capitalism or socialism?

lufties · 27-02-2015 04:07PM #1

Is it possible to have both? I don't agree in the government having control over everything, but also don't believe that money is everything.

At the end of the day, most folk want a decent peaceful life. With revelations recently about establishment paedophilia in the UK, it is becoming clear that the most powerful in this world are either megalomaniancs(DOB, R. Murdoch) or greedy phsycopaths, or both perhaps. Free market capitalism has brought us a race to the bottom and the destruction of livelihoods and transfer of wealth from the lower and middle class, to the aristocrats, elites, privelidged and corporate giants. The older I get, the more fearful I become about where the world is going. Will the majority of us(if not already) become corporate slaves the a system that benefits a few? Money and wealth seems to be the only thing that matters.

Russell Brand talks of revolution, I reckon there will be one at some point, as people are now waking up to what is going on, and how we are being hoodwinked on a daily basis. Hopefully we can bring power back to the people, whichever form that will come in.

fedor.2. · 27-02-2015 04:11PM

There's no stomach here for revolution, for the most part, Ireland is a pretty awesome place to live. People, if only deep down, realise that.

Lucky to be alive, we are.

lufties · 27-02-2015 04:13PM

fedor.2. wrote: »

There's no stomach here for revolution, for the most part, Ireland is a pretty awesome place to live. People, if only deep down, realise that.

Lucky to be alive, we are.

We are indeed lucky to be alive, but do you not feel a disconnection and disgust when you hear about how the world is being run? Sometimes I honestly find the anger hard to contain.

NotCominBack · 27-02-2015 04:15PM

Capital socialism - manic street preachers

catallus · 27-02-2015 04:16PM

lufties wrote: »

Hopefully we can bring power back to the people, whichever form that will come in.

Such mindless rhetoric gives us nothing but countless dead and millions of willingly blind slaves.

"Whichever form it will come in" ????

Use your brain man!

uch · 27-02-2015 04:16PM

Cake !

hatrickpatrick · 27-02-2015 04:17PM

Neither. Both take power from ordinary people and give it to unaccountable entities.

Direct democracy FTW. Swiss style.

positron · 27-02-2015 04:18PM

I would vote for benevolent dictatorship, but my vote doesn't matter.. so... I don't know.

Dravokivich · 27-02-2015 04:19PM

I though capitalism was more of an economic principal, as opposed to a political ideology?

Your issues referencing the recent issues exposed UK have nothing to do with either though. There is the potential for corruption where there are people in control. Doesn't matter what politics are involved.

fedor.2. · 27-02-2015 04:22PM

lufties wrote: »

We are indeed lucky to be alive, but do you not feel a disconnection and disgust when you hear about how the world is being run? Sometimes I honestly find the anger hard to contain.

Sure, but not enough people feel that way, and if they do, the feeling doesn't last that long. There's just too many things to be angry about, it's hard to focus on any one issue for too long

smash · 27-02-2015 04:22PM

Fcuk socialism. I'm not gonna bust my balls so lazy folk can get even more shít for free.

hatrickpatrick · 27-02-2015 04:22PM

Dravokivich wrote: »

I though capitalism was more of an economic principal, as opposed to a political ideology?

Your issues referencing the recent issues exposed UK have nothing to do with either though. There is the potential for corruption where there are people in control. Doesn't matter what politics are involved.

They have become intertwined. Capitalism in its pure form allows companies to run rampant, unchecked.

I think most people who oppose both ideologies simply oppose power. That'd be my own stance anyway. Who holds power is irrelevant - state or corporations - power itself is the problem and should be limited to whatever extent it can be, no matter who wields it. People should be free from control by others.

biko · 27-02-2015 04:24PM

It's funny how it used to be capitalism and communism that were the two opposites. Since the fall of communism I suppose the conservatives have moved the goalposts a bit.

ancapailldorcha · 27-02-2015 04:29PM

Either taken to an extreme is a bad thing.

anncoates · 27-02-2015 04:35PM

The unfortunate thing about socialism is that it's bound to fail because it relies on people to do the right thing, which makes me sad.

You simply cannot trust a significant minority of the population to act with the common good in mind. That's why all experiments with same have mutated into totalitarianism.

If you cannot trust a large number of citizens to act selflessly on a micro basis with things as trivial as parking, queuing, management companies or just simple altruism, expecting them to do it forever on the macro level of a socialist society is a well meaning but futile pipe dream.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 27-02-2015 04:41PM

It is possible to have both, we live in a mixed economy ourselves.

lufties · 27-02-2015 04:41PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Neither. Both take power from ordinary people and give it to unaccountable entities.

Direct democracy FTW. Swiss style.

Seems to be the way forward..

