The end of Venezuela's "socialist paradise"

[New Avalon]

1. No, several have been proven to work, most of them being mixed systems between Capitalism and Socialism.
2. Obviously you don't or else you wouldn't have posted that shitty meme to begin with. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
3. As someone who actually understand economic systems and their history, watching you act as if you know the history of those history of those systems is funny. Keep it up, I need some afternoon entertainment.

Look, I don't know what you think Socialism is, but you clearly have a pretty warped idea of what it is if you think being a developed nation makes you Socialist. That's the most idiotic claim I've heard in a while, and I've heard a lot of idiotic claims.

Socialism is the good things in Western societies

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

“I keep building this one rocket that should achieve FTL speeds, but everytime it blows up 10 seconds after launch!... I’ll try it again, those weren’t the real models anyway.”


This is Marxism and it’s derivatives as a whole.

Basically what I said, but yours is funnier. Kudos.

and C. You're actually living in a Socialist society, Socialism tends to be ahead of the trend and evolves over time with it's original purpose being to give people universal suffrage, union/worker rights, etc... so if you live in any of the developed nations, then congrats, you live in a Socialist society!

None of those have anything to do with socialism lol

Ah, but didn't you know? Megacorporations, invasive ads, and rampant consumerism are the true embodiments of Socialism! Workers of the world order now and receive a red flag for just $9.99! /s

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Look, I don't know what you think Socialism is, but you clearly have a pretty warped idea of what it is if you think being a developed nation makes you Socialist. That's the most idiotic claim I've heard in a while, and I've heard a lot of idiotic claims.

Socialism is the good things in Western societies

Yeah, no. That's not how it works.

[New haven america]

1. No, several have been proven to work, most of them being mixed systems between Capitalism and Socialism.
2. Obviously you don't or else you wouldn't have posted that shitty meme to begin with. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
3. As someone who actually understand economic systems and their history, watching you act as if you know the history of those history of those systems is funny. Keep it up, I need some afternoon entertainment.

1. Look, I don't know what you think Socialism is, but you clearly have a pretty warped idea of what it is if you think being a developed nation makes you Socialist. 2. That's the most idiotic claim I've heard in a while, and I've heard a lot of idiotic claims.

1. Which means that you obviously have read or studied the history of Socialism. Again, thank you for bringing me entertainment by not understanding what you're talking about.
2. And yet you've brought no evidence to contradict me. Good for you. Now, if you actually did know what you're talking about, then you'd know that early Socialism called for universal suffrage, worker/union rights, etc... around the times of the 1st Industrial and French Revolutions, and seeing as how all developed nations have at least a mixed system, universal suffrage, unions, etc... then it's undeniable that early Socialism did have an effect on modern society.

So yet again, congrats, you live in a early Socialist's desired state. They got what they wanted, and to deny that fact is to deny history and our modern state.

[Gig em Aggies]

this

True Socialism© has never been tried.

Nice meme.

It kind of sounds like that what the socialist in the US Congress want for Americans.

There are no Socialists in Congress. Go fearmonger somewhere else, please.

Sen B Sanders, Alexandria Cortez so yes there are socialists in the US Congress.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

1. Look, I don't know what you think Socialism is, but you clearly have a pretty warped idea of what it is if you think being a developed nation makes you Socialist. 2. That's the most idiotic claim I've heard in a while, and I've heard a lot of idiotic claims.

1. Which means that you obviously have read or studied the history of Socialism. Again, thank you for bringing me entertainment by not understanding what you're talking about.
2. And yet you've brought no evidence to contradict me. Good for you. Now, if you actually did know what you're talking about, then you'd know that early Socialism called for universal suffrage, worker/union rights, etc... around the times of the 1st Industrial and French Revolutions, and seeing as how all developed nations have at least a mixed system, universal suffrage, unions, etc... then it's undeniable that early Socialism did have an effect on modern society.

So yet again, congrats, you live in a early Socialist's desired state. They got what they wanted, and to deny that fact is to deny history.

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

This besides the point that nobody was talking about "Early Socialism" because "Early Socialism" is fucking irrelevant in the 21st Century.

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

Socialists try create Socialist state; Socialist state fails; Socialists claim it wasn't Socialist; repeat.

Like a broken record, it repeats again and again. Just turn the damn thing off already and be done with it.

It kind of sounds like that what the socialist in the US Congress want for Americans.

No. The so called 'socialists' are capitalists trying the be cool or something. There are many kinds of socialism, but the Democrats aren't any of them. Yes, a more true form of socialism hasn't been tried, but the evil lies in the beliefs about freedom. Stalinism and actual democratic socialism are quite different. Blaming what Leninist states did on libertarian socialists is as dumb as blaming what fascism did on social liberals. Then again, Stalin did say that social democracy is fascism, despite there being no evidence. Holding each ideology accountable for something a different one did is foolish. I would prefer if both of you presented legitimate arguments why socialism won't work instead of repeating something you heard a random person on the internet said. It's not hard, but people seem to dislike coming up with good arguments.

