File: 1425434192758.png (140.22 KB, 846x944, 423:472, socialism_explained_by_par….png)
No.512[View All]
ITT: We discuss why socialism is the only way forward for a better society.
>What is socialism?
An economic system by which the means of production are collectivized, which means
1) Productive enterprise is owned collectively by the employees that work there
2) Workplace democracy is established
3) The wage system is abolished
>What is communism?
A stateless, classless, moneyless society where civilization is broken up into small, autonomous communities called "communes" (hence "communism") organized linearly by voluntary organizations and workers' councils.
80 posts and 12 image replies omitted. Click reply to view. No.890
>>874
It requires the same skill set. The point is, you don't have to be a superman to run a business. It takes know-how that may not come naturally, but don't go around with the pretense that businessmen are these ultra-competent super humans when they're not. If anything, they're just far more invested in their business because, of course, they own the property and it holds the promise of maybe, one day, giving them tons of money.
No.895
>>885>Because I'm not already rich, and I don't have rich friends/family.Yeah, the typical cop-out. Entrepreneurs are very middle class, and many of them don't even have college degrees. They raise capital by taking loans and/or pitching to investors.
No.897
>>886
>But how do you objectively define productive work?
Any work which produces things of value.
>How do you demonize outsourcers without appealing to a nationalistic populism?
Because their whole purpose for doing so is using what amounts to slave labor in developing countries.
No.898
>>890>It requires the same skill set. The point is, you don't have to be a superman to run a business. It takes know-how that may not come naturally, but don't go around with the pretense that businessmen are these ultra-competent super humans when they're not.Okay, so if it's not that hard, then why don't the workers go into business themselves, using the techniques the evil capitalists do, and run their own worker-owned enterprises?
No.901
>>894
>I don't agree here, managing people and making smart investments of time and finances
Which is what the BA major is supposed to train you to do.
>has very little to do with being a skilled craftsman for example
Which the BA major doesn't train you to do.
No.906
>>895>Yeah, the typical cop-out. Entrepreneurs are very middle class, and many of them don't even have college degrees. They raise capital by taking loans and/or pitching to investors.The petty bourgeoisie rarely rise very far, and I wasn't really talking about them, even though liberals tend to get all hung up about them like they're the standard business owner that we're all talking about because muh American Dream or whatever. I don't think progress should be slowed or stopped because the hardships of the petty bourg.
No.910
>>899
>According to your own first-world bourgeois sensibilities?
According to anyone's standard, including theirs.
And I'm not bourgeois, I don't own any part of the means of production.
No.913
>>910You are basing this entirely on your perceptions of what manual labor in a developing economy is like. Consider for a second that not everyone has the disdain for blue-collar work that you have.
No.935
>>913No, I'm basing this off of the fact that we have a system one class profits off the labor of another class. We have a class of people who make money without necessarily having to do an ounce of labor to get it, like a modern landed gentry.
No.945
>>937
Yes, by collectivizing the means of production, like I've been saying.
No.955
>>948
They should be compensated and treated accordingly, so long as they're doing actual work
No.958
>>957
So? It's not about that level of equality, it's about putting everyone at an equal playing field and ending exploitation.
No.972
>>959
It wouldn't be a race, and there wouldn't be "social status" by birthright.
No.978
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>974
I don't think the differences there are that drastic. The extreme inequality you see today is due to private capital ownership and absentee ownership.
Nor do I think people are completely motivated my the acquisition of material goods.
No.986
What are your favourite socialist dictators?
No.998
>>980
Yes, but people like doctors, engineers and scientists are proletariat, if very well paid proletariat, and don't consist of the ultra-rich, at least the ones that didn't use their positions to start acquiring capital, anyway.
No.1002
>>996
Take a closer look at that image.
No.1010
>>1000
Nice GET
Also, that's some screwy logic you have there. Getting rid of economic classes increases social inequality because... Some people are more competent than others? What does that have to do with class exploitation, or are you just hung up about semantics?
Also, the super compotent people you're talking about are motivated by way more than just money. Give them a higher pay grade and get out of their way and let them do their thing.
No.1020
>>1012
>I don't know how human psychology works
Well it's good that we got that out of the way
No.1021
>>512It's better than the economic anarchy that capitalism would endorse. I don't want to say it's good though, as that might encourage the AnarchoSoc.
It is good though. No.1061
>>643
>ChávezFaggot, thanks for ruining my country.
No.1063
>>1012
The fuck are you on about?
