What country is gonna be the first to go socialist?
I'm guessing Russia but it might be Brazil or Syria
>>59799120
>Russia but it might be Brazil or Syria
Just why?
I believe in France at least we have the potential
Why us?
>>59799120
Venezuela is feeling the effects of socialist policies right now.
>>59799218
Tbh the French left seems so Muslim-friendly that legitimate socialism will probably never happen
Although I admit that most of my understanding of French politics comes from Houellebecq
>>59799120
It's not 1967 anymore
Current Russia is more capitalist than America
>>59799294
Things are getting worse, a leftist was just removed from power undemocratically, and you guys have a large and active Marxist community
>>59799218
>>59799771
Liberalism =\= leftism
>>59799778
Fag
>>59799862
>insults instead of arguments
>>59799993
because you are a fag
>>59799837
>undemocratically
Impeachment is a democratic process. And at this point there is an increasing movement in favor of changing our system to parliamentarism, and the left never gets most of the parliament in this country, just the presidency because of weak opposition which then governs with a mercenary center.
>>59799690
Venezuela is feeling the effects of sanctions, collapsing oil prices, and drought if that's what you mean. Tbh the biggest actual policy error they made was relying too much on oil. The actual socialist policies they implemented went a long way to improving the standards of living.
>>59800086
And you're a retarded spic with shit in place of brain
>>59800163
Fuck off, Chavez and Maburro ruined the country
>>59801082
HAHAHA ERES EL MIERDAZOLANO CHICANO
>>59801117
dale postea el pikachu y el snoopi
>>59801265
NO TE ARRECHES
>>59799120
>implying there's any political force in these countries that seriously advocates the collectivization of the means of production
>>59801296
why not?
>socialists still exist in the 21th century
>>59801082
>>59801117
>>59801265
>>59801289
i VIVA ZAPATA!
>>59801481
the croRAT
>>59801481
Tito frowns upon your shenanigans
>>59799120
Replicants in Mars colony 420 BLAZE under the Primary ED 209 ASIC will be the first to experience "true socialism"
National socialism is the only socialism that ever truly worked. Bud nobody is willing to try that out anymore because Nazis were evil etc.
>>59801558
it is well known that croats helped nazis during ww2
>>59801615
>>59801615
Soviet Union worked far longer than Germany
>>59801688
Prove me wrong you little shit.
>>59801764
:0)
>>59801751
>Soviet Union
>worked
Chose one.
>>59799690
more like feeling the effects of being a poor ass country
the arabs should look to them as an example of what's to come
>>59801289
filthy sureño spotted
germoney like garl marx said :-D
>>59801636
Tito was a Croat.
There were more Croats among Partisans than with the Ustashe.
sUrEñO sPotTed
>>59801912
and you hate tito...
>>59801973
I don't.
But socialism is still a meme.
>>59799120
Soviet Union was socialist and we see how that turned out.
>>59802102
thanks to that, today's russia is a superpower
>>59801751
"""""worked"""""
>>59802102
But you see it wasn't the very specific kind that OP likes so it wasn't real socialism.
>>59802142
>today's Russia is a superpower
>>59802142
No. It's a regional power. But it would probably be a super power had it gone down the route that the united states did.
Greece – first country
se """""""arrecho"""""""" el chipanzuelANO....... >>59801082
>>59802219
russian army went to crimea, and the entire NATO dindu nuffin against them
>>59802350
Because Ukraine is not part of NATO... It's a defensive alliance so why the fuck should they've acted?
>>59799778
Not at all.
>>59802350
Serbian army went to Croatia and the entire NATO dindu nuffin against them.
>>59802214
Except there are actually different kinds of socialism. The USSR implemented a very specific kind of socialism and it failed for specific reasons.
>>59802438
They have a flat tax rate, mate
Russia has wild capitalism
>>59801082
chicano mogolico, no volves MAS
>>59802521
fag
>>59801816
It did, thats why so many people want it back
>>59802413
>It's a defensive alliance so why the fuck should they've acted?
