So you want to change the name of ideology, that postulates free market relations as important part of human freedoms? Fine, it can be Classic Liberalism if you want.
i dont see why even communism would mean there are no free markets:
in the most basic definitiv communism is (economically) a system in which the working people control the means of production.
this could e.g. be achieved if all companies were work coops - thus workers controlled the companies and therefore the means of production
if we dont change anything else there will still be a free market
Uh-huh. How do we define means of production? Can I come to your home and take your PC? I mean that’s means of productions alright. So it shouldn’t be privatized, and thus, traded.
(are we seriously discussing communism supporting free market? are we seriously considering communism as a sane ideology? what next, try nazism, because real nazism was never tried?)
The means of production are the tools, machinery, factories, land, etc., required to make goods. In ye olden times artisans/tradesmen/farmers would own their own tools (i.e., means to produce goods). However, since the industrial revolution, the craftsman have been put out of business. They cannot compete with machine production. So this is where we need to make the distinction between personal and private property.
Personal property are things you own for your individual use. Your house, clothes, toothbrush, etc. Private property is means of production used to make a profit for the person who invested (i.e., capitalist). Communism seeks to put the workers in charge of the workforce (i.e., workplace democracy). It also aims to abolish class, private property, the need for money/wages, and ultimately the state itself.
what next, try nazism, because real nazism was never tried
This is a poor comparison. The communists want to erase hierarchies of class, race, gender, etc., whereas the Nazis wanted to reinforce them. Need I remind you that the communist killed millions of Nazis in WW2?
Today, 4 billion people live on less than $10 a day. How many billions around the globe suffer and die unnecessarily in capitalist countries? Why are the deaths of communism seen as a failure of the system as a whole whereas the exploitation of the land, labor, and resources of billions is seen as merely a problem with regulation? Capitalism has shown that it does not respect the environment, human rights, or even human life.
Yes, there were abuses and missteps in communist countries. But we have to place this history within the context of an economic system that was resisted by the U.S. because it threatened profits. The diplomatic isolation, trade embargos, and political assassinations that socialist countries attempted to withstand necessitated a strong centralized government. Of course, this provides fertile ground for corruption and abuse, but the goal of communism is to eradicate the state entirely! Whereas the goal of capitalism is a never-ending increase of profit at the expense of everything else.
Today, 4 billion people live on less than $10 a day.
Yeah, I lived in Ukraine. You should also mention that $10 could buy you different stuff in different regions of this planet.
How many billions around the globe suffer and die unnecessarily in capitalist countries?
There is no intent to let people suffer and die. There are all the liberties for every human in capitalist country to do anything they want to in order to live a happy wealthy live. Not everyone end up being successful.
It should never be equated to state-driven genocide.
the goal of communism is to eradicate the state entirely
Bullshit. This is just state-driven propaganda, a new religion that replaces an old one, which, as we know, is opium of the people.
Nobody gives up power willingly. Especially absolute power the authoritarian communist countries provide.
The intention is to make profit, human life be damned. It doesn’t matter whether the oligarchy intend for us to suffer when all the increases in productivity are being systematically siphoned to the top of this pyramid scheme we call an economy. It doesn’t matter if they intend for people to die when they can’t afford life-saving medical procedures. It doesn’t matter whether they intend for literal slavery to still exist, in 20-fucking-25, in service of profits. It doesn’t matter if they intend for civilians to die when we go to war to “protect” strategic resources or when we bomb the Vietnamese to “save” the people from communism or when we install a tyrannical pro-capitalist dictator in South America. The suffering and deaths under capitalism are incalculable, so this appeal to intention is less than convincing.
There are all the liberties for every human in capitalist country to do anything they want to in order to live a happy wealthy live.
This “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” rhetoric clearly doesn’t work for people in capitalist developing countries. Arguably doesn’t work for the poor in rich countries either.
Nobody gives up power willingly. Especially absolute power the authoritarian communist countries provide.
Socialism is not synonymous with authoritarianism. Strong central governments were necessary to resist the U.S… And these governments also lifted their people out of poverty: education, housing, healthcare, transportation, and jobs for all. Hell, the USSR went from literal feudalism to competing in the space race. You don’t have to agree with every historical example of communism to appreciate a system designed to work for everyone.
Well yeah I can agree here, USA is a fucked up country. I’m not from it. They aren’t good example of neither capitalism, nor democracy (two parties on a country of the size of EU lol).
This “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” rhetoric clearly doesn’t work for people in capitalist developing countries.
Why? I am from capitalist developing county, from rather poor (but sane) family. Those, who try, find the options.
USSR went from literal feudalism to competing in the space race
USSR was the fucking feudalism. My grandma didn’t have her passport till 80s. Without it she wasn’t allowed to move from the region, while forced to work at kolgosp.
USSR took the already wealthy state, with factories and all, and brought it into chaos, murdering people for the ideals of the revolution. And before you say “well they were killing wealthy capitalists so it’s OK”, …they even murdered anarchists, also lefties.
Then they disarmed people. Then they did the literal fucking genocide of Holodomor, stockpiling food that was rotting in the hangars trying to sell it to the West while the people had nothing to eat, and they were executing them for “stealing food”.
But hey, free housing. They were also offering poets free apartments. The catch? The whole building was wiretaped. Half of the residents were 3-letter agencies that monitored all contacts inside the building. And while they were doing genocide, they were forcing local poets to write stuff to glorify the regime, and tortured/sent to camps ones who didn’t bend.
