Post by c***@gmail.comPost by c***@gmail.comwhat is/was the first country to reach this technological
advancement to allow socialism to be practiced in this pure form you
advocate for, and approximately what year did this country reach this
desired state of readiness? Please be specific.
As Marx wrote extensively about, it was Britain, where it was the
industrial revolution, that created a working class into the majority of
the population and the productive potential to fulfil peoples needs.
Germany and then America and other European countries then went through
their own industrial revolutions and many came to the same conclusion as
Marx of the importance of the working class.
So there have been about two hundred years to voluntarily have your
working class rise up and demand these ideas from their leaders, yet the
pure brand of socialism you advocate for has yet to be tried. Hmmm.
Post by c***@gmail.com"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit
of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed.
Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher
consideration." Lincoln
Perhaps the worst thing he ever wrote.
Post by c***@gmail.comPost by c***@gmail.comWhen will you be providing your example(s)? It's been several weeks.
And i have repeatedly said that no nation can be described as socialist.
But there has been events in history that indicates various aspects of
socialism.
In Marx's own time he praised the Paris Commune.
He also studied and respected the structure of society within the Iroquois
Confederation.
In my view other situations also show the signs of a nascent socialist
society, such as the Seattle
Chaz/Chop? Surely you jest.
and Winnipeg general strikes where people
Post by c***@gmail.comtook the running of the city under their control. The Mexican Zapatista
controlled parts of Chiapas indicate the possibilities of grassroots
democracy.
I say the educational and intellectual development of working people is
necessary and you call it, that they must understand and actively want
socialism and you call that "More nebulous fluff.'
Revolutions must take place in the mind before they can be carried out on
the streets.
We had our revolution. Economic freedom is inextricably tied to political
freedom.
Post by c***@gmail.comWhat is really shameful is that the technology and productive capacity of
todays world can provide an abundance for each and every person and still
be ecologically sustainable. You ignore the millions of unnecessary deaths
caused by a "no pay - can't have" economic system.
Not at all. I point out that misery is decreasing globally. This is a
self-evident fact, not spin or conjecture. Is it decreasing more due to
the acceptance of your ideas that restrict economic and political freedom,
or more due to the acceptance of the ideas that free people run circles
around the politically and economically enslaved? You have a textbook
example with China over the past thirty-forty years or so. Has
liberalizing their economic policies helped China grow into a global
powerhouse, or have they doubled-down on their policies from the 1940s
trough the 1960s? It's right in front of your eyes, comrade.
Post by c***@gmail.comFreedom for socialists is as the Industrial Workers of the World called it
"Industrial Democracy", there is no economic freedom for working people
under capitalism and it is why for two hundred years it has been described
as wage-slavery.
Baloney. There is a tremendous amount of economic mobility for people in
capitalist countries. And studies that use panel
data — data that is generated from following the
same people over time — consistently find that the
largest gains over time accrue to the poorest workers and that the richest
workers get very little of the gains.
https://fee.org/articles/income-mobility-data-show-america-still-very-much-the-land-of-opportunity/
Post by c***@gmail.comI'm well aware of the argument you are trying to impose , the no true
Scotsman fallacy.
Actually that's the argument you're trying to impose, the No True
Socialist argument. I'm not allowed to point out command economy failures
around the world because the pure brand of socialism you advocate
for--whatever that is--wasn't tried in the country under examination.
But it doesn't apply. For something to succeed it
Post by c***@gmail.comrequires the right ingredients. Without those, it cannot work, no matter
how it is re-defined. The Russian Revolution and the others was premature.
Now we find out it was premature! That's about 20-30 million dead too
late. But it wasn't real Socialism, so we can discount it. Fortunately,
being a socialist means never having to apologize for the failures of its
evil-spawn cousin systems: they weren't "pure" so they can be shunted
aside.
Post by c***@gmail.comEngels explained what happens when a revolution is ill-timed
"...The worst thing that can befall a leader of an extreme party is to be
compelled to take over a government in an epoch when the movement is not
yet ripe for the domination of the class which he represents and for the
realisation of the measures which that domination would imply. What he can
do depends not upon his will but upon the sharpness of the clash of
interests between the various classes, and upon the degree of development
of the material means of existence, the relations of production and means
of communication upon which the clash of interests of the classes is based
every time. What he ought to do, what his party demands of him, again
depends not upon him, or upon the degree of development of the class
struggle and its conditions. He is bound to his doctrines and the demands
hitherto propounded which do not emanate from the interrelations of the
social classes at a given moment, or from the more or less accidental
level of relations of production and means of communication, but from his
more or less penetrating insight into the general result of the social and
political movement. Thus he necessarily finds himself in a dilemma. What
he can do is in contrast to all his actions as hitherto practised, to all
his principles and to the present interests of his party; what he ought to
do cannot be achieved. In a word, he is compelled to represent not his
party or his class, but the class for whom conditions are ripe for
domination. In the interests of the movement itself, he is compelled to
defend the interests of an alien class, and to feed his own class with
phrases and promises, with the assertion that the interests of that alien
class are their own interests. Whoever puts himself in this awkward
position is irrevocably lost..."
Turgid stuff from a thankfully bygone era. Let's keep it in history's
garbage can.