[Washington Resistance Army]

1. Which means that you obviously have read or studied the history of Socialism. Again, thank you for bringing me entertainment by not understanding what you're talking about.
2. And yet you've brought no evidence to contradict me. Good for you. Now, if you actually did know what you're talking about, then you'd know that early Socialism called for universal suffrage, worker/union rights, etc... around the times of the 1st Industrial and French Revolutions, and seeing as how all developed nations have at least a mixed system, universal suffrage, unions, etc... then it's undeniable that early Socialism did have an effect on modern society.

So yet again, congrats, you live in a early Socialist's desired state. They got what they wanted, and to deny that fact is to deny history.

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

This besides the point that nobody was talking about "Early Socialism" because "Early Socialism" is fucking irrelevant in the 21st Century.

The Nazis wanted environmental protections and strong laws protecting animals.

Congrats, you live in a Nazi's desired state!

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Nice meme.



There are no Socialists in Congress. Go fearmonger somewhere else, please.

Sen B Sanders, Alexandria Cortez so yes there are socialists in the US Congress.

Social Democrats aren't Socialists, try again.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

This besides the point that nobody was talking about "Early Socialism" because "Early Socialism" is fucking irrelevant in the 21st Century.

The Nazis wanted environmental protections and strong laws protecting animals.

Congrats, you live in a Nazi's desired state!

Darn, looks like I gotta start hating Jews or the Gestapo will get me! :,(

/s

[New haven america]

1. Which means that you obviously have read or studied the history of Socialism. Again, thank you for bringing me entertainment by not understanding what you're talking about.
2. And yet you've brought no evidence to contradict me. Good for you. Now, if you actually did know what you're talking about, then you'd know that early Socialism called for universal suffrage, worker/union rights, etc... around the times of the 1st Industrial and French Revolutions, and seeing as how all developed nations have at least a mixed system, universal suffrage, unions, etc... then it's undeniable that early Socialism did have an effect on modern society.

So yet again, congrats, you live in a early Socialist's desired state. They got what they wanted, and to deny that fact is to deny history.

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

A. got it, you're incapable of making an argument
B. Fucking kek. You don't even understand what Liberalism was. Around the time of the 1st industrial and French Revolutions, Liberalism only wanted to break the then current social constraints (Being the aristocracy) and religious conformity. It did however, not really give a shit about workers and generally favored the owners/economic barons at the time, and really only wanted to give things like voting rights to property/business owning males (And some of the extremists at the time wanted to give voting rights to *gasp* all males).

But sure, pretend that you know things. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm sure that's easier than actually reading a fucking history book.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

A. got it, you're incapable of making an argument
B. Fucking kek. You don't even understand what Liberalism was. Around the time of the 1st industrial and French Revolutions, Liberalism only wanted to break the then current social constraints (Being the aristocracy) and religious conformity. It did however, not really give a shit about workers and generally favored the owners/economic barons at the time, and really only wanted to give things like voting rights to property/business owning males (And some of the extremists at the time wanted to give voting rights to *gasp* all males).

But sure, pretend that you know things. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm sure that's easier than actually reading a fucking history book.

Socialism is the belief that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be in the hands of the working class and not the wealthy elite; Liberalism is the belief in the promotion of civil rights and social equality.

But sure, go ahead and tell the fucking history buff he's the one who doesn't know history while claiming the First World practices Socialism while simultaneously acting as if Socialism is the only philosophy in history to endorse the concepts of universal suffrage and labor unions and that this makes any practice or endorsement of such things "Socialist" by default.

If you really feel the need to try and twist the standard definition of established ideologies to your preferred definition in order to garner a cheap victory, then I can't help but pity you.

[Far Easter Republic]

Socialists try create Socialist state; Socialist state fails; Socialists claim it wasn't Socialist; repeat.

Like a broken record, it repeats again and again. Just turn the damn thing off already and be done with it.

Socialism feels like a paradise until the rich and the government can't pay the poor who don't work because of the free pay, then it's hell. We are seeing the aftermath of collapse in Venezuela and the early stages of collapse in France.

[Erythrean Thebes]

Fucking lol. Apparently Liberalism is now "Early Socialism". Holy shit, dude. That's just too funny.

A. got it, you're incapable of making an argument
B. Fucking kek. You don't even understand what Liberalism was. Around the time of the 1st industrial and French Revolutions, Liberalism only wanted to break the then current social constraints (Being the aristocracy) and religious conformity. It did however, not really give a shit about workers and generally favored the owners/economic barons at the time, and really only wanted to give things like voting rights to property/business owning males (And some of the extremists at the time wanted to give voting rights to *gasp* all males).

But sure, pretend that you know things. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm sure that's easier than actually reading a fucking history book.

Perhaps in spirit socialism achieved many of its aims in the United States, but they were rarely (but not never) the achievements of socialists or communists

[Valentine Z]

While I am generally fine with both capitalist and socialist ideas, I think that Venezuela's problems lie more towards their corruption?

Remember that when they were doing well and the oil prices were stable and good, the revenue and profits were allowed to be siphoned off and misused.

