" was the collapse of the USSR
Orostan wrote:which was started by Gorby being politically and economically incompetent.
Orostan wrote:This graph is a GDP graph, which in our situation would probably be more accurate.
Orostan wrote:We can see that the Soviet GDP, aside from a few bumps in the road, was rising at a relatively constant rate since the end of WW2. In 1982 (the year Brezhnev died), the economy began a recession and stagnation period after a decline in growth rates.
Orostan wrote:The reforms only worsened the USSR's economic situation.
Orostan wrote:If we follow the trend from just before the collapse of the USSR, we would come out ahead of where the former soviet union is at the end of that graph.
Orostan wrote:It looks like this graph takes the trend from a period of stagnation, which is a bit dishonest.
by Orostan » Wed Jan 24, 2018 5:37 pm
Great Minarchistan wrote:Orostan wrote:1- The USSR seems to have had multiple periods of stagnation followed by growth
None that lasted as much as the last.Orostan wrote:and the trend near the end of the USSR's life was started in the 1960s but interrupted by slow growth and stagnation sometimes. On this graph near the late 80s we see stagnation due to Gorby's Market reforms.
It's interesting, since the stagnation was already there before Perestroika started in 1986. And there's more: even with the "socialist strength" before 1986, USSR couldn't reach the levels of Spain, Finland and Japan that started off roughly at the same bar.Orostan wrote:In addition this is GDP per capita - which is not always a good measurement to use.
You say that after several of your arguments based on it? Wew.Orostan wrote:The big "recession" was the collapse of the USSR
Which started when it existed.Orostan wrote:which was started by Gorby being politically and economically incompetent.
You ignore the stagnation coming before.Orostan wrote:This graph is a GDP graph, which in our situation would probably be more accurate.
GDP per capita in adjusted dollars, to be precise.Orostan wrote:We can see that the Soviet GDP, aside from a few bumps in the road, was rising at a relatively constant rate since the end of WW2. In 1982 (the year Brezhnev died), the economy began a recession and stagnation period after a decline in growth rates.
Wrong, the stagnation began before 1982.Orostan wrote:The reforms only worsened the USSR's economic situation.
Ah, so the reforms didn't cause the bad economic situation that later on ended up on the collapse, they (allegedly) worsened it.Orostan wrote:If we follow the trend from just before the collapse of the USSR, we would come out ahead of where the former soviet union is at the end of that graph.
Because the economy entered on the longest slowdown of its history. Nonetheless, even with the fastest trend (1) it couldn't even keep up with Spain.Orostan wrote:It looks like this graph takes the trend from a period of stagnation, which is a bit dishonest.
Because it became the new normal of USSR?
“It is difficult for me to imagine what “personal liberty” is enjoyed by an unemployed hungry person. True freedom can only be where there is no exploitation and oppression of one person by another; where there is not unemployment, and where a person is not living in fear of losing his job, his home and his bread. Only in such a society personal and any other freedom can exist for real and not on paper.” -J. V. STALIN
Ernest Hemingway wrote:Anyone who loves freedom owes such a debt to the Red Army that it can never be repaid.
Napoleon Bonaparte wrote:“To understand the man you have to know what was happening in the world when he was twenty.”
Cicero wrote:"In times of war, the laws fall silent"
by The Glorious Third Reign of Templedom » Wed Jan 24, 2018 6:27 pm
Universal Union of Panhumanity wrote:I would say the best alternative to capitalism is probably a socialist state-run economy using automated labour. This would allow for the production of more goods for lower costs, which could then be distributed evenly amongst the populace, increasing the average standard of living.
The Empire of Pretantia wrote:I would prefer a capitalist computer-run economy using automated labor. This would allow for people to do whatever the **** they want.
Community Values wrote:Not really, if education matches the times. There will probably be something new to consume the 9-5 slot.
Maybe service jobs, maybe something else.
The Grene Knyght wrote:What I mean is that, capitalism has created a paradoxical system where automation can be harmful to workers, because it's a system that requires work for the sake of work. Applying the same logic to socialism is silly, because it assumes the same logic.
In short, while automation under capitalism isn't necessarily good for workers (because of unemployment) it is a good thing under socialism. ...
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Cyptopir, Eahland, Herador, Kowani, Moreistan, Nanatsu no Tsuki, Plan Neonie, Prion-Cirus Imperium, Tarsonis, Tungstan
Advertisement