Should Communism Be Declared A Criminal Ideology?

[JimC]

It's funny - certain folks here do all kinds of gymnastics responding to posts suggesting capitalism is horrible...

Actually, no, that's not funny. The funny bit is that you seem to presume robust criticism of capitalism - particularly the type of capitalism you advocate - means we embrace communism. You are repeating the mistake you make in regarding a criticism of Trump as an embrace of Clinton, or Obama for that matter.

Exactly. If one defines socialism (or at least a vital part of it) as complete state ownership of the means of production, then I defy 42 to find anybody here who would see that as a good thing.

In the modern world, there can be many nuanced relationships between elected governments, private enterprise, the welfare of the public and the environment, and the overall trajectory of a country's economy. This could involve state ownership of some important areas of the economy, such as railways and ports, as well as considerable government investment in public goods, such as health care and moving towards renewable energy. It will certainly involve a whole raft of government measures to control corporations, and to look after people and the environment. This can still be compatible with free enterprise, even if there is always a degree of tension between government regulation and the freedom of individuals and corporations. In a democracy, the balance appropriate to a given society should arise from the ballot box. Unless, of course, you have a faux democracy where gerrymandering etc. means that the majority does not rule...

[pErvinalia]

Question: further to Hermit's point of needing to wait for an advocate of socialism, cuz we don't have any of their kind around here no more -- does anyone here think socialism is a good economic system to pursue?

No

Does anyone here advocate for socialism instead of capitalism?

No

Does anyone here think that in a mixed economy, it's the socialism part of the mix that facilitates economic well-being of the given country?

Not me. Being a mix is what's important.

[Hermit]

Why be cagey about this? Do you support some form of socialism?

Cagey?

How many more times must I post that my preference is a mixed economy and all it entails?

[Forty Two]

The question wasn't directed specifically to you - it was open to the forum to see if someone was going to adopt a pro-socialism position.

There are a series of questions in that post, too, including one regarding mixed economies.

[Forty Two]

It's funny - certain folks here do all kinds of gymnastics responding to posts suggesting capitalism is horrible...

Actually, no, that's not funny. The funny bit is that you seem to presume robust criticism of capitalism - particularly the type of capitalism you advocate - means we embrace communism. You are repeating the mistake you make in regarding a criticism of Trump as an embrace of Clinton, or Obama for that matter.

Exactly. If one defines socialism (or at least a vital part of it) as complete state ownership of the means of production, then I defy 42 to find anybody here who would see that as a good thing.

Jesus H. Christmas this is not that difficult. If you support a form of socialism, say "yes, I support a form of socialism, it's just not the bad kind. The kind I support is called _________________ and it operates like this ___________________.

If nobody sees that as a good thing, then why are there people arguing against me when I set forth why socialism is a bad thing? Why don't they agree - "yes, 42 - we agree with you, the kind of socialism you're describing sucks ass. But, have you considered this kind of socialism ____________________________?" And, then explain what the "good socialism" is all about?

In the modern world, there can be many nuanced relationships between elected governments, private enterprise, the welfare of the public and the environment, and the overall trajectory of a country's economy. This could involve state ownership of some important areas of the economy, such as railways and ports, as well as considerable government investment in public goods, such as health care and moving towards renewable energy. It will certainly involve a whole raft of government measures to control corporations, and to look after people and the environment. This can still be compatible with free enterprise, even if there is always a degree of tension between government regulation and the freedom of individuals and corporations. In a democracy, the balance appropriate to a given society should arise from the ballot box. Unless, of course, you have a faux democracy where gerrymandering etc. means that the majority does not rule...

That's all well and good, and agreed. But it has nothing to do with socialism as an economic system. Having governments and social services is not socialism.

[JimC]

The real point is that people who prefer the unfettered type of capitalism (and the one that is closest to be unfettered is the US...) often view any form of government controls, or government health care programs as "creeping socialism", then make their argument a complete straw man by pointing out the bad things that have historically happened with complete state control socialism. Effectively, they equate any reasoned criticism of capitalism run amuck as being an argument for complete socialism. They also extoll capitalism by showing facile pictures of modern, western technological societies; "look, how modern, how smart"

Modern western societies with much lower levels of inequality than the US have achieved that through carefully planned and managed governmental programs, both in the areas of welfare and environmental management, while still leaving room for private ownership and business activity.

[pErvinalia]

It's funny - certain folks here do all kinds of gymnastics responding to posts suggesting capitalism is horrible...

Actually, no, that's not funny. The funny bit is that you seem to presume robust criticism of capitalism - particularly the type of capitalism you advocate - means we embrace communism. You are repeating the mistake you make in regarding a criticism of Trump as an embrace of Clinton, or Obama for that matter.

Exactly. If one defines socialism (or at least a vital part of it) as complete state ownership of the means of production, then I defy 42 to find anybody here who would see that as a good thing.

Jesus H. Christmas this is not that difficult. If you support a form of socialism, say "yes, I support a form of socialism, it's just not the bad kind. The kind I support is called _________________ and it operates like this ___________________.

What we are all trying to say is that as far as we can tell there's no one here who supports socialism. Jesus H. Christmas, this is not that difficult.

If nobody sees that as a good thing, then why are there people arguing against me when I set forth why socialism is a bad thing?

No one is arguing against that. Learn to read. People are arguing against your pro capitalist position regarding mixed economies.

[pErvinalia]

Having said that, it looks as though China is an example of a largely socialist system excelling. In the case of China, unlike failed socialist states, it seems the government has got it largely right in their directed economy. Still plenty of time for them to fuck it up, but as of now they are doing most things right.

[JimC]

Having said that, it looks as though China is an example of a largely socialist system excelling. In the case of China, unlike failed socialist states, it seems the government has got it largely right in their directed economy. Still plenty of time for them to fuck it up, but as of now they are doing most things right.

Apart from creating an authoritarian hell on Earth, particularly if you are a non-Han Chinese ethnic minority...

[pErvinalia]

Yeah true. But from a planned economy point of view they seem to be doing things right.

[JimC]

I suppose their trains run on time.

Particularly the ones that run past Uighur concentration camps...

[JimC]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-30/ ... t/10570820

Over 200 car manufacturers are sending real-time location information and dozens of other data points from electric vehicles in China to surveillance centres backed by the country's government.

[Sean Hayden]

They're catching up then. We better up the ante.

[DRSB]

The fact that something is called "socialist" does not mean it fits the bill. Yugoslavia was called "Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia", not sure how adequate the name was.

Again - different question. The question I posed was whether anyone supports or advocates any kind of socialism, not whether anyone supports a particular kind of socialism. Whether one or another economic system "fits the bill" is a different question to whether a person advocates or supports a particular economic system or one of several versions thereof.

That's because you are more keen on the label than on the content. But now others have explained the catch better than I could.

[Scot Dutchy]

I have explained Northern European Social Democracies. Do I have to fucking do it again? Your society is crap ok.
If you cant understand that then you need to find a few brain cells.