Post by c***@gmail.comThe Bolsheviks created a class from its intellectuals, the apparatchik,
the nomenclatura, to serve as the capitalist class
Post by c***@gmail.comAre you so naive as to actually buy the idea that your unstated socialist
paradise won't be filled with envy and racism and the other human traits
and conditions common to all of mankind?
Your assertion is simply unscientific.
Heaven forbid the power should go off around the globe; there would be
open warfare and the world would look like 1300 BC in about six weeks.
There is no fixed human nature but
Post by c***@gmail.comhuman behavior determined by differing conditions.
Yes, and socialism and its evil spawn-systems create the conditions which
lead to greater greed, income inequality, greater misery, etc.
Ideas are in constant
Post by c***@gmail.comflux. Social evolution has not stopped.
Yes, I hear there are now six genders or something, and male/female is a
simple social construct. Silly, but college cultural Marxists are
promoting it. Progress on the path to the socialist utopia!
Post by c***@gmail.comIsn't it an indictment of yourself that you judge the world by your own
privileged position.
My privileged position is a result of people much braver than I who
successfully resisted your ideas, thankfully.
Post by c***@gmail.comAnd casually dismiss the real misery of millions.
My concern for their real misery is why I feel it my small obligation to
fight your ideas, which have been proven to increase suffering and strife.
Tee
Post by c***@gmail.comcase of improving conditions is based upon the World Bank poverty $1.90 a
day income...such a very low bar. The figures for those living on $5.50 a
day has remained unchanged for decades.
There are lies, damn lies, and the lies of the Socialist and his casual
statistics. Let's put it in perspective: is the well-being and economic
lot of mankind better today than it was 100 years ago? If your argument is
that we don't know how much better off we'd be because your brand of pure
socialism hasn't been tried yet, that's fair enough. However, it should
give you pause for reflection.
Post by c***@gmail.comUN’s outgoing special rapporteur, Philip Alston, (you should
recall him as he exposed the extreme poverty levels in the US
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/15/extreme-poverty-america-un-special-monitor-report
“One of ‘miracle’ case studies always used is
China. But I remember visiting China, and meeting with key people in
charge of a taskforce eradicating extreme poverty, where it would be clear
the discussion was how you could take a]village or situation to get people
the extra three cents a day to get them over the threshold, not about how
to improve their miserable situation. It was a statistical
challenge.”
I'm no fan of China, but there's something seriously wrong with the
individual who advocates for socialism and cannot admit that China's gains
these past decades have come as a result of liberalizing their economic
policies.
Post by c***@gmail.comAnd it always amazes me that apologists for free-enterprise capitalism are
required to go to a despotic state-controlled economy to justify
capitalism supposed improvements.
And it amazes me that you think that socialism leads to anything other
than despotism. Think Venezuela. Oh, wait...it wasn't practiced perfectly
there, so you get to hand-wave away their failures, too. Something about
collapsing global oil prices on the triumphant march to your shiny utopia,
right? Now the proletariat rifle through garbage for necessities and catch
rodents and roast them on open spits under candle light. The more
"fortunate" prostitute their teen daughters to the fat German tourist on
holiday, the holiday attraction being the teen.
Post by c***@gmail.comEven in America the wealthiest country on the globe people die because
they lack the means for paying for medical treatment.
Wrong. That literally doesn't happen.
Post by c***@gmail.comI have already posted the data on US mediocre standing in the index of
developed nations well-being.
Yes, the US always ranks low on these leftist-produced charts. Granting
the accuracy of these indexes, we're still talking about differences in
degree, not kind.
Post by c***@gmail.comThe truth hurts but it is more more painful to know that some people know
the reason for the problem and seek to change things rather than shut
their eyes to the reality around them
The reason for the "problem" here is that we've already embraced too much
of the policies you advocate for. We're being crushed under the weight of
free stuff for everyone.
Post by c***@gmail.comI'll end the reply with this quote.
“One man with an idea in his head is in danger of being considered
a madman: two men with the same idea in common may be foolish, but can
hardly be mad; ten men sharing an idea begin to act, a hundred draw
attention as fanatics, a thousand and society begins to tremble, a hundred
thousand and there is war abroad, and the cause has victories tangible and
real; and why only a hundred thousand? Why not a hundred million and peace
upon the earth? You and I who agree together, it is we who have to answer
that question.”
Here's some good quotes:
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the
gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
– Winston Churchill
The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other
peoples’ money. – Margaret Thatcher
Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But
notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty,
socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude. – Alexis de
Tocqueville
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. –
Winston Churchill
Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an
intellectual could ignore or evade it. – Thomas Sowell
Socialism states that you owe me something simply because I exist.
Capitalism, by contrast, results in a sort of reality-forced altruism: I
may not want to help you, I may dislike you, but if I don’t give
you a product or service you want, I will starve. Voluntary exchange is
more moral than forced redistribution. – Ben Shapiro
Socialism means slavery. – Lord Acton
In practice, socialism didn’t work. But socialism could never have
worked because it is based on false premises about human psychology and
society, and gross ignorance of human economy. – David Horowitz
A socialist is someone who has read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is
someone who understands Lenin and Marx. – Ronald Reagan
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are
willing to work and give to those who would not. – Thomas
Jefferson
If socialists understood economics, they wouldn’t be socialists.
– Friendrich Von Hayek