Socialism in the 21st Century

by John Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:53

Name one socialist country at any time in any continent where the people had a higher standard of living or quality of life than in Ireland today. Just one.

by Sherlock Holmes Fri Jul 08, 2005 12:08

Name one country that was truely socialist ie where the power belonged to the people and wealth was equally distributed. Name one?

Then discuss the distribution of wealth in Ireland

Then discuss corruption in Ireland, led by your political party.

Then discuss worker exploitation, please include migrant worker exploitation.

Then discuss the destruction of our heritage (you can include this in the corruption part)

Then discuss our system of local government and how it has been deprived of power and money.

Then discuss the racism of the Irish government.

Then discuss garda corruption

Then discuss our disaster of a health service

Then discuss our education system, include primary schools and the lack of funding for buildings, secondary schools and the lack of funding and third level education with the focus on working class youths being denied an education.

There are more but this is enough for now. What a great country.

by eif Fri Jul 08, 2005 18:05

Our generally high standard of living under the current capitalist system depends on the exploitation of African and other majority world countries. Not good enough. Looking for an alternative is the only way.

by Dave Fri Jul 08, 2005 20:55

Your question is meaningless because it depends what you mean by socialism. Some idiots dont really like nuance i suppose.

by Sean Mon Jul 11, 2005 02:13

Why not EIRE NUA?

by John Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:00

This is a pitiful response to my original question. I had expected a whole series of responses listing various socialist countries and describing how their living standards and quality of life outstripped capitalist Ireland. But nothing, apart from the usual leftist abuse. May I offer you some advice? If you wish to sell socialism to the masses, you need better sales technique. If a car salesman tried to sell me a car and, in response to my simple query as to whether or not the car he was selling was better than the one I had, I would expect him to do more than simply recite cliches like 'meaningless question as it all depends what you mean by a car' or 'youre an idiot who doesn't like nuance' or 'car you allready have is better but was built by exploited Africans' . Just trying to be of help.

by another John Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:19

>Name one socialist country at any time in any continent where the people had a higher standard of living or quality of life than in Ireland today. Just one.

John take a look in your own country at standards of living. Do travellers live in capitalist Ireland? Do Lone Parents, what about the elderly in modern capitalist Ireland?

Then look outside Ireland. Look at Africa - with little exception all capitalist. You argue that capitalism works because you have a good standard of living. You should ask someone who doesn't. Head down to your local sheltered housing flat complex (old folks) and talk to people who have worked all their lives, paid taxes all their lives (unlike your capitalist friends who employ accountants to avoid doing so) living on €174 per week (probably what you spend on an average saturday night).

You should really do some research before making wild statements

by Sherlock Holmes Mon Jul 11, 2005 13:13

I wouldn't expect any better from you John. You made a ridiculuous statement and then defended that statement refering to "sales technique". Clearly you have no understanding of ideology, you have a unsophisticated understanding of marketing which you believe is all you need for a society. In other words all gloss and no substance, just like capitalism.

by John Mon Jul 11, 2005 15:48

This is all irrelevant. I issued a simple request to name one socialist country where the people's quality of life and standard of living are higher than in capitalist Ireland. You have failed to do so. If you are unaware of any, why don't you just say so? then we can move on to the next question.

by Sherlock Holmes Mon Jul 11, 2005 16:17

Your ignorance is startling. There hasn't been a socialist country merely dictatorships. Thats what all the posters were saying. Is that clear enough for you. Then you went off on a little irrelevant rant about marketing an ideology, showing that you believe in image rather than reality. You should wake up you have a lot to learn.

by John Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:08

So that's your answer? This thing called socialism has never actually been tried before, according to you. Well, well, well! What about all those governments that called themselves socialist? Were they just pretending? But, if socialism has never ever been tried before in the whole history of the world, from where do you derive your evidence that it will work?

by Davo Tue Jul 12, 2005 12:42

"So that's your answer? This thing called socialism has never actually been tried before, according to you. Well, well, well! What about all those governments that called themselves socialist? Were they just pretending?"

Well, yes actually. Since socialism means that the workers control the means of production, the statist economic systems like those in Eastern Europe were not really socialist.

