Socialism: evil impact

[sun rise]

The PRC did become less authoritarian, but only after embracing capitalism.

Oh? And the PRC crackdown on Hong Kong, creating concentration camps for Muslims, getting rid of any of disagree with Xi is LESS authoritarian? Xi is the most authoritarian ruler of China for decades. We used to think that capitalism inevitably led to democracy. We were wrong.

I know people who fled socialism (USSR & China).
But none who fled capitalism.

You just don't know them. But they exist. Especially if we don't speak in false absolutist terms, anyone who leaves the USA for more socialist Canada has relatively speaking fled capitalism. In fact, there's a goodly amount of ex-pats who have left for other countries with more socialist policies.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh? And the PRC crackdown on Hong Kong, creating concentration camps for Muslims, getting rid of any of disagree with Xi is LESS authoritarian? Xi is the most authoritarian ruler of China for decades.

It was worse. Aside from the news, I had & have
family there. It was worse. Did I mention it was worse?
And it's still bad....just better than it was.

We used to think that capitalism inevitably led to democracy. We were wrong.

I never thought that.

You just don't know them. But they exist.

You assume I knew people who fled capitalism.
Convenient.

Especially if we don't speak in false absolutist terms, anyone who leaves the USA for more socialist Canada has relatively speaking fled capitalism. In fact, there's a goodly amount of ex-pats who have left for other countries with more socialist policies.

Canuckistan isn't more socialist than Ameristan. They have
a thriving market economy financed by private parties.
Emigrating there would be for reasons other than fleeing capitalism
for socialism. For example, I nearly moved there in the early 70s to
avoid the draft. That was about civil liberty...not economics.

 

[metis]

Socialism developed and evolved because of the ills of capitalism, plus socialism is part & parcel of probably every country's economic system today since all countries have adopted what's called a "mixed economy".

Thus, debating which is better, capitalism or socialism, is really nonsensical because it assumes an either/or dichotomy that simply doesn't exist in today's world.

 

[Revoltingest]

Socialism developed and evolved because of the ills of capitalism, plus socialism is part & parcel of probably every country's economic system today since all countries have adopted what's called a "mixed economy".

Thus, debating which is better, capitalism or socialism, is really nonsensical because it assumes an either/or dichotomy that simply doesn't exist in today's world.

You believe that economies are all mixed,
but with no leaning towards either end of
the spectrum?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's still wrong to use a personal definition of a word
that conflicts with all dictionaries. That's what some
cons do with "socialism". Don't be like them.
But if personal definitions are to rule, then all Democrats
would be "commie fascists".

It's not personal definitions. It's examples of when a dictionary isn't the right tool, and even a couple examples when the typical dictionary definition is logically flawed.
Politics, economics, social ideas and philosophy are things dictionaries do not handle well.
And I didn't use a personal definition. "Ownership... by community as a whole" and "ownership being to the community as a whole" are both saying the same thing and can be accurately reworded as "common ownership." And hence why I mentioned the difference between the two is debated.

Definition of socialism | Dictionary.com
1) a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.

Definition of communism | Dictionary.com
1) a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2) (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not personal definitions. It's examples of when a dictionary isn't the right tool.....

Not the right tool if one wants a personal definition
that's at odds with whats more common...standard.
It's why people who call any expansion of the social
safety net "Socalism!" or "Communism".

Your personal definition hasn't been in wide enuf
usage to replace the old standard.

 

[sun rise]

I know people who fled socialism (USSR & China).
But none who fled capitalism.

You just don't know them. But they exist

You assume I knew people who fled capitalism.
Convenient.

Misreading on your part.

 

[Revoltingest]

Misreading on your part.

Yeah....right.

 

[Stevicus]

I thought we were in agreement that authoritarianism & economic failure were bad.

Perhaps, although I think we have a difference of opinion as to why. And if often comes down to one's point of view.

So you're blaming capitalism for the failure of socialism?

I'm blaming capitalism for creating the need for socialism in the first place.

I've long been an advocate of reasonable regulation in concert with economic liberty.
The "red herring" is justifying socialism by pointing to problems under capitalism.
I'm comparing the 2 systems. Socialism necessitates authoritarianism, as borne
out by its history. And then it also tends have more famines & pogroms.

I wouldn't say it justifies socialism. My point here is that capitalism leads to socialism because it creates human misery and resentment. Every socialist country you mentioned was a capitalist country before the revolution, so it's ultimately the capitalists' fault for creating the conditions which lead to revolution.

