Gregory's ServerSocialism (the collective ownership of the means of production by society), an alternative system to capitalism (the private ownership of the means of production by individuals or corporations) is better than capitalism in that it allows everyone in society, regardless of social status, to have access to the basic necessities of life (housing, food, healthcare, etc).
|
25 comments
Cuba. The Cuban government under Fidel Castro nationalized industries and implemented extensive social programs, particularly in healthcare and education, and as a result has achieved high literacy rates and a strong public health system, though the economy has faced challenges, particularly due to the U.S. embargo and limited economic reforms. @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom saying a communist country is paradoxal, communism is against the state To be fair, they asked me to give an example of a country where socialism worked, not communism.  @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom It isn't fair or accurate to say that. Despite the interference from capitalist countries like the U.S.A, there have been, and currently are, countries that not only embraced socialism, but were in fact socialist, such as the former Soviet Union or modern-day Cuba. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom The U.K. was quite socialist til #THATCHER β¦rail, road transit, power, water, gas, were all state owned. @TheWolfOfSouthEnd @Radical_EgoCom and were considered to offer a fairly awful service. Also, national rail strikes and lack of investment meant the railway in particular was almost unuseable. Trains, at least, improved a little after they were sold off. It didn't last and they will soon be re-nationalised. Britain, back then, was a poor advert for socialism - it was not working. @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom Of course they were a bit rubbish. We were a bit skint after WW2 for a good while. @TheWolfOfSouthEnd @Radical_EgoCom The trains, when i last used them, were better than in the early 70s. At least clean with mainly undamaged seats and doors that work. Early 70s britain was awful - trains poor, gas management poor, electricity plagued by strikes (by miners). The state owned services existed for those who worked in them, not the people they were supposed to serve. @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom Itβs exactly like that now. Ask yourself why the miners were on strikeβ¦.and tell me a better system. @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom Well, that wasn't socialism since the means of production were not collectively owned. It was welfare capitalism, and I would say that it being eviscerated by neoliberal capitalism highlights a major flaw in the capitalist welfare state, that being that as long as capitalism still exists it will challenge any attempt at achieving social equality. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter You're wrong about the definition of socialism and communism. Socialism is the direct or governmental ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods. Communism is a classless, stateless society in which all property is owned communally. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter I doubt it since socialism originates from Europe, and this definition is based on socialism as derived in Europe. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter From an English dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism Maybe spend more energy attack capitalists, not Socialists? This definition doesn't go into specific detail explaining what socialism actually is, and instead gives an extremely quick description of socialism that lacks any of the key details of socialist ideology. Maybe spend more time looking up more comprehensive definitions of political ideologies instead of settling for definitions that try to summarize a several hundred year old ideology into one brief and nondescriptive sentence. @Alternatecelt @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom While I'm appalled at how much has been sold off I'm also amazed and impressed how much there was to sell. It's incredible to me how much we used to own collectively and what an achievement that was. @flowti @FisherPeter @Radical_EgoCom @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter IMHO, eco-socialism would be more an alternative to capitalism than "old style" socialism. If by "'old style' socialism" you mean socialism that wasn't heavily focused on environmental protectionism, then I completely agree, eco-socialism would be far more preferable. There's no reason why we can't have collective ownership of the means of production and a safe and healthy environment. |
@Radical_EgoCom @Reddog @FisherPeter Absolutely amazing isnt it that people having basic needs is controversial, but people having billions of pounds/dollars/etc of planes/houses/cars/yachts/hoarded cash whilst underpaying workers is acceptable and encouraged.