vietcong2005 wrote:
Despite its mistakes, Capitalism still allow a good amount of citizens to make money.
Capitalism is an inherently flawed system that is prone to crises and creating inequalities and hirearchies. There's no denying it that capitalism is a step after feudalism and that it did improve the quality of life.
This is no longer the case; capitalism is an outdated system that holds us back and
can possibly kill us all.
vietcong2005 wrote:
Some of you may call the nordic countries socialist, in reality they are not, they still allow private property, free market, private companies, etc.
Those countries are social democratic.
Socialism101 wrote:
We are not social democratsMany European nations practice an ideology known as social democracy. Social democracy is an ideology which supports "economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy", and thus it a capitalistic ideology, not a socialistic ideology. Socialism, by definition, opposes capitalism and seeks to dismantle the capitalist system. Whilst social democratic nations do well in some regards, they are only able to offer things like social security to their citizens due to the availability of cheap off-shore labour in the third world, and by high taxes on the working class. We socialists oppose outsourcing jobs to third-world nations and we oppose taxes on the general population. We believe in common ownership of enterprise, the productivity of which will be used to benefit all of society and not just CEOs. Taxes and redistributionism only attack the symptoms of inequality, not the cause.
We are not social democrats. We are not Democrats. We are not Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama.
Socialism101 wrote:
Is social democracy, or "Nordic-style socialism" a viable alternative to capitalism?Social democracy is a system that, by definition, advocates for social justice within the framework of a capitalistic economy. It serves not as an alternative to capitalism itself, but rather a different, "friendlier" version of it. To many, the social democratic system seems like a good middle-ground between capitalism and socialism. But social democracy is a system built not only on the exploitation of the workers in the country it is established, but also on imperialistic exploitation of the global south's "third world" countries. Social democracy is not viable without the luxury that cheap offshore labour provides. If conditions for the workers in third world countries improve (e.g. child labour is outlawed and the 12-hour workday is changed to an 8- or 6-hour workday), the standards of living in social democratic countries fall.
Further critiques of social democracy include the fact that democratic systems of social democratic countries still serve the bourgeoisie. The rich and the corporations work tirelessly to undo any victories won by the workers through democratic means (universal healthcare, free education, unemployment subsidies, raising of the minimum wage, etc.), resulting in effectively half the parliament in any given social democratic country being bourgeois, and the other being social democratic, both sides of which carry on a back-and-fourth political battle that never ends and doesn't have a winner. The short 4-year terms only add to the problem: A party with majority parliamentary representation in a social democratic country tries desperately to make as much short-term change as possible, and do nothing when they don't have majority, resulting in no party ever making any long-term commitments and practically abandoning ideology altogether. It turns politics into a sports game where people vote for their favourite team, not for any ideological reason but because they believe their team is the best, or has the prettiest logo, or the best slogan, or the most handsome party leader, or simply because their parents vote for that party. (Source)
As you can see,
social democratic countries exploit poorer countries. There's no middle ground of capitalism and Socialism/Communism. Capitalism must be abolished.
vietcong2005 wrote:
Meanwhile, China and Russia are more Fascist than Socialist, the government does not give any benefits to the people.
Why are you talking about Russia? Russia is not a Socialist country right now nor does it even claim to be one. And did you know that
the dissolution of the USSR and move away from Socialism in Russia was undemocratic and unpopular?
Regarding China, I must admit I haven't done enough research on China yet. While I'm not denying that China is possibly authoritian and is commiting many attrocities, I'd still be more critical if I were you whenever you hear news of China being evil.
vietcong2005 wrote:
If you want to experience socialism, go live in North Korea, they have a good quality of life. They have a benevolent and charismatic president, and an open democracy.
Oh look, the North Korean argument and the "go live in country X" argument. Please research more about North Korea:
here &
here.
And I could argue the same thing: If you want to experience capitalism, go live in the slums of Brazil. Or the Amazon rainforest that's continually being burned in the name of profit.
Well, that's about it. I know full well your feelings will probably not care of the facts, but I still invite you to an open minded discussion or to learn more about this.