So, if capitalists truly don't like socialism and believe it's authoritarian, then it would behoove them to treat their workers and customers better. They should be honest and ethical, vow not to cheat people, and to always give everyone a fair deal no matter what. If they try to use lawyers or weasel words or hide behind fine print, then they only have themselves to blame for any ill consequences which are visited upon them.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm blaming capitalism for creating the need for socialism in the first place.

A cure worse than the disease, eh.

I wouldn't say it justifies socialism. My point here is that capitalism leads to socialism because it creates human misery and resentment.

LIke the misery we find in Canuckistan, Denmark, Australiastan, N Zealand, Singapore, etc.
Unlike the utopias of the USSR & N Korea.

Every socialist country you mentioned was a capitalist country before the revolution, so it's ultimately the capitalists' fault for creating the conditions which lead to revolution.

This doesn't address the issue of socialism being necessarily authoritarian.
And blaming capitalism for it sometimes preceding something worse
doesn't help your case.

So, if capitalists truly don't like socialism and believe it's authoritarian, then it would behoove them to treat their workers and customers better. They should be honest and ethical, vow not to cheat people, and to always give everyone a fair deal no matter what. If they try to use lawyers or weasel words or hide behind fine print, then they only have themselves to blame for any ill consequences which are visited upon them.

I advocate a social safety net to keep the masses happy.
Capitalism can do this better than socialism

 

[Stevicus]

I advocate a social safety net to keep the masses happy.
Capitalism can do this better than socialism

But will they? That's the question. The social safety net hasn't been working very well and is in dire need of improvement.

 

[Revoltingest]

But will they? That's the question. The social safety net hasn't been working very well and is in dire need of improvement.

I predict its expansion.
We'll see what happens.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

But will they? That's the question. The social safety net hasn't been working very well and is in dire need of improvement.

Well what on earth would you expect in a nation in which the present Executive and Senate are working as hard as they can at ripping holes in that net?

 

[Stevicus]

Here's another example of someone worried about the "evils" of socialism.

DeVos says free college amounts to a 'socialist takeover'

In a veiled swing at President-elect Joe Biden’s education plans, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos on Tuesday blasted the push for free college as a “socialist takeover of higher education” that could damage the nation’s economy.

Speaking at an online conference hosted by the Education Department’s Federal Student Aid office, DeVos did not mention Biden by name. But she railed against “politicians” who have issued “shrill calls” to cancel federal student debt or make college free.

“Make no mistake: It is a socialist takeover of higher education,” DeVos said. “Now, depending on your personal politics, some of you might not find that notion as scary as I do. But mark my words: None of you would like the way it will work.”

A "socialist takeover of higher education"?

 

[Altfish]

Here's another example of someone worried about the "evils" of socialism.

DeVos says free college amounts to a 'socialist takeover'



A "socialist takeover of higher education"?

Capitalists fear an educated population. Whilst they can control private schools and colleges and mere mortals can't get into them it is fine.
But make them free - horror of horrors.

 

[metis]

Here's another example of someone worried about the "evils" of socialism.

Capitalists fear an educated population. Whilst they can control private schools and colleges and mere mortals can't get into them it is fine.
But make them free - horror of horrors.

The Devos family here in Michigan [Grand Rapids based] are billionaires that also have been big-time investors. They have undermined the public school system in order to have investors take charge by pushing charter schools, and these schools have actually performed below the state average, but that still has not stopped them.

Also, a couple of decades ago the Devos family and the other owners got caught up in a money scam by having their Amway products being mislabeled so as to be taxed at a lower rate when being shipped to Canada. But all they did was to pay a fine, thus never having to personally show up in court. Now, if you and I robbed a 7-11, do you think we'd get similar treatment?

 

[Revoltingest]

Capitalists fear an educated population. Whilst they can control private schools and colleges and mere mortals can't get into them it is fine.
But make them free - horror of horrors.

This reminds me of Christian fundies telling me what atheists believe.
We hate God.....we know God, but lie to ourselves...we have no morals.
As a capitalist who hires people...many people over the years, I see
lack of education as an enormous problem.
Don't buy into rants like the preceding post.

 

[Altfish]

This reminds me of Christian fundies telling me what atheists believe.
We hate God.....we know God, but lie to ourselves...we have no morals.
As a capitalist who hires people...many people over the years, I see
lack of education as an enormous problem.
Don't buy into rants like the preceding post.

That's why the GOP puts so much money into state schools, is it?

 

[Revoltingest]

That's why the GOP puts so much money into state schools, is it?

Set aside the partisan line for a minute....they put in a lot.
But between the Dems & Pubs fighting over it, & their
injecting their other agendas (eg, Bible learn'n, diversity
training) into it, they manage to do too little with too much.