I'm sure the Serbs thought the same thing. Try pulling your head out of your ass.
>>59802521
Maybe in the 90s, but modern Russia is statist
>>59802464
>Except there are actually different kinds of socialism.
And every single socialist state has been a failure or near failure. The only one that sort of worked was Tito's Yugoslavia and it still fell apart once he kicked the bucket.
The point is that every socialist thinks that their version of socialism is the correct one and split into numerous factions each supporting their own brand of "true" socialism, that make the whole movement essentially a joke.
It's basically a religion in how you have academics get butthurt over the smallest details in Das Kapital like Protestants get butthurt over the smallest details in Leviticus.
>>59802464
>Except there are actually different kinds of socialism
Yes, I am aware. It's just a bit of meme in circles that frequently debates/discuss with socialists and communists.
>The USSR implemented a very specific kind of socialism
It was more that the socialism that they tried to implement evolved as they implemented it. And while there are many reasons for its collapse that are not directly related to socialism in itself, there are certain issues that all forms of socialism suffer from (for instance the economic calculation problem).
>>59800087
hue hue hue go away coxinha
>>59801404
brazil is too deep in conservadorism and fascism ideologies to attempt a real comunist experience
>>59802615
Who are these people?
I don't know anyone who misses the Soviet Union and doesn't think a capitalist system isn't vastly superior.
>>59802911
Nostalgic Old Russians?
>>59802637
>>59802413
>>59802788
and i forgot to say, that NATO is training ukrainian hohol army....and those hohols are always getting BTFO by novorrosiya army
>>59802934
young people too
>>59802781
>And every single socialist state has been a failure or near failure
And yet socialist policies have been successfully implemented in most western countries.
The only thing you can say about the social experiment of the USSR is that authoritarian centralized state socialism doesn't work. That by no means is the only model of socialism, and the majority of them have never actually been implemented, at least for not more than a few years before something very bad happens (wild Franco appears, etc.)
>>59800163
>Venezuela is feeling the effects of sanctions,
The US is the only nation sanctioning Venezuela, why would that even have a significant effect?
>>59799120
Glorious Socialist Republic Of Canada when?
Imagine the collectivized shitposting farms.
>>59802781
cuba is still working despite poverty and embargoes, i hope they get better after globalization
>>59802825
>>59802879
Dafuq is this? "Não vai ter golpe" "Fica querida"?
Vão para bêbado porque vocês estão muito casa.
>>59803039
now they are having LGBT parades
>>59802962
>And yet socialist policies have been successfully implemented in most western countries
The step between having socialist policies but a mostly private ownership of the means of production to full-blown socialism is pretty fucking big.
>>59799120
Go home leftypol. Shill for Billionaire kikes and muslims somewhere else.
>>59803011
they also have an elite that stores food away from the people to simulate an even worse crisis
the situation there is terrible
>>59802962
Policies=/= state socialism, which is the socialism Marx advocates for.
Every country has some kind of socialist policies, even the US where socialism is a boogyman has limited-access socialized medicine and socialized highways. That doesn't make them socialist.
>>59803119
>state socialism, which is the socialism Marx advocates for.
It's called leninism IIRC, not marxism.
I read some theory long time ago.
>>59803039
Cuba works because of tourism mostly. Havana is nice, but the rest of the country is like any other place in Latin America.
>>59803098
he wants to kill everything related to communism in the east....and that's the reason why russia told him to fuck off
>>59802911
70%+ of the Russian population voted to preserve the USSR
>>59803050
listen to my favorite album, machado and jucá, great songs about stop washing cars and geting power
>>59802960
>young people too
That explains.
Only people who have never tasted it dream of it.
>>59803103
>>59802879
>>59802825
This level of autism
>>59803200
maybe because they have relatives who liver under it
>>59802962
Gonna have to agree with the American on this one. Fuck socialism.
>And yet socialist policies have been successfully implemented in most western countries.