Source: https://www.cato.org/publications/devel ... -venezuela

I would talk more about both the pros and cons of capitalism and socialism (or communism, if you will), but for Venezuela, it is my standing that it was more of the corruption that got them. If they still have all of those siphoned cash as funds, I'm sure they wouldn't have collapsed.

[New haven america]

A. got it, you're incapable of making an argument
B. Fucking kek. You don't even understand what Liberalism was. Around the time of the 1st industrial and French Revolutions, Liberalism only wanted to break the then current social constraints (Being the aristocracy) and religious conformity. It did however, not really give a shit about workers and generally favored the owners/economic barons at the time, and really only wanted to give things like voting rights to property/business owning males (And some of the extremists at the time wanted to give voting rights to *gasp* all males).

But sure, pretend that you know things. Whatever helps you sleep at night. I'm sure that's easier than actually reading a fucking history book.

Socialism is the belief that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be in the hands of the working class and not the wealthy elite; Liberalism is the belief in the promotion of civil rights and social equality.

Thank you for proving to me that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

Liberalism today is actually much closer to early Socialism, while Conservatism today is actually closer to early Liberalism. But sure, pretend that ideas don't evolve over time.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Thank you for proving to me that you don't actually know what you're talking about.

Liberalism today is actually much closer to early Socialism

The whole "lack of socialism" thing kinda throws a massive fucking wrench in your theory pal.

[Zeganas]

Nice meme.



There are no Socialists in Congress. Go fearmonger somewhere else, please.

Sen B Sanders, Alexandria Cortez so yes there are socialists in the US Congress.

Bernie Sanders is not a real socialist.

[Gutulia]

So, will Maduro be deposed from the presidency or detained ?

[Nord-Republikk]

Nothing quite more socialist than a 95% private sector economy.

[Nova Colombian Confederation]

pls get me the fuck out of here.

EDIT: Okay, i got that out of my insides. I'll prefer Stalin's USSR instead of this, because he ordered efficiency (or else...).

I have other things to do. To those that don't know what's going on, i'll leave this comment made by someone else.

"Literally nothing, someway, somehow, this thing actually gets worse by the day. Suicide rate is going up like crazy, the media don't even want to report suicides because they think it will provoke even more suicides or shit like that, the people here tried for four full years to overthrow the government. Unfortunately, they were arrested, "disappeared", killed, hurt badly, and the opposition party practically declared themselves to be the same as the governing party, thus, people got really demoralized and stopped protesting. The economic situation is so fucking harsh on normal people that they don't even care anymore, they're just focused on surviving and trying to eat a full meal once a day.

Long story short, fuck you."

Venezuela was not wealthy; what would be the point of collectivizing and pursuing autarchy when you have so little?

Not really. It basically had one of the highest standards of life quality on LatAm.

[Vallermoore]

Capitalism and Socialism are like hot and cold water-too hot and the bath scalds you, too cold and the bath freezes you. The trick is getting just the right mix. Venezuela just ran the cold tap for far too long. Enough socialism is needed so people are not homeless or worse, without so much socialism that it kills capitalism.

[Rio Cana]

While I am generally fine with both capitalist and socialist ideas, I think that Venezuela's problems lie more towards their corruption?

Remember that when they were doing well and the oil prices were stable and good, the revenue and profits were allowed to be siphoned off and misused.

Source: https://www.cato.org/publications/devel ... -venezuela

I would talk more about both the pros and cons of capitalism and socialism (or communism, if you will), but for Venezuela, it is my standing that it was more of the corruption that got them. If they still have all of those siphoned cash as funds, I'm sure they wouldn't have collapsed.

In that blue part above, you just showed what has been happening in Ven. since Independence. Yes, there were times the leadership actually was not corrupt but leaders like these were far and few between.

[Nord-Republikk]

While I am generally fine with both capitalist and socialist ideas, I think that Venezuela's problems lie more towards their corruption?

Remember that when they were doing well and the oil prices were stable and good, the revenue and profits were allowed to be siphoned off and misused.

Source: https://www.cato.org/publications/devel ... -venezuela

I would talk more about both the pros and cons of capitalism and socialism (or communism, if you will), but for Venezuela, it is my standing that it was more of the corruption that got them. If they still have all of those siphoned cash as funds, I'm sure they wouldn't have collapsed.

In that blue part above, you just showed what has been happening in Ven. since Independence. Yes, there were times the leadership actually was not corrupt but leaders like these were far and few between.

It's also a matter of poor currency management and the general hazards involved with letting oil dominate your economy. The Venezuelan government was fucking horrible in economic policy, but "helping poor people and setting up workers co-ops" wasn't exactly the kicker there.

[US-SSR]

venezuela isn't socialist

this

True Socialism© has never been tried.

If by "True Socialism" is meant control of the means of production by workers, then yes, that is a true statement. When did workers control the means of production in Russia? China? Cuba? North Korea? or Venezuela?

Democratic socialism as practiced in, say, Scandinavia, on the other hand is a roaring success on all counts. But for some reason those who run down so-called "socalism" in despotic and/or populist nations never are able to come up with a cogent critique of Scandinavian-style democratic socialism other than that taxes are high.