Politics Communism - One More Try From Utopia?

[DivideandMultiply]

OK, then this begs the question: why has it not worked so far, and if you can narrow that down, how do you mitigate the same thing next time around?

It has worked. This isn't advocacy for communism, it is advocacy for cooperative and empathetic governance. The best model we have had so far is social democracy, which gives space to both individual freedom and input, but also collective governance and broad social wellbeing. You could also make argument for non revolutionary modes of socialism, like liberal socialism, which as a baseline begins at the level of soft social democracy but is open to further structural reform.

 

[ShanDog]

It has worked. This isn't advocacy for communism, it is advocacy for cooperative and empathetic governance. The best model we have had so far is social democracy, which gives space to both individual freedom and input, but also collective governance and broad social wellbeing. You could also make argument for non revolutionary modes of socialism, like liberal socialism, which as a baseline begins at the level of soft social democracy but is open to further structural reform.

I think we've been engaging in this back and forth from two completely different frames of reference without realising it. My criticisms were solely regarding a communist regime. I also get the impression you have been thinking I advocate an unrestricted free market capitalist society with the extreme libertarian views you were talking about earlier. I definitely do not.

 

[HARKER]

Hundreds - if not thousands - of books, studies, articles and other scholarly works on the psychology of socialism, capitalism and communism over the last 50-100, and Harks comes in with "What a crock". Glad you have all the answers mate.

You speak of fundamental human nature. You may well speak for yours but don't speak for mine.

There are people and there are many, that don't care to compete, but be part of a larger whole, searching for knowledge and not just the dollar.
Most of us know simply what we've been fed and aren't capable of dreaming for a more equitable society and frown upon terms attributed to a fairer society.

i.e. I wouldn't want to be like you and I don't care how many books you may have read. Think for yourself. That's a better way.

 

[Pessimistic]

Cos the group hug thing is more easily hijacked by control freak s than otherwise

Kibbutzes worked this out very early apparently

 

[ShanDog]

You speak of fundamental human nature. You may well speak for yours but don't speak for mine.

There are people and there are many, that don't care to compete, but be part of a larger whole, searching for knowledge and not just the dollar.
Most of us know simply what we've been fed and aren't capable of dreaming for a more equitable society and frown upon terms attributed to a fairer society.

i.e. I wouldn't want to be like you and I don't care how many books you may have read. Think for yourself. That's a better way.

Haha Ok mate. How does your own bathwater taste, by the way?

Everyone's the glorious leader of their own imaginary utopia. Strange they never happen in the real world. Ever.

 

[HARKER]

Haha Ok mate. How does your own bathwater taste, by the way?

Everyone's the glorious leader of their own imaginary utopia. Strange they never happen in the real world. Ever.

Strange they haven't happened yet, for sure. Doesn't mean it won't........and you had to spoil your work by citing 'the real world'

The real world. What does that even actually mean?
You're not going to next tell me that you wear your heart on your sleeve. That would start tying up the cliches, nicely.

OK, I'm being a prick but why do we so easily get tied into our own lifetimes as being all that matters?
This earth may well survive for thousands of years yet and many changes are yet to come about.
We think we have the mortgage on civilisation today, yet we may well only be in a relative infancy.
Why is what we have today, need to be what we'll always have? Are we simply lacking imagination or have we just got fat on our own juices?

Maybe we are all Gordon Geckos and maybe that's what it simply has to be, but really; How s**t is that?

 

[ShanDog]

Strange they haven't happened yet, for sure. Doesn't mean it won't........and you had to spoil your work by citing 'the real world'

The real world. What does that even actually mean?
You're not going to next tell me that you wear your heart on your sleeve. That would start tying up the cliches, nicely.

OK, I'm being a prick but why do we so easily get tied into our own lifetimes as being all that matters?
This earth may well survive for thousands of years yet and many changes are yet to come about.
We think we have the mortgage on civilisation today, yet we may well only be in a relative infancy.
Why is what we have today, need to be what we'll always have? Are we simply lacking imagination or have we just got fat on our own juices?

Maybe we are all Gordon Geckos and maybe that's what it simply has to be, but really; How s**t is that?