Where? Scandinavia? Yes. In a homogenous society where hard work and honor exists then maybe it could work. But those societies don't exist anymore. Sweden was a wealthy country before it entered socialism. Now I can guarantee it will be impoverished by the time it gets out.
Though I'm surprised a Canadian likes socialism lol. You enjoy paying large taxes for long wait lines at hospitals? Bro you live in heaven already. You should go to Venezuela, I've heard they have it even better down there now.
>>59801636
Individuals who happened to be Croatian helped the Nazis. No need to castigate an entire nation.
>>59803254
*lived
>>59803180
Leninism is more about establishing a vanguard party that spearheads the revolution.
>>59803184
Source? It's a bit strange to sponsor pro-immigration, leftist organizations and marxist activist groups if that is his goal.
i am ultimately anti political because I never follow the rules and I want full freedoms. I know it's edgy but thats just way it is. i am animal
>>59803369
>>59803103
That sounds like a conspiracy tard meme, you really have to give a source for those kind of statements.
>>59803192
That figure does not translate into public approval of communism. Dissolving the union meant that not only did Russia lose a lot of power, it also had put in a very exposed position while transitioning. Additionally something that radical put people out of their comfort zone and most people don't want radical change.
>>59803200
and also old people too. when It's old people It's nostalgia when It's young people they ''never tasted It''. Why do people who have double digit IQ's try to talk about concepts they can't comprehend?
>>59803192
Russia wasn't the only state in the USSR
>>59803379
you may want to look at some anarkiddie ideas
>>59803432
This isn't going to go anywhere. Why are marxists in favour of the EU? Every communist and anarchist I have ever meet was in favour of the EU. The EU forces muslim immigration into Europe, and that seems to be their only appeal to leftist, why is this so important to you?
>>59803192
And 70% of the confederates voted to preserve segregation and slavery.
The Russians can have all the unions they want as long as they keep it inside their own boarders and leave the rest of us out of it.
>>59803487
and they were right, the dissolution ruined Russia and its people, only 20 years later they are showing signs of recovery
>>59799837
>undemocratically
NIGGER
>>59803379
Go anarcho-capitalist.
>>59803546
>>59803737
can you recommend me where to start.
>>59803688
>This isn't going to go anywhere.
You're talking to a profesional memer.
He's not even leftist, just a putin fag.
>cree k el imbecil de la foto soy yo
pobre weon
>>59803688
EU destroys nationalism and national identities, also religion and serves globalist goals, which is what commies want generally
>>59803688
What? Most far-left parties are critical towards the EU what the fuck are you talking about
>>59803976
you are still butthurt over this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
>>59804024
The fuck has Russian war has anything to do with what I said about EU?
>>59803724
The Soviet union was starting to crack before the fall of communism, though. Not to mention that the massive amount of corruption and cronyism that followed and the '98 crisis didn't exactly help with a speedy recovery.
>>59800163
this. but don't expect this brainwashed retards to understand
>>59804153
you are mad, because the EU failed to you
>>59804243
nigga what, I don't give a fuck about EU.
Maybe you meant NATO, people were butthurt at NATO (specifically USA), but I don't give a fuck about it either
>>59804424
abkhazia and south osetia will never be yours again, and i believe that people who live there have the hammer and sicke flag
>>59803261
>Sweden was a wealthy country before it entered socialism.
Are you serious? Despite the memes Sweden is one of the most successful countries in the world, and it's largely because of their social democratic policies.
>>59803119
>state socialism, which is the socialism Marx advocates for.
Good thing Marxism isn't the only kind of socialism there is. Tbh I'd be more in favour of something like the early USSR, a free market based around autonomous soviets competing in a free market.
>>59802911
> I don't know anyone who misses the Soviet Union
There are some in eastern germany, hungary, etc. Estonia isn't unique.
> a capitalist system isn't vastly superior.
> t. oligarch living in commieblock
>>59804997
does hungary miss the communist era????
>>59804186
I wonder how things would have turned out if the USSR had been actually democratic from the start. Every country has corruption, but the problem with Russia was that there was absolutely no way for the people to hold the government accountable.
