I would like the same protesters with banners saying something like "communism sucks". Their critics to capitalism and free trade may be legit and helpful, but unless they come up with a better realist proposal it is shear demagogy. I don't see them emigrating to Cuba, China or other countries.
Someone who knows Said :
There are countries where capitalism and socialism work just fine together. Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Spain. Denmark and Sweden frequently top lists of countries with the best living standards in the world.
The world is bigger than the US, China and Cuba you know.
Felipe Said :
"There are countries where capitalism and socialism work just fine together. Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Spain. Denmark and Sweden frequently top lists of countries with the best living standards in the world."
Except that NONE of the "socialist parties" in those countries actually supports the marxist theory anymore.
In fact they rejected socialism and they define themselves as social-democrat.
There is a reason why with the exception of France and Spain no social-democrat party in Europe calls itself socialist since the first world war.
The world is bigger than capitalism vs socialism you know.
Felix Said :
Marx was a Communist, not a Socialist. Socialism is the belief in socialization of necessities, not of everything as Communism suggests.
A fourth economic system exists. Far to the right (farther than Capitalism) is Corporatism. This belief holds that everything should be privatized, including school systems, transit, and medicine. Corporatism is the belief of many of the extreme right, such as the right-wing Republicans of America.
Check your facts please.
Brian Said :
Felix is incorrect of course. Republicans don't support Corporatism for everything because it doesn't work for every situation.
Luis Said :
Felix, scientific socialism (as opposed to utopian socialism) is a fundamentally Marxist socioeconomic concept. All communists are necessarily socialists because socialism is the transition stage to communism. Socialism exists when the means of production is socialized and private property is abolished. Private property is property that makes money: you can own the apartment/house you live in (this is considered personal property), but if you own an apartment and rent it out, it becomes private property. Communism exists when the need for borders and state apparatuses ceases to exist, a form of existence that develops out of socialism that has yet to come to fruition. What you likely imagine to be "communism" is likely either state capitalism (where the state simply replaces the capitalist) or socialism. Where there is a state, there is not communism, and where there is private property, there is not socialism, plain and simple. So no, Felix, socialism does not call for just the socialization of necessities.
Socialism and capitalism CANNOT work together because socialism calls for the destruction of capitalism, plain and simple. All mainstream parties that call themselves socialist in Western Europe and Scandinavia are social democratic. Some of them, like the PSOE in Spain, were in fact formerly real socialist parties. For example, the founder of the PSOE, Pablo Iglesias, stated (I'm translating) that "The ideology of the PSOE is the complete emancipation of the working class; That is to say, the abolition of all social classes and their declaration and conversion into one class of workers that reap the fruits of their labor, free, equal, honored and intelligent." The PSOE no longer believes this, and hasn't since the mid-70s when Felipe Gonzalez became leader of the party. This is just one example of many.
Socialism isn't about making the state own more (or all) of the economy; it is a radical break with the old society that creates new forms of government, new forms of democracy, new forms of economy, and new social relations. You can't just reconcile these things with a pre-existing capitalist state because the totality of capitalism functions in a particular way to perpetrate that system and is antagonistic to ideas that threaten it. When you nationalize or socialize stuff in a capitalist state, all that does is convert it into a welfare state, not a socialist one.
Also, corporatism is a form of capitalism, not a distinct economic system. Your characterization is not necessarily wrong, simply incomplete. Most everything IS privatized, but representatives from the different economic sectors are collected into a governing body that is part of the state apparatus. Effectively, the different elements of the free market come together to run an extremely powerful state in their interests. Kinda like what we have now but without the facade of any kind of citizen's power and a much deeper intertwining of the state and the economy + society.
seb Said :
This was a joking protest.
It was sarcasm
Comedy Talk Said :
Such a joke. Why cant people just do there jobs properly without wasting thier time as well as other
Mastros Said :
I find the above to be a very interesting and impressive discussion. But it is also a rather sad one, and also a confusing one, seeing how people in the US think about the most common concepts of politics.
Then again, there is the march,the one in the photograph. Obviously a parody, but it makes it quite clear that some people known what they are talking about.
Ecology, and alternative society. Ecology should prove a powerful enough engine to carry things forward.
-.
Jaime Said :
Profit is not evil. How is creating wealth wrong? Capitalism gives you a choice, work and be rich, work harder and be richer, or don't work and be poor. Sounds fair and equitable to me. youtube.com/watch?v=JbnWF24eafo
Al Said :
Capitalism only gives choices to those who are financially viable to make choices in the first place. You mean to tell me that a child enslaved into labour, with no education and a family history of poverty has a choice? Are all poor people lazy? Come now, do not presume to know if you have not lived a life of abject poverty.
All the wonderfully complecated systems the wealthy intellectualls has developed, left or right, has always been about keeping the poor poor in order to keep the rich rich. So all the intellectuall bable, quotations and references some of you so eagerly subscribe to makes no difference when you are not adding value and putting forward ideas that can better the world for the collective.
The truth is simply that as the human race we will never find the right answers to our problems because most the human race think individualistic and not collective. Such a pity though, since we can do wonderfull things as a species, most of us simply just choose to believe the crap we are fed because its easier that way. After all, our entire development as a species has been driven by making our lives easier, not everyone AND everything elses as well.
Alden Witte Said :
I loved what Mike Dillard said about the demonstration,
"What the protestors need to realize is that they’re not protesting the wealthy. They’re protesting corruption and the accumulation of wealth by the government, banks, and select corporations through out-right fraud and theft.