I enjoy your posts consisting of what most would consider internal monologues; however, I rarely see much utility in them. If you actually have a burning desire to know what the 'real world' is in this context - it's that which is of utility. Or it could at least be reduced down to something like that. You're welcome in advance.

 

[King Brown]

There’s no evidence that humans have a great natural affinity beyond direct family and close kin.

Society creates reasons to extend that natural affinity, but as society fractures people return to what matters.

 

[Procrastinator35]

There’s no evidence that humans have a great natural affinity beyond direct family and close kin.

Society creates reasons to extend that natural affinity, but as society fractures people return to what matters.

How very tribal of you.....So much for Romantic love then....Or going outside the bonds of family & kin to find a partner then.

Human empathy & a sense of community finds it's grounds in the human condition & our collective psychic beneficence.

Only those fully entrapped in the Social Darwinian, Capitalist ethos of Dog eat Dog competition would subscribe to such an outdated & archaic notion.

Capitalism's victims.

 

[medusala]

Likewise, the argument that free market capitalism leads to greater diversity and competition within the market is also decidedly false.

Right so the baby Bells offer less diversity and competition than one state owned telco? Dozens of competing water co's in the UK offer less competition than one state owned water co? Ditto gas and electricity?

In any event see Adam Smith re markets and monopolies.

 

[smokingjacket]

OK, then this begs the question: why has it not worked so far, and if you can narrow that down, how do you mitigate the same thing next time around?

You have to be quite specific here when you say, what did not work about, for example, Soviet Communism. Even after the tragedy of the reform era there are less people in absolute poverty in modern Russia today than the US, as an example. What is your benchmark for success? The Soviet system realised it's base capital capacity quicker than any state to that point, while recovering from the loss of 20 million civilians and soldiers and most of the Western side of the country being razed to the ground during the Nazi retreat.

Full literacy, full employment, industrialisation, great scientific achievements and eventually a middle class existence for all Russians within 50 odd years. It was only 50 years before the revolution that most of the Russian population were agricultural slaves. That's some achievement that many people fail to comprehend. Nowadays people use the CIA's freakout about economic growth in the Soviet Union as case study in understanding the middle income trap and the differences between developing states versus mature states but there was a reason they were worried. At one stage the best analysts in US intelligence genuinely thought that the Soviet Union would outgrow the US economically.

 

[King Brown]

Right so the baby Bells offer less diversity and competition than one state owned telco?

The US telecommunications industry not the hill you should die on for this point.

 

[Helfarch]

You have to be quite specific here when you say, what did not work about, for example, Soviet Communism. Even after the tragedy of the reform era there are less people in absolute poverty in modern Russia today than the US, as an example. What is your benchmark for success? The Soviet system realised it's base capital capacity quicker than any state to that point, while recovering from the loss of 20 million civilians and soldiers and most of the Western side of the country being razed to the ground during the Nazi retreat.

Full literacy, full employment, industrialisation, great scientific achievements and eventually a middle class existence for all Russians within 50 odd years. It was only 50 years before the revolution that most of the Russian population were agricultural slaves. That's some achievement that many people fail to comprehend. Nowadays people use the CIA's freakout about economic growth in the Soviet Union as case study in understanding the middle income trap and the differences between developing states versus mature states but there was a reason they were worried. At one stage the best analysts in US intelligence genuinely thought that the Soviet Union would outgrow the US economically.

When you kill off huge amounts of people there are more resources to go around initially. The legacy of the Soviet Union may be the breakup of Russia itself.

 

[Mofra]

I think we've been engaging in this back and forth from two completely different frames of reference without realising it. My criticisms were solely regarding a communist regime. I also get the impression you have been thinking I advocate an unrestricted free market capitalist society with the extreme libertarian views you were talking about earlier. I definitely do not.

A lot of debate seems to be incorrect interpretation of the fringes.
Very very few people in practice advocate the extreme libertarian form of capitalism or the extreme form of centrally planned economy ruled by a communist regime. When we speak of capitalism, it is the type of capitalism that needs to be defined.

 

[smokingjacket]

When you kill off huge amounts of people there are more resources to go around initially. The legacy of the Soviet Union may be the breakup of Russia itself.

Not when the majority of the people left behind are less or non-productive civilians women, children, and the elderly. Losing as many working age males in a war as the Soviet Union did would test any economy.