>>59804930
Marxism is the quintessential backbone of 99% of socialist theory. Socialism without Marx is like Christianity without Jesus.
>>59805043
SOME people miss it because gulyasz communism was actually very soft regime as for """"""""""totalitarian communist oppressing system""""""""""""
>>59804576
I don't give a slight fuck m8
>>59805144
Anon, socialism predates Marx, other brands of socialism take certain Marxist elements, others ignore Marx completely.
The most important thing about Marxism that actually is common to basically all brands of socialism is a Marxist interpretation of history.
Saying Marxism is central to all socialism is like saying that all all Christians are Catholics.
>>59803992
This is not the case. There some occasional murmurring about the EU being capitalist institution, but these have allways been dismissed as far as I know.
This seems like dishonest front to hide the embarracing fact that the left has now become generally against the white working class.
Socialist moderates have betrayed their traditional bases. This is why so many are falling apart.
>>59805730
>left has now become generally against the white working class.
This is because of neoliberal bullshit that essentially dismisses anything other than unrestrained capitalism as not even worth pursuing. Because of that the left has abandoned their economic ideas that benefited everybody and has started focusing on all the SJW bullshit we know and hate.
>>59805730
The two German communist parties (DKP and MLPD) are very critical towards the EU, they say Brussels only serving the interests of the powerful corporations and banks. Other leftist euro-sceptic parties are the Red-Green Alliance (Denmark), Front de gauche (France), SYRIZA (Greece) and many others.
>>59806118
>This is because of neoliberal bullshit that essentially dismisses anything other than unrestrained capitalism as not even worth pursuing.
This isn't true though, the EU imposes a lot of stupid regulations of buisnesses and is in many ways bad for the economies in Europe, there is a reason for why so many US states outperforms most EU countries on GDP PPP. The UK (a wealthy nation) is only above Alabama, one of the worst states on all fronts. (The top US states like New Hampshire out perform all European countries)
The only selling point of the EU is anti-racism and the erasure of native culture. The EUs only selling point is that it increase the immigration of middle-easterners and africans.
>>59807148
The U.S. may outperform EU countries in GDP but the EU beats the U.S. in basically everything else (public safety, standard of living, IHDI, education, healthcare, etc.)
American GDP may be high but it isn't evenly distributed across the population so most people don't see that wealth.
K U R D I S T A N
>>59800192
Go squat somewhere else.
>>59802102
A glorious state that lifted millions out of slavery?
India
>>59808403
out of peasantry*
>>59799120
Soviet Russia
Maoist China
North Korea
>>59807618
Not in Vermont and New Hampshire, the stats are about the same as Switzerland and any Scandinavian country.
Socialism = Means of production in democratic control of the workers and abolition o private property(which it's diferent from personal property)
Leninism = Vanguard party to spearhead the revolution and take the role as a state to implement reforms to archive socialism, the end goal it's to the state wither away with time.
Anarchism = the end goal it's still socialism, but diferent from leninism they don't like the vanguard party thing, because to they the vanguard party will not wither away like we saw happening in USSR
In USSR the state never wilted away, and even worse, the workes never got the means of production.
The best example of socialism was the spanish revolution with the anarchists.
>>59809459
>the state never wilted away
Because the state would always be necessary to enforce socialism and ultimately communism (a literally impossible goal). This is why I believe that so many people see so much wrong with this point of view; its reliance on humans to not be humans will constantly require government intervention to restore balance because there are no natural equalizers in a communistic society. Its ultimately a self defeating dogma.
Human beings are and always will be, so long they remain human, nonrational, nepotistic social animals, not utility-maximizing economic individualists or collectivist.
>>59809906
and the biggest problem capitalism faces is we don't have an infinite amount of resources for it to work perfectly. and marxism doesn't requiere people to be not people.
Fuck socialists, if they really try any shit not through democratic means there will be blood.
>>59799120
>I'm guessing Russia but it might be Brazil or Syria
>>59810646
João will hunt all reds down.