It is not the 99% against the 1%. It is the people of the world against the corrupt."
I would like the same protesters with banners saying something like "communism sucks". Their critics to capitalism and free trade may be legit and helpful, but unless they come up with a better realist proposal it is shear demagogy. I don't see them emigrating to Cuba, China or other countries.
There are countries where capitalism and socialism work just fine together. Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Spain. Denmark and Sweden frequently top lists of countries with the best living standards in the world.
The world is bigger than the US, China and Cuba you know.
"There are countries where capitalism and socialism work just fine together. Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Italy, Spain. Denmark and Sweden frequently top lists of countries with the best living standards in the world."
Except that NONE of the "socialist parties" in those countries actually supports the marxist theory anymore.
In fact they rejected socialism and they define themselves as social-democrat.
There is a reason why with the exception of France and Spain no social-democrat party in Europe calls itself socialist since the first world war.
The world is bigger than capitalism vs socialism you know.
Marx was a Communist, not a Socialist. Socialism is the belief in socialization of necessities, not of everything as Communism suggests.
A fourth economic system exists. Far to the right (farther than Capitalism) is Corporatism. This belief holds that everything should be privatized, including school systems, transit, and medicine. Corporatism is the belief of many of the extreme right, such as the right-wing Republicans of America.
Check your facts please.
Felix is incorrect of course. Republicans don't support Corporatism for everything because it doesn't work for every situation.
Felix, scientific socialism (as opposed to utopian socialism) is a fundamentally Marxist socioeconomic concept. All communists are necessarily socialists because socialism is the transition stage to communism. Socialism exists when the means of production is socialized and private property is abolished. Private property is property that makes money: you can own the apartment/house you live in (this is considered personal property), but if you own an apartment and rent it out, it becomes private property. Communism exists when the need for borders and state apparatuses ceases to exist, a form of existence that develops out of socialism that has yet to come to fruition. What you likely imagine to be "communism" is likely either state capitalism (where the state simply replaces the capitalist) or socialism. Where there is a state, there is not communism, and where there is private property, there is not socialism, plain and simple. So no, Felix, socialism does not call for just the socialization of necessities.
Socialism and capitalism CANNOT work together because socialism calls for the destruction of capitalism, plain and simple. All mainstream parties that call themselves socialist in Western Europe and Scandinavia are social democratic. Some of them, like the PSOE in Spain, were in fact formerly real socialist parties. For example, the founder of the PSOE, Pablo Iglesias, stated (I'm translating) that "The ideology of the PSOE is the complete emancipation of the working class; That is to say, the abolition of all social classes and their declaration and conversion into one class of workers that reap the fruits of their labor, free, equal, honored and intelligent." The PSOE no longer believes this, and hasn't since the mid-70s when Felipe Gonzalez became leader of the party. This is just one example of many.
Socialism isn't about making the state own more (or all) of the economy; it is a radical break with the old society that creates new forms of government, new forms of democracy, new forms of economy, and new social relations. You can't just reconcile these things with a pre-existing capitalist state because the totality of capitalism functions in a particular way to perpetrate that system and is antagonistic to ideas that threaten it. When you nationalize or socialize stuff in a capitalist state, all that does is convert it into a welfare state, not a socialist one.
Also, corporatism is a form of capitalism, not a distinct economic system. Your characterization is not necessarily wrong, simply incomplete. Most everything IS privatized, but representatives from the different economic sectors are collected into a governing body that is part of the state apparatus. Effectively, the different elements of the free market come together to run an extremely powerful state in their interests. Kinda like what we have now but without the facade of any kind of citizen's power and a much deeper intertwining of the state and the economy + society.
This was a joking protest.
It was sarcasm
Such a joke. Why cant people just do there jobs properly without wasting thier time as well as other
I find the above to be a very interesting and impressive discussion. But it is also a rather sad one, and also a confusing one, seeing how people in the US think about the most common concepts of politics.
Then again, there is the march,the one in the photograph. Obviously a parody, but it makes it quite clear that some people known what they are talking about.
Ecology, and alternative society. Ecology should prove a powerful enough engine to carry things forward.
-.
Profit is not evil. How is creating wealth wrong? Capitalism gives you a choice, work and be rich, work harder and be richer, or don't work and be poor. Sounds fair and equitable to me. youtube.com/watch?v=JbnWF24eafo
Capitalism only gives choices to those who are financially viable to make choices in the first place. You mean to tell me that a child enslaved into labour, with no education and a family history of poverty has a choice? Are all poor people lazy? Come now, do not presume to know if you have not lived a life of abject poverty.
All the wonderfully complecated systems the wealthy intellectualls has developed, left or right, has always been about keeping the poor poor in order to keep the rich rich. So all the intellectuall bable, quotations and references some of you so eagerly subscribe to makes no difference when you are not adding value and putting forward ideas that can better the world for the collective.
The truth is simply that as the human race we will never find the right answers to our problems because most the human race think individualistic and not collective. Such a pity though, since we can do wonderfull things as a species, most of us simply just choose to believe the crap we are fed because its easier that way. After all, our entire development as a species has been driven by making our lives easier, not everyone AND everything elses as well.
I loved what Mike Dillard said about the demonstration,
"What the protestors need to realize is that they’re not protesting the wealthy. They’re protesting corruption and the accumulation of wealth by the government, banks, and select corporations through out-right fraud and theft.
It is not the 99% against the 1%. It is the people of the world against the corrupt."