this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
-8 points (42.3% liked)

Memes

45890 readers
1507 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The only economic system that works is sending me all your money via western union so I can keep it safe for you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

You forgot the "or else" part.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (5 children)

Except the transitional stage often leads right back to fudalism/oligarchy.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Capitalism is an oligarchy

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change

also 'fudalism' is a funny typo considering this is F.U.D. about socialism and communism

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I don't get how what you linked relates to what I said. Could you clarify?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

the United States expanded the geographic scope of its actions beyond traditional area of operations, Central America and the Caribbean. Significant operations included the United States and United Kingdom–planned 1953 Iranian coup d'état, the 1961 Bay of Pigs Invasion targeting Cuba, and support for the overthrow of Sukarno by General Suharto in Indonesia. In addition, the U.S. has interfered in the national elections of countries, including Italy in 1948,[1] the Philippines in 1953, Japan in the 1950s and 1960s[2][3] Lebanon in 1957,[4] and Russia in 1996.[5] According to one study, the U.S. performed at least 81 overt and covert known interventions in foreign elections during the period 1946–2000.[6] According to another study, the U.S. engaged in 64 covert and six overt attempts at regime change during the Cold War.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

How does that information inform whether the revolution and dictatorship of the proletariat tends to lead to socialism or back to oligarchy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Name one time when that's happened.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Neither of those countries returned to a feudal system. Where are the nobles, with entrenched legal privileges, with titles passed down on a hereditary basis, commanding their own armies? What a ridiculous claim.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

That's why I said /oligarchy. Both became oligarchys.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Feudalism specifically would be more north Korea.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Does North Korea have the noble class I described? Do you have any evidence that such a class exists?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, it has a king and royal family.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That's both not true and also not what I asked. The UK has a king and noble family, does that make it a feudal system?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Mostly not because they don't have the political power.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There are other monarchies in the world today that do hold political power. That doesn't mean that they're governing over a feudal system. The noble system I described is one of the defining characteristics of feudalism.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Okay, in the oversimplified graphic of the meme, I was including absolute monarchy under feudalism, since I thought it was closer to that than capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Right, because you're doing zero analysis of the economic or political structures involved and playing fast and loose with terminology.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because that's what the original meme did. I was trying to fit within it's framework.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago

Child brain child behavior

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

They're the largest landholders in the entire country. Holy shit you're fucking dumb.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Elmer Fudalism

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Does it? Is Oligarchy just when you have a government but no or little Capitalism?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Any system which requires government coercion over individuals is never going to be feasible because the greedy will always find a way into power. That's why it hasn't worked for communism, and that's why it hasn't worked for capitalism. What we need is a government specifically set up to protect individuals from corporations. The more we can empower individuals and the common worker, the better off we will be. Communism is not the answer to that, neither is capitalism.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Why do you say Communism isn't the answer? It does empower people and the xommon worker and protects individuals from corporations.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because every time it has existed it just leads to a huge amount of government power without actually empowering the people. The people may be protected from corporations but they are not protected from their own government.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The government is run by the people, it's a complete restructuring away from Capitalist ownership into public ownership. The people are not distinct from the government.

Shifting from an economy run by competing warlords to one owned and run by the people is indeed a vast improvement.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And how is that worked out? Every time it's been tried the people who are in the government take all the power and rule with tyranny over their citizens. Communism only empowers the people in the minds of idealists who think that it works. Every time it's actually implemented it's just dictatorships under fancy names.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

None of what you just said is historically accurate. The USSR, for example, had Soviet Democracy in place. Yes, the government did have the power, because that power was taken from Capitalists and given to the public, which was managed by a Worker State. The idea that the USSR was a "dictatorship" is wrong, even the CIA said that the idea that the USSR was run by 1 dude and his whims was false (pdf download link, fair warning).

An excerpt from said doc if you don't want to download it:

"Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain. However, it does not appear that any of the present leaders will rise to the statue of Lenin and Stalin, so that it will be safer to assume that developments in Moscow will be along the lines of what is called collective leadership"

The idea that the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. are/were just "Dictatorships with fancy names" makes no attempt to do actual, material analysis of the structures in place in these countries.