Leftism has never worked and will never work.
>>59803458
google it
http://www.telesurtv.net/news/Venezuela-Hallan-toneladas-de-alimentos-escondidos-bajo-tierra-20150815-0039.html
>>59805730
>There some occasional murmurring about the EU being capitalist institution
It started as an economic union of several western capitalist countries. It's pretty much a capitalist institution by nature and one of the reasons why it has some problems now. Coming from an economic union, it becomes a political one, which causes some problems, especially with widespread information networks through the internet.
>>59800163
>Tbh the biggest actual policy error they made was relying too much on oil
Because they killed everything that wasn't their nationalized oil sector.
>>59811414
>Because they killed everything that wasn't their nationalized oil sector.
like what?
>>59811414
they dont even have many natural resources or land to grow crops, what have they killed, their coca cola crops?
>>59809906
No. See the anarchist in Spain, the production and society was way better without the state.
>>59811492
>>59811550
By driving all entrepreneurs out of the country from crippling laws to appease the poor.
>>59811550
There are many economic activities that aren't directly related to the extraction of natural resources or farming, but those weren't really killed as they weren't really there to begin with.
Not having them developed during good times was still probably a bad choice looking now.
>>59811856
thats what greece and latter argentina tried to do by following some market rules, i only wonder how well they are now
Anarchist Spain was objectively the best society model that ever existed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9X8vgdHw10
>>59800087
>>59803729
cucks
>>59799690
too much facebook videos
>>59812204
>now
pretty bad because people dont know how to vote
>>59812204
When the country is already at rock bottom it doesn't work nearly as well.
>>59802911
You forgot that 4chan is a contrarian board
>>59799120
GUESS WHOS BACK
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVkUvmDQ3HY
>>59804241
>>59810810
>implying socialists aren't the true fedora lords
>>59812993
He looks like a badass Hindu deity in that pic
>>59799218
Isn't your socialist party comprised entirely of Bernie Sanders "socialists"
>>59813044
>>59812994
>>59813044
João pls no proxyrino
>>59813044
They really aren't
>>59813066
ik r
>>59813141
Perdóname señor. Yo voy a denunciar tu post de mierda.
>>59812994
>>59813044
>"""""""Anarcho Capitalism""""""
People still think this is not an oxymoron.
>>59813320
WHAT THE FUCK IS THE DEAL WITH LIBERTARIANS AND BOWTIES
>>59813195
Reddit is calling....
>>59813320
Where did I advocate for anarcho capitalism? They are pretty fedora tier too.
>>59811753
The Anarchists looted the houses of people who opposed them (after killing them of course). There was no "production", only "appropriation" via theft.
Fuck capitalism
>>59799120
>What country is gonna be the first to go socialist?
THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE BRAZIL IS NATIONAL SOCIALIST NOW! HEIL HITLER!
>>59813502
Private property was theft for the anarchists(again,diferent form personal property)
And there were no state or party pulling the strings, only worker co-ops ruled by direct democracy(one person one vote, in a horizontal division), and other factories and buildings were open during the revolution, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9X8vgdHw10
>>59809906
You are falling for the old meme of capitalism being "natural" to humans. It isn't any more natural than any other system, for hundreds of years feudalism was dominant, it was considered the "natural" order that serfs were subordinate to lords, and kings ruled over their subjects with divinely ordained sovereignty. That was a load of crap, and saying the same thing about capitalism is equally idiotic.
The state didn't whither away in the USSR because of the simple fact that party elites didn't want to relinquish power. If they had done was they were supposed to do and allowed autonomous soviets to produce goods and sell them on an open market, splitting the profits evenly, then things would have turned out quite differently.
Centralized state socialism fails mostly for logistical reasons, it's just not practical for a government to manage something as big, complex, and unpredictable as a national economy. It has nothing to do with human nature.
>>59812993
B-but Tito was a pretty good leader
>>59814067
shhhhh desu soon
>>59813434
Reddit's more right than it is left
/r/the_donald is indistinguishable from /pol/
>>59799837
>undemocratically
its in our constitution, fuck off.