"The legacy of the Soviet Union may the breakup of Russia itself." You'll have to explain that one to me. Surely the legacy of the breakup of the Soviet Union would the breakup of the Soviet Union?

 

[Moshie The Mook]

It's O.K to live in the U.S if you're a banker in N.Y, or a computer geek in Silicone Valley, Or an oil exec in Dallas.....But if you're from middle America, then all you have left (Unless you're exceptional at sports) is to become a grunt in the armed-forces.....And pray like hell that you don't come home missing a limb, full of toxic chemicals & cancer, shell-shocked, a case of the DT's or in a body-bag.

What is being done to the U.S, is the same as was done to Germany prior to WW2 by the banksters.....It's a sick & twisted petty agenda of revenge, for a country that - once upon a time - had the temerity to declare it's sovereignty on behalf of all the citizens of the world, from the forces of usury evil.....It doesn't get any more obvious.

The corporate criminals have the U.S by the throat.....They both own & control it's congress, it's legislature, it's media & the executive branch.

Land of the brave & the Free?....I don't think so!....More like: Home of the cowardly & the slave.

I've been hearing this drivel since the 70's.

America is evil. The cabal own the Federal Reserve. America is gonna fail coz like the Roman empire collapsed n that.

You need to go right back to the days of the pyramids to understand why America will not collapse in your lifetime.

Accept the fact we live magnificent lives under the protection the United States provide. There is a reason we follow them into battle without question.

Wake up to yourself a bit mate. We all now the banks are controlled by the sick redheaded step children of Illuminati-controlled Rockefellers, Rothschilds, and the Zionists.

These same folk are shepherding your privileged white ******* arse through the valley of darkness. Pay your toll and show some gratitude.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Yes, but what does Milos, Bolt, Murdoch & Rand have to say on the subject Moshie!

This is the 21st century mate.....We already have mutually assured self-destruction....There is absolutely no requirement at all for all this military hardware proliferation around the world.

Quite clearly, some people (Including our insane so-called political & financial leaders) haven't learn't a damn thing from our past....This entire s**t-show is all prefaced upon the desire for power & greed over requisitioning a majority of the world's oil, gas & precious mineral reserves....Such a foreign policy represents a complete repudiation in fact, of so-called Democratic principles, free-market philosophy & any notion at all of human social progress across the globe....Prefaced upon a defensive/aggressive, intimidating & paranoid mind-set.

Our technology is such that we now have both the capability & capacity to harness all natural energy sources....This technology is being suppressed, & all in the name of greed & power over the rest of humanity, to the benefit of a very few....Not to mention the massive cost to our environment & our future....It is simply unsustainable & yet, these global criminal lunatics wish to regress the whole of humanity in shutting down any dissent, including our voices & our rights in order to enact this human & global insanity.

Time to see outside of & beyond the 'given' senor Mook.....It doesn't have to be this way.

 

[Helfarch]

Not when the majority of the people left behind are less or non-productive civilians women, children, and the elderly. Losing as many working age males in a war as the Soviet Union did would test any economy.

"The legacy of the Soviet Union may the breakup of Russia itself." You'll have to explain that one to me. Surely the legacy of the breakup of the Soviet Union would the breakup of the Soviet Union?

Women are non-productive civilians? My eyebrows just went into orbit.

So the break-up of the Soviet Union didn't mean that the Soviet era everything suddenly ceased to be and had no further influence. Putin was in the KGB from 1975. Lysenkoism is still a thing. Anyway the varying ethnic groups split by large distances are increasingly seeing that at least autonomy from Putin's Russia could have benefits but it would also likely come at great cost if not outright civil war.

 

[Todman]

South Korea chose Capitalism
Venezuela chose Socialism
In 1970 S. Korea's GDP Per Capita was just 25% of Venezuelas By 2014 the S. Koreans were 88% richer! Despite S. Korea having no natural resources & Venezuela having the worlds largest oil reserves.

 

[smokingjacket]

View attachment 451638 South Korea chose Capitalism
Venezuela chose Socialism
In 1970 S. Korea's GDP Per Capita was just 25% of Venezuelas By 2014 the S. Koreans were 88% richer! Despite S. Korea having no natural resources & Venezuela having the worlds largest oil reserves.