Agricola · 27-02-2015 05:06PM

anncoates wrote: »

The unfortunate thing about socialism is that it's bound to fail because it relies on people to do the right thing, which makes me sad.

You simply cannot trust a significant minority of the population to act with the common good in mind. That's why all experiments with same have mutated into totalitarianism.

If you cannot trust a large number of citizens to act selflessly on a micro basis with things as trivial as parking, queuing, management companies or just simple altruism, expecting them to do it forever on the macro level of a socialist society is a well meaning but futile pipe dream.

In a nutshell yes. Some cultures are, for whatever historic reasons, better suited to coming close to this pipe dream, Scandinavians being the obvious example on our doorstep. Generally conscientious about the micro stuff, accepting higher taxation and lower wages in the "common good"
But the most of the world is a capitalist bear pit where socialism of any kind wouldnt last a minute.

Karl Stein · 27-02-2015 05:11PM

All countries employ some combination of socialism and capitalism. Capitalist development isn't practical for certain things (like constructing an energy grid) and socialist practices aren't suited to others (producing consumer goods).

lufties · 27-02-2015 05:17PM

Karl Stein wrote: »

All countries employ some combination of socialism and capitalism. Capitalist development isn't practical for certain things (like constructing an energy grid) and socialist practices aren't suited to others (producing consumer goods).

I live in London so perhaps I only see the worst of capitalism.

4zn76tysfajdxp · 27-02-2015 05:23PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Direct democracy FTW. Swiss style.

Mob rule.

Yurt2 · 27-02-2015 05:26PM

lufties wrote: »

I live in London so perhaps I only see the worst of capitalism.

The NHS is probably the most ambitious, not to mention most successful and resilient socialist project in history.

hatrickpatrick · 27-02-2015 05:30PM

Giancarlo Helpful Hallway wrote: »

Mob rule.

Better than aristocratic rule. Neither is ideal, but at least with mob rule ordinary people cannot be screwed over by the financial elite repeatedly and without consequence.

If we had direct democracy in Ireland you can bet your ass Anglo bondholders wouldn't be getting a red cent.

anncoates · 27-02-2015 05:58PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

If we had direct democracy in Ireland you can bet your ass Anglo bondholders wouldn't be getting a red cent.

Letting the electorate decide certainly helped with divorce and abortion didn't it.

Edit : I know referenda were required but the point is that I don't think direct vote is always the best way to decide important issues.

Ben D Bus · 27-02-2015 06:02PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Better than aristocratic rule.

Not so sure. With aristocratic rule at least you know who's who. Mob rule means you can't trust anyone. Not family. Not friends.

MRnotlob606 · 27-02-2015 06:11PM

Well in the Nordic countries they have synthesized both , What doe the results say ? highest standards of living, higher wages, less working ours, more holidays.

ancapailldorcha · 27-02-2015 06:17PM

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

Well in the Nordic countries they have synthesized both , What doe the results say ? highest standards of living, higher wages, less working ours, more holidays.

They pay very high levels of tax compared to the UK & Ireland though.

catallus · 27-02-2015 06:21PM

MRnotlob606 wrote: »

Well in the Nordic countries they have synthesized both , What doe the results say ? highest standards of living, higher wages, less working ours, more holidays.

Didn't they have an extensive eugenics programme up til the 1970's too?

The Diabolical Monocle · 27-02-2015 06:43PM

Just have ID cards - capitalist or communist.

you go to the shopping market and hand in your communist card and get issued your national share or if you have a capitalist card you pick up the bill with cash.

finish work on a friday you swipe your commie card and walk out with nothing, swipe your capitalist card you get issued your cash and off you go on the town.

get in an accident the hospital asks you if you're paying commiecard or cash.

Capt'n Midnight · 27-02-2015 09:37PM

"Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."

Littlekittylou · 27-02-2015 09:48PM

Social Democrat. Germany has it going both ways. They seem to be doing ok.

The unfortunate thing about socialism is that it's bound to fail because it relies on people to do the right thing, which makes me sad.

No true socialism enforces a system of social ownership of means of production and the economy and is the enforced political management and establishment of such a system through direct action. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. But the main crux is that they are about forcing people to do a certain thing rather than even forcing them to do the right thing let alone relying on them to do the right thing.

Numerous studies and surveys indicate that people tend to live happier lives in social democratic societies rather than neoliberal ones, even the rich. But generally miserable in socialist societies.

I describe myself as a social democrat. It has been described by Jerry Mander as “hybrid” economics, an active collaboration of capitalist and socialist visions, and, while such systems aren't perfect, they tend to provide high standards of living. I think it's generally a state where many different views tend to be able to exist harmoniously also.

capitalism or socialism?

Comments