>>59814029
Civilization is unnatural to humans in the first place. One could argue purely competitive based systems are more natural than a fully self-sacrificing one, but the middle ground probably works best, like efficient welfare focused state + liberal economy with working mechanisms to prevent distortions (which is the hard part, since power and greed will work against it just like they will on socialist states/party members).
>then things would have turned out quite differently
You mean "could have", no evidence of that working in any sufficient scale so far.
>>59815019
I honestly don't think that it's smart to speculate on what is "natural" or "unnatural" for human behaviour, considering how much psychology, ideology, and environment can influence it. I mean, self preservation seems like it would be natural to humans, but Jihadis still willingly blow themselves up.
>but the middle ground probably works best, like efficient welfare focused state + liberal economy
I would agree, I'd say that the first priority of the modern left should be to prevent the erosion of the victories won by the labour movement and to restore Keynesianism. That's a proven system and a logical first step towards functional alternative to capitalism, after that I'm not entirely sure. I would expect a gradual move towards a free market based on co-operatives rather than corporations would be the best course of action.
Just one more month to 21st century socialism.
>>59815751
What will happen in one month?
>>59814402
>Reddit's more right than it is left
>/r/the_donald is indistinguishable from /pol/
And /r/Bernie_Sander_for_president is TWICE as large as /r/the_donald is, reddit is by far more leftist
>>59814796
>its in our constitution
it's not because it's legal to impeach a president that buying the STF and the congress to achieve it does not fall under the definition of a coup anon
stop denying it will be best for you
>>59800163
It's so good being a leftard but living in a capitalist country heh?
>>59815890
New elections coming after failed attempts to form government. All left wing parties have united in a single coalition for first time in 80 years and have real chances of winning the elections.
However, they will need support from the neoliberal PSOE to form a government, something the ruling oligarchy is not going to allow.
>>59816177
>OMG why are you talking bad of feudalism, you're literaly have books in your home right now.
Same thing, and not an argument.
>>59816250
Coalition with neoliberals is the worst thing, look here for example.
>>59815442
>based on co-operatives
That would probably kill economical activities with high barrier of entry though. No one would have "budget" to start from scratch new businesses like say semiconductor fabrication without major investors like the state or big corporations, especially when it could create a major net deficit to society.
And if they can selectively join and become mega co-operatives, it's one step off from capitalism, and especially dangerous with no centralized control built by the decision of the whole population.
>>59817076
Search Mondrago
>>59816352
/r/Sanders for president has 234,000 subscribers while /r/the donald only has 131,000.
Difference is /r/ the donald users have recently been more active with around 5000 user on right now compared to 2000 currently on Bernie for president
>>59801764
Because at least in the US literally Fucking nobody knows that the Nazi party was socialist
>>59817076
There's also the possibility of government subsidies, and the ability for co-operatives to be formed by unions purchasing the majority shares of corporations. Not to mention that other cooperatives can invest in new ones.
>And if they can selectively join and become mega co-operatives, it's one step off from capitalism
Except that any action that they take won't be possible without the democratic will of their workers. Mobilizing the members of a cooperative to vote for their interests and exercise their democratic rights is a far cry from using excessive wealth to corrupt the democratic process through campaign contributions, lobbyists, etc.
Northern Europe seems to me because salaries there haven't got a big difference and if I hear something about Sweden or Norway, something will be said about socialism.
One of the most successful young russian buisnessman Pavel Durov have said that he won't set up a company there because they are becoming socialist countries.
>>59817138
From wikipedia it seems like a perfectly capitalist corporation with shared management, with even different wages for different positions. If every worker is a share holder is it a socialist company? And without previous or posterior budget accumulation would a group of worker be able to finance industries that requires multi-billion dollars in investment just to start operation? That budget would be of the whole society, not theirs.
>>59817314
>There's also the possibility of government subsidies
If there is government then I assume that the socialism is the final step for you, not the communism.