And as for them calling themselves socialist? Well they also called themselves "people's democracies" -does that mean they were democratic, John?

by MV Tue Jul 12, 2005 13:26

It comes as no surprise that no SWP members have commented yet as to the future of socialism. I wonder why? Were they not listening at the meeting?
with wespect,
Masters Voice

by Doh! - SWP Wed Jul 13, 2005 00:20 Dublin

Since the meeting hasn't happened yet, if someone from the SWP DID say something about the future of socialism, you'd say this shows our closed minds! Can't win! On the subject of where has there been socialism. As others have commented, most socialists now accept that the so-called socialist countries were/are, in fact, state capitalist - the analysis on which the International Socialist Tendency, to which the SWP belongs, was founded in the mid-1950s (I think - it might have been early 60s, but not about to go and check!!)

However, in the Paris Commune 1871; Russia 1917; Spain 1930s; Portugal mid 1970s; Iran 1979, we caught glimpses of what workers' power, or the start of socialism might look like. Decisions about their own lives being taken by the majority of people. Those decisions being implemented by the same people who made them. Real democracy in action, people's needs being put first and the rich getting a taste of their own medicine. Definitely worth working for.

by John Wed Jul 13, 2005 12:00

So, how long did each of these socialist utopias last before they descended into dictatorships? A week? A month? Or longer? And what makes you think a similar socialist utopia in Ireland would not also descend into dictatorship within a very short time?

by Harps Wed Jul 13, 2005 12:48

Socialism is an ideal. The same way that 'perfect information' in economics is an ideal.

They miss out on a very important factor "human nature" and attempt to abstract from this constant when defining the utopia. Capitalism draws its feul (rightly or wrongly) from the essence of human nature... procreation, power, influence, desire. That's why capitalism works (again, righly or wrongly).

Hypeothetical situation; in my commune of 5 families the crop fails and there is enough food for 4.... what happens? Conflict.

If someone could take the socialist vision and 'feul' it on human nature and instint then you'll change the world.

by Sherlock Holmes Wed Jul 13, 2005 15:06

John,

They did not descend into dictatorships the Paris commune and the Spanish social revolution were destroyed by right wing governments and fascists.

Harps,

You don't know what capitalism is and you have given a very immature view of what you believe capitalism is. Capitalisms fuel is profits not human nature.

by Pol Wed Jul 13, 2005 16:13

If the detractors of Socialism (and capitalism) are genuinely interested in this topic, why not come along to the meeting the SWP are holding? I'm not a member of this group, so I'm not promoting them, but it would inform people a lot more if they actually went to find out what Socialism is rather than what they think it is.
People who say Socialism didn't become prevalent in any country are right, but that is not to say Socialism cannot work. It has worked in places (Spain, Ukraine, etc) only to be destroyed by reactionary forces.
Certainly, it is better than Capitalism which tends to do an awful lot of harm, and confers more hazard than benefit to our species. To those of you who think that Capitalism is a reflection of human nature: You have a very poor understanding of what makes humans tick.
As I said, if you really are interested, come along to the meeting. It's on late enough in the afternoon (8pm) so there's no real excuse to miss it.

by Harps Wed Jul 13, 2005 16:27

"Capitalisms Fuel Is Profits"

I take your point, but disagree.

Profit is way down the chain in terms of the 'feul' of capitalism. What drives the majority of suboptimal economic behaviour is people.... rich people, making decisions for essentially selfish reasons - that affect many other less rich people.

To change people's worldview - i.e. to make people see the consequences of their actions - is the point of a lot of activism (marches, boycotts, demos etc). This is a good thing.

Socialism in its purest form is an unachievable goal. However, if it leveraged human nature in a more visible and immediate way I feel it may be more sustainable for everyone.

For example.... lets have a bin tax for a few years to show people the cost of having rubbish collected at their door. That's one way of changing ideology (not a perfect way by any means!). but leverages peoples desire to have more dosh, pay less bin tax, recycle more. Or lets have a 15c bag tax to encourage people not to use them. You can beg and beg and beg but incentivise with 15c (15c!) per bag and BOOM.... usage drops 97% with all the commensurate social benefits.

All extreme ideologies are dangerous and few if any are workeable. However, a bit of moderation and flexibility and acknowledgement of the human condition will reap rewards.

Look at capitalism....they said "lets have it, but also a welfare state and a few other social-type things"... boom... you get a load of votes.

by Sherlock Holmes Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:12

Again you are describing a small feature of capitalism and not capitalism itself. You have a very immature economic outlook. Your ideas are not well thought out and your arguments as a result are unsophisticated. Perhaps you should scan through the internet for a basic introduction to how capitalism works. Start off with it's origins, the creation of wage slavery, primitve accumulation etc. That will give you a better idea.

by Harps Wed Jul 13, 2005 18:06

Maybe.... thanks for responding.