And yeah lol space race. Aka guide to lose your empire without any war. Even USA wasn’t ready to this turn of events. The fuckers tried to save USSR from collapse.
All in all, nothing did as much damage to my people as the fucking commies. And nazies tried their best.
So you want to change the name of ideology, that postulates free market relations as important part of human freedoms? Fine, it can be Classic Liberalism if you want.
Is the free market that enables human freedoms in the room with us now?
Free market IS human freedom.
i dont see why even communism would mean there are no free markets: in the most basic definitiv communism is (economically) a system in which the working people control the means of production. this could e.g. be achieved if all companies were work coops - thus workers controlled the companies and therefore the means of production if we dont change anything else there will still be a free market
Uh-huh. How do we define means of production? Can I come to your home and take your PC? I mean that’s means of productions alright. So it shouldn’t be privatized, and thus, traded.
(are we seriously discussing communism supporting free market? are we seriously considering communism as a sane ideology? what next, try nazism, because real nazism was never tried?)
The means of production are the tools, machinery, factories, land, etc., required to make goods. In ye olden times artisans/tradesmen/farmers would own their own tools (i.e., means to produce goods). However, since the industrial revolution, the craftsman have been put out of business. They cannot compete with machine production. So this is where we need to make the distinction between personal and private property.
Personal property are things you own for your individual use. Your house, clothes, toothbrush, etc. Private property is means of production used to make a profit for the person who invested (i.e., capitalist). Communism seeks to put the workers in charge of the workforce (i.e., workplace democracy). It also aims to abolish class, private property, the need for money/wages, and ultimately the state itself.
This is a poor comparison. The communists want to erase hierarchies of class, race, gender, etc., whereas the Nazis wanted to reinforce them. Need I remind you that the communist killed millions of Nazis in WW2?
Communists killed millions without any wars.
PCs are needed to create lots of different goods. Where do we put them? The classification is vague.
Today, 4 billion people live on less than $10 a day. How many billions around the globe suffer and die unnecessarily in capitalist countries? Why are the deaths of communism seen as a failure of the system as a whole whereas the exploitation of the land, labor, and resources of billions is seen as merely a problem with regulation? Capitalism has shown that it does not respect the environment, human rights, or even human life.
Yes, there were abuses and missteps in communist countries. But we have to place this history within the context of an economic system that was resisted by the U.S. because it threatened profits. The diplomatic isolation, trade embargos, and political assassinations that socialist countries attempted to withstand necessitated a strong centralized government. Of course, this provides fertile ground for corruption and abuse, but the goal of communism is to eradicate the state entirely! Whereas the goal of capitalism is a never-ending increase of profit at the expense of everything else.
Yeah, I lived in Ukraine. You should also mention that $10 could buy you different stuff in different regions of this planet.
There is no intent to let people suffer and die. There are all the liberties for every human in capitalist country to do anything they want to in order to live a happy wealthy live. Not everyone end up being successful.
It should never be equated to state-driven genocide.
Bullshit. This is just state-driven propaganda, a new religion that replaces an old one, which, as we know, is opium of the people.
Nobody gives up power willingly. Especially absolute power the authoritarian communist countries provide.
The intention is to make profit, human life be damned. It doesn’t matter whether the oligarchy intend for us to suffer when all the increases in productivity are being systematically siphoned to the top of this pyramid scheme we call an economy. It doesn’t matter if they intend for people to die when they can’t afford life-saving medical procedures. It doesn’t matter whether they intend for literal slavery to still exist, in 20-fucking-25, in service of profits. It doesn’t matter if they intend for civilians to die when we go to war to “protect” strategic resources or when we bomb the Vietnamese to “save” the people from communism or when we install a tyrannical pro-capitalist dictator in South America. The suffering and deaths under capitalism are incalculable, so this appeal to intention is less than convincing.
This “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” rhetoric clearly doesn’t work for people in capitalist developing countries. Arguably doesn’t work for the poor in rich countries either.
Socialism is not synonymous with authoritarianism. Strong central governments were necessary to resist the U.S… And these governments also lifted their people out of poverty: education, housing, healthcare, transportation, and jobs for all. Hell, the USSR went from literal feudalism to competing in the space race. You don’t have to agree with every historical example of communism to appreciate a system designed to work for everyone.
Well yeah I can agree here, USA is a fucked up country. I’m not from it. They aren’t good example of neither capitalism, nor democracy (two parties on a country of the size of EU lol).
Why? I am from capitalist developing county, from rather poor (but sane) family. Those, who try, find the options.
USSR was the fucking feudalism. My grandma didn’t have her passport till 80s. Without it she wasn’t allowed to move from the region, while forced to work at kolgosp.
USSR took the already wealthy state, with factories and all, and brought it into chaos, murdering people for the ideals of the revolution. And before you say “well they were killing wealthy capitalists so it’s OK”, …they even murdered anarchists, also lefties.
Then they disarmed people. Then they did the literal fucking genocide of Holodomor, stockpiling food that was rotting in the hangars trying to sell it to the West while the people had nothing to eat, and they were executing them for “stealing food”.
But hey, free housing. They were also offering poets free apartments. The catch? The whole building was wiretaped. Half of the residents were 3-letter agencies that monitored all contacts inside the building. And while they were doing genocide, they were forcing local poets to write stuff to glorify the regime, and tortured/sent to camps ones who didn’t bend.
And yeah lol space race. Aka guide to lose your empire without any war. Even USA wasn’t ready to this turn of events. The fuckers tried to save USSR from collapse.
All in all, nothing did as much damage to my people as the fucking commies. And nazies tried their best.