>Mobilizing the members of a cooperative to vote for their interests
And would the average of the workers allow their co-operative risks on revolutionaries stances that could easily result in major deficit? On the other side, if the loss is fully socialized, then would there be no actual risks and bankrupting co-operatives?
>If there is government then I assume that the socialism is the final step for you, not the communism.
Communism is the goal, but I'm just more of a reformist than a revolutionary. I'm actually more concerned with preserving democracy than implementing socialism, I just see equally distributing wealth as the best way to ensure maximum freedom and democratic integrity.
>And would the average of the workers allow their co-operative risks on revolutionaries stances that could easily result in major deficit?
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to stay here. Are you questioning whether or not workers in a co-operative would support socialist policies when it could result in financial losses for them?
>>59818240
Meant to quote>>59818051
>>59803192
I bet 90% would want the empire back
>>59818051
Everything is decided by the workers democraticaly(one person one vote), the wages, how to spend the surplus, what to research, etc.
Mondragon doesn't has open capital(doesn't has shares), and you may pay a sum of money to associate.
Fun fact the hiest paid manager doesn't even earn more than 4 times de salary of a cleaner.
>>59818240
The second one is just that my intuition is that if everyone in a corporation had equal vote in it's direction it would tend to be more conservative than when the decision is made by a individualistic meritocratic "genius". And it's not just a question of individual marketing capabilities there, for those cases that a person would still able to convince the majority in taking his lead.
>>59818448
Wikipedia says it goes to up to 9:1 ratio, but honestly paying billions for the CEO and minimum wage for workers isn't even the optimal strategy in terms of generating efficiency and profitability, so even if this happens in capitalism because those up there can, it's not a good approach and not the definition of capitalism either. Salaries fixed and too close to everyone with would be equally demotivational.
>>59799120
Fuck, i don't wanna think about it. Aren't things statist enough as is?
>>59818782
That's why is important for the workers to own the means of production, if not they feel alianeted from the whole thing and there's no motivation.
>>59812211
Not objectively, but anarchy is cool. I don't like being shot. Why does the government hate me so much?
>>59819079
Anarchy!= there is no laws
The difference is that the power to apply the law is not concentrated at the state, and the laws are accordingly to what the community decides by direct democracy.
>>59818782
But that argument applies to any democracy m8. You can use that as an argument against democracy for an entire country.
>>59800087
You believe in nothing, coxinha huehuehuehue
>>59819304
Countries and companies have different objectives though. Being conservative and having to compromise at every step is desirable for countries instead of frequently gambling with people's lives for possible better payoffs.
>>59818240
Equally distributed wealth necessitates equally distributed productivity. How will a socialist society incentivize economic contribution?
>>59799120
United States :^)
>>59818324
The Romanov Empire was only good for the top 1% at most
>>59820014
God I hope so
>>59819988
Well in the kind of society I'd like to see at the moment you're looking at co-operatives competing in a free market, essentially meaning that the profit motive is still there, the profits are just more equitably distributed. Workers have a vested interest in making sure their co-operative does well because it ensures the wellbeing of both them and their fellow workers.
>>59819901
I think you're overestimating how often corporations are actually willing to take risks. Most corporations won't invest in something they aren't convinced will earn them a good profit, I think the risk taking go getter capitalist is largely a myth. For example we have this problem in Canada where business aren't investing money because the economy is too uncertain and they think it's too risky, rather they are sitting on excess cash and waiting for things to improve. It's a phenomenon called "dead capital".
>>59821210
>because it ensures the wellbeing of both them and their fellow workers
But does that mean that there will be poor people that doesn't have their wellbeing ensured? And successful groups with much higher wellbeing?
>Most corporations won't invest in something they aren't convinced
Heavily established companies sure, but small and medium companies have to do it if they want to grow. And back to the comparison with countries, considering the very high rate of failure of those enterprises, it isn't a good approach to managing a small country. On the same side you don't really to see any country growing as fast as some of the fastest growing corporations.
