-
Marx agreed that capitalism is very good at rapid economic growth, which is why Lenin implemented the NEP and Deng Xiaoping implemented the liberal reforms. So why abandon that completely for the system like in Cuba or North Korea which are very inefficient and grow slowly?
-
Norway, Sweden, Iceland etc are the best places to live on earth. Clearly social democracy has provided the goods. Of course in recent years, due to neoliberalism, those countries are not as great places to live anymore, but they are still the best in the world. So why are you against social democracy if when implemented correctly, it is the best system we have seen? Communism also if not implemented correctly produced horrific results, its all about the implementation. Ideas alone are not enough.
-
The vast majority of workers do not want communism. How will you try to establish communism democratically when people dont want it? When people say they want socialism, they usually talk about social programs or nationalization of key industries, rather than implementing Cuba or North Korea economy, no one wants that.
EDIT : I have another question. Are communists willing to work with social-democrats? Obviously neoliberalism and fascism are bigger threats, so wouldnt it make sense to vote for and support social democrats like AOC in USA or Corbyn in UK or Mélenchon in France?
To the comrades reading this:
OP, while many of us might find their views to be harmful or incompatible with our own, went to the effort of coming here to ask what appear to be good-faith questions looking for information. OP also does not appear to harbor any resentment towards any of us or any marginalized groups we stand in defense of. We think our ideas are good, right? Good-faith, curious people are future comrades. This isn't tone policing, let's just act in the most effective way to strengthen our movement. Not a single one of you was born an ML/anarchist and being high and mighty to those who aren't as educated as you are is how you kill the left from the inside out.
Next time, if we scare a new OP less knowledgeable than @sozialdemokraten away, some cryptofash skinhead will be happy to welcome them with open, ghoulish arms.
I do not for a second believe that OP asked the questions in good faith. You can hardly even call these question. They wrote statements of their own beliefs and then begged the reader to disagree.
First question, "Capitalism is efficient, Cuba/China not efficient. Hmmm?". Second question, "Nordic countries best on earth. Why do you hate? Communism bad". Third question, "Workers do not want communism. China Cuba Vuvuzela?"
The OP has no intention of learning from the responses in this thread. The OP only wants to position themself as the "more rational" person in the thread and to waste your time. Look at all their replies in this thread, all say "good response but I still disagree". OP has no intention of changing. This is all in bad faith.
I don't think that's evidence that this is in bad faith, these are beliefs that are sincerely held by plenty of people.
And even if it is in bad faith, it's good to know how to argue against these points anyway.
yeah these are the default views of millions of americans lol
I am asking in good faith. I will respond to your questions :
Multiple people have agreed with me on this that capitalism is good at developing quickly. I have not mentioned China, as it is developing rapidly after liberalization. I have mentioned about NEP and Deng's reforms as proof of this.
I have mentioned the objective measures like social wage, HDI etc. It's common knowledge that Iceland, Sweden are some of the best places to live. Like some people may disagree, but its more or less common knowledge. Do you have any reasons why Sweden is a worse place to live than, say, Thailand or Chile? I didnt say "Communism bad" in a simplistic way. I said I don't want to live in a country where the govt controls everything and you dont have freedom of speech like in NK. That's a personal desire. I'm well aware of Cuba's excellent social services, zero unemployment in NK etc.
Based on how many votes Communist parties get.
I actually learned a lot. I'm not going to change my political views based on a single internet post. Someone mentioned that making the whole world like Norway would be desirable for communists, which is agreeable to me. Most of the disagreements are about how social democrats would betray communists, to which I mentioned that self-described social democrats can be anyone from Starmer to Evo Morales. So its not about ideology but the people involved. No one has yet responded to my main point, why implement a Cuba/NK style economy when its clearly not working well? And if thats not what you want, then what would communism look like to you?
Countries that challenge capital are sanctioned by capitalists. Countries that do not challenge capital are not sanctioned by capitalists.
I do not think that Cuba and DPRK are bad. They are suffering economically because they are sanctioned and terrorized by US imperialism. The reason that you think that nobody likes Cuba is because the only Cubans that you have heard from are those that fled Cuba. The people who fled Cuba were the oppressors of the old Cuba. You are erasing the people who still choose to live in these countries.
I understand that but I think we are arguing past each other. Take Bolivia and China for example. I would prefer the economic systems in these two countries, even though they are also threats to Western imperialism, as evidenced by the Anez coup and by the anti-Chinese sentiments. Im talking about the govt control that Cuba and DPRK has, Im saying I dont like that system. That's my main issue. Im not against govt control per se, but complete and utter govt control. For example, 35% of Norway economy is state owned which is even higher than Venezuela;s 30%. So im OK with govt control of key industries but not DPRK style total ownership.
Having a unified Communist party is functionally more democratic. The CPC has no one to blame and thereby maintains its legitimacy through sheer performance in improving the material conditions for hundreds of millions.
It also precludes any party politics for candidates vying for election into the party, no DNC to stop Bernie Sanders, for example.
All of leftist theory is predicated on the idea that there are primarily two large economic classes with inherent conflict of interests. The capitalist class is a group of people who collect capital by owning things and/or extracting surplus value from wage labor. The working class is a group of people who have to sell their labor for a wage. If the working class works harder to produce more things and/or is payed a lower wage, then the capitalist class benefits and working class suffers. Inversely, if the working class works less hard to produce less things and/or is payed a higher wage, then the capitalist class suffers and the working class benefits. Leftists want the capitalist class to not exist. Capitalists should control 0% of the economy. Capitalists should not exist because they are parasitic to the working class and do not add value to the labor process. Workers should control 100% of the economy and if a government is needed to seize the ownership from the capitalists, then so be it.
I more or less agree with this. My main differences is that I want to do this democratically, and secondly, worker ownership is distinct from government ownership for me. A shoe factory owned by workers who profit from it is different from a shoe factory owned by the governmet that employs workers. I would prefer to work in a place that is entirely controlled and owned by the people working there, rather than some government buearucrat. Also the democracy part is kinda important to me. The solution to lack of democracy under capitalism is not even less democracy under socialism.
You want some brand of syndicalism or other anarchism flavor by the sound of it. Most people on this site are Marxist-Leninists of some kind and hold the belief that a vanguard is necessary to establish communism - usually that's a reclaimed People's government that removes the capitalist class.
Anarchism is more of an end state of communism and involves all unjust hierarchies being abolished and power itself being destroyed or decentralized so all members of a community or business have equal voting right in it.
I just wanna point out a few things that I feel aren’t being communicated fully and I get a sense that you are very new to some of these concepts (which is okay! We all start somewhere)
Yeah, so?
A loaded question forces an assumption on the responder. This is bad faith.
As example in 'question' 2, OP writes "So why are you against social democracy if when implemented correctly, it is the best system we have seen?". The responder is forced to operate under the assumption that "(social democracy) is the best system that we have seen". This is not really a question. It is just an assertion that "(social democracy) is the best system that we have seen".
It's like if I were to ask you "How long have you been a liberal ?". This would force the assumption on to you that you are a liberal, despite you not being a liberal.
If you think someone asking "well why don't you like this when it's so good" when they actually believe that is automatically nefarious and bad faith, then perhaps you've spent way too much time on reddit or whatever.
You are correct. If someone uses one loaded question, they are not automatically nefarious or bad faith, but the OP has about 15 or 20 incorrect assumptions baked into 3 "questions".
Perhaps it is because they think they are correct, because this is what socdems believe?
Thanks, I assure you I'm asking in good faith.