Lol, yeah South Korea is a free market paradise other than the fact that the government controls 80% of GDP through the Chaebol.

 

[smokingjacket]

Women are non-productive civilians? My eyebrows just went into orbit.

So the break-up of the Soviet Union didn't mean that the Soviet era everything suddenly ceased to be and had no further influence. Putin was in the KGB from 1975. Lysenkoism is still a thing. Anyway the varying ethnic groups split by large distances are increasingly seeing that at least autonomy from Putin's Russia could have benefits but it would also likely come at great cost if not outright civil war.

Not when the majority of the people left behind are less or non-productive civilians women, children, and the elderly.

Soviet Communism placed extraordinary faith in women as a revolutionary force, in many ways they saw them as their greatest achievement. The Soviets were exceptionally proud of their record in Central Asia. The US as the "liberator of women" in developing countries is a form of soft power that the US has borrowed from them over the past 20 years. But it also placed enormous burdens on women too, they were expected to be mothers and workers, so when I say "less productive" I mean in the strictly economic sense. The vast majority of women will not be able to do non-mechanised industrial labour to the same level as men, although some did in times of acute labour shortage.

Apologies but I'll pass on the rest of your post as it's drivel.

 

[Helfarch]

Soviet Communism placed extraordinary faith in women as a revolutionary force, in many ways they saw them as their greatest achievement. The Soviets were exceptionally proud of their record in Central Asia. The US as the "liberator of women" in developing countries is a form of soft power that the US has borrowed from them over the past 20 years. But it also placed enormous burdens on women too, they were expected to be mothers and workers, so when I say "less productive" I mean in the strictly economic sense. The vast majority of women will not be able to do non-mechanised industrial labour to the same level as men, although some did in times of acute labour shortage.

Apologies but I'll pass on the rest of your post as it's drivel.

I appreciate the explanation.

Autonomous regions from Moscow are not just possible they are likely. Russia perpetually expands and contracts - Putin will seek to reintegrate former Soviet republics as buffers and demographic band-aids but it's unlikely to work regardless of how successfully territory is expanded.

Kasparov has believed it's a real possibility for years.

 

[Todman]

Soviet Communism placed extraordinary faith in women as a revolutionary force, in many ways they saw them as their greatest achievement. The US as the "liberator of women" in developing countries is a form of soft power that the US has borrowed from them over the past 20 years. But it also placed enormous burdens on women too, they were expected to be mothers and workers, so when I say "less productive" I mean in the strictly economic sense. The vast majority of women will not be able to do non-mechanised industrial labour to the same level as men, although some did in times of acute labour shortage.
Apologies but I'll pass on the rest of your post as it's drivel.

So you would pay women only 70 cents in the dollar as per gender paygap.

 

[smokingjacket]

I appreciate the explanation.

Autonomous regions from Moscow are not just possible they are likely. Russia perpetually expands and contracts - Putin will seek to reintegrate former Soviet republics as buffers and demographic band-aids but it's unlikely to work regardless of how successfully territory is expanded.

Kasparov has believed it's a real possibility for years.

I think that's exceptionally unlikely to be honest. Garry Kasparov is a famous Russian, who speaks English and hates Putin, which is fair enough, he's a useful propaganda asset for making it seem like Russians are in revolt against Putin but the reality is not that simple. His geopolitical ideas that I've come across leave a bit to be desired, although to be fair to him he's not alone in those views, they're the opinion of his friend Bill Kristol and most of the liberal/neo-conservative foreign policy blob at the Council on Foreign Relations. They've been predicting the collapse of his regime every year for a decade, while at the same time saying he's an all powerful tyrant trying to create a new Soviet Union through trickery. When you create a demon in your head, it allows you to create an enemy that is simultaneously all powerful, and everywhere, and ready to collapse at any moment.

It appears Russia's strategy in Central Asia is ride the coattails of China's OBOR expansion, possibly getting a cut of the action by doing security work while the Chinese do the infrastructure, and to be honest that's about as good as they can hope for. They don't have the capacity to offer anything else. It's a country of 122 million people with an economy the size of Australia's.

 

[smokingjacket]

So you would pay women only 70 cents in the dollar as per gender paygap.

Try harder