No.1067
>>1061>implying Venezuela wasn't already shitAnd capitalist imperialism wouldn't have made it better. Chavez at least helped lower poverty, despite the imperialists best efforts to fuck him over.
No.1068
>>1067
>MUH EMPIRE>MUH BOURGEOISIE Goddamnit you faggots are cringeful, always blaming someone else for your own fuck ups, these including exchange control, which has ruined the economy completely.
Poverty is worse than before, idiot.
No.1089
>>1082I'm not going to watch an one hour video.
Yeah, the CIA might have done shit in SouthAm before, but every single time the CIA is or was mentioned, it's accusing them on backing the opposition, which is fucking bullshit, and has never been proven. Funny thing is, the accusation have become extremely retarded, with Maduro recently saying that the dead kid in Táchira was recruited by a CIA sect.
Anyway, got something to say instead of rants on muh ebil empire, cia and bourgeoisie?
No.1097
>>512>>>/leftypol/ is that way, kiddo.
No.1101
>>1067>helped lower poverty>HELPED LOWER POVERTY>CHAVEZ>leftypolVenezuela here, you're so full of shit it isn't even funny, also the "imperialism" is just a weasel-way to blame every bad business he has made to north america, like neutering and killing 60% of the private business in the country which is causing the HUGE sudden drop in our money value of the stock market and the lack of products on stores to the point where the government has to set a fucking ticket system where people can only buy a certain amount of food, that is if there's any on the store at all.
Seriously, go eat shit, people like you is why this country is so shit.
No.1110
>>655The thing is though, and naturally this isn't only in regards to socialists is that it seems to me like you're picking an ideology and trying to shape society to it, rather than taking the issues at hand and fostering something realistic and contemporary. I'm a fan of he NSDAP, but they didn't cling to the German aristocracy. Even I'm guilty of this, but it's probably counter-productive to think this way. Many people have similar issues with society that I have and it makes a lot more sense to appeal to those to the best of my ability than to expect some kind of awakening to my way of thinking and a revolt.
No.1111
>>1101
>rationingI'm sorry, at least you have cheap gas. Kike professors and hipsters really love the shit out of Chavez in the US by the way.
No.1121
>>1111I'm not the same guy, but that shit happens everywhere, and with the propaganda you guys are bombarded with it wouldn't come as a surprise.
Sadly gas is cheap because the government keeps selling it at the same price. It should cost many, many times more than it does, but I think there would be big consequences considering how expensive everything is right now.
No.1149
>>1100The problem here is that you (I'm assuming that you're OP. Correct me if I'm wrong) aren't trying to foster civil discourse, you're just shitposting.
>We discuss why socialism is the only way forward for a better societyThat isn't discussion. It's trying to make a fucking circlejerk. So please, fuck off back to your commie hugbox. You can come back when you're willing to have an open debate.
No.1181
>>1152
>reds that can handle the banter
That settles it. /polidicks/ confirmed for best political board.
No.1384
Anyone else a Technocrat/resource based economy /sci/entist?
>Fund science to build machines to take most jobs (like they are already doing)
>Both production rates and human free time increase
>Most items are extremely cheap to free
>Government basically non existent since economical scarcity doesn't exist any more
No.1401
>>1097We're allowed to disagree here, anon. Go back to /pol/ if dissent triggers you.
No.1430
No.1440
>>1395
Great argument anon.
No.1456
>>1149>>1430>The opening statement was too assertiveDeal with it, faggot.
No.1465
>>1456>people don't want a communist circlejerkDeal with it, faggot.
No.1494
>>1465Who said anything about a circlejerk?
No.1546
>>1494>We discuss why socialism is the only way forward for a better society>I'm right you're wrong, lalala I can't hear you No.1661
>>1546>Can't handle the bantRightists
No.1663
>>1661>oh no! Someone disagreees with me! I'd better call them conservative, because there's no way a left leaning person could disagree with me!<inferring that you're a faggot No.1689
>>1663>there's no way a left leaning person could disagree with me!Why the fuck would a socialist disagree that socialism was the way forward?
No.1696
>>1689
>hurr durr the left is formed by a single ideology>Helmets required No.1716
>>1689Maybe it's because I'm not a fucking socialist? Just throwing that out there.
No.1748
>>1696>>1716Socialism is the only Left ideology in the modern day.
Any pro-capitalist ideology is going to be centrist at best.
No.1780
>>1748
>Socialism is the only Left ideology in the modern day
It's like you're trying to be a parody on liberalism.
No.1787
>>1748
Some communists like Bob Black reject socialism.