- cross-posted to:
- showerthoughts@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- showerthoughts@lemmy.world
There’s clearly a lean to the left side of things in Lemmy instances, with many people attacking people at the right.
In some cases regarding the climate crisis, there’s people blaming it on capitalism while hinting that communism/socialism are the solution to the climate crisis, because somehow having the state controlling the entire economy will lead to stop CO2 emissions.
A bit from the article:
The best way to protect the environment is to get rich. That way, there is enough money not only to meet the needs of ordinary people, but also to pay for cleaner power plants and better water-treatment facilities. Since capitalism is the best way to create wealth, humanity should stick with it.
Not the first time I’ve heard about this concept, and the more i look into the world the more I agree with it. Being green is kind of a luxury that not many people can afford, and the poorer people are the less they can afford green technology.
Do you have any example of a country with socialism that successfully made it?
Nordic countries are currently blowing the US out of the water on every measurable metric so you might want to rethink that argument.
I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist
Nordic countries are not socialist.
Sounds like your definition of “socialism” is (like Cato’s) “a state that is easy to criticise”. ACS did are some of the most socialist governments. They are clever about it for sure but that is why they are so inconvenient. Hell look as Norway socialising profits a from oil exploration to lift an entire nation out of poverty.
You what, mate? They’re among the most socialist nations in the world, more so than Argentina or China
They are social democracies. Even Wikipedia makes it clear.
Dunno where people got the idea these countries are socialist.
You are using a cold war definition of socialism. It’s outdated
Socialism isn’t the opposite of democracy
Socialism is what social democracies do.
I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist
That’s communism
I don’t think you know the definitions. Communism is a classless society. Socialism is one where the workers own the means of production
You’re now following in the most common argument fallacy between socialists/communists, called No true Scotsman.
Except it’s you that’s using an outdated definition for socialism, you are the odd one out here, the rest of us all agree on that as a type of socialism
Note that Wikipedia does not call Venezuela socialist or communist, though the outdated ideas you’re relying on do
Socialism’s definition hasn’t changed. It’s when the workers control the means of production. If that’s not true, it’s a capitalist country
Your wiki links first sentence says it’s within socialism which would make them socialist.
Funnily enough Wikipedia’s entry for Saudi Arabia doesn’t use socialism anywhere in it, and Venezuela only has “socialist” in political party names
I wonder if to be socialist you need to implement social policies for the benefit of the people rather than for the benefit of the government (by preventing revolt)
I don’t understand if you’re dumb or just trolling at this point
Most of Western Europe have social programs (free education, free healthcare, etc.) and made it. The G7 counts France, Germany and Italy
I hope you are joking. Socialism is when the workers own the means of production. These social democracies do not the workers owning the means of production and hence are capitalist
Having social welfare doesn’t make a country socialist.
France?
France is capitalist
French economy is not a good example, as far as I know it’s stagnated.
You clearly know very little.
The data shows it’s stagnated. It’s a common symptom between western european economies. The more they lean left, the worse their economy gets:
Their GDP
If they are stagnating it’s despite leaning TO THE RIGHT - and hard - over the past 20 years. There are very few truly socialist parties left in Europe and very few are in power. Definitely not recently in France. Their stagnation and exploding inequality is due to capitalism taking over.
It’s like California - a poor mixture of hopeful socialism and neoliberal cynical Reaganism.
To drive the point home Macron is quite a bit pro capitalism right wing politician. Not any other way. P
Yes another “No true Scotsman” argument. Amazing!
Funny. That is the fallacy you’re commuting with capitalism. Oligarchy / widespread poverty is a feature of most systems we’ve invented so far. But for you that is deformation of capitalism and a feature only of socialism. Go figure. No true Scotsman for you either.
And about France - who would have thought that world history and politics is complicated!? (Not Cato. If all you read is Cato bullshit, you get a very simplistic understanding of the world)
I never did say poverty wasn’t not existent in capitalist systems. I’ve said though that capitalism helped decrease poverty races over the last century.
When the Berlin Wall was up, to which side people wanted to run?
GDP is not a good indicator for quality of life for a bunch of different factors. You need to get your theory right before you try to look for high numbers
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.PP.CD?locations=FR
China, DPRK, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba are all great examples