1. 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?

  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  • Janked [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    I don't have the time or energy to make a real effort to address all of the things wrong in this post, but if you're actually arguing in good faith, all I will say is you have a severe lack of knowledge of history as it actually happened instead of idealized propaganda.

    • sozialdemokraten [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      That's OK, I admit I'm quite uneducated about history. Definitely there are good reasons why the USSR collapsed, such as due to US aggression, and I know about Cuban sanctions, NK bombing etc. My main point is that bad actors will attempt to destroy both communism AND social-democracy. So the fact that social-democracy is in decline is not proof that social democracy is inherently prone to failure. Like all good things, it has to be protected against aggression from big business, imperialism etc.

      • Indifference_Engine [comrade/them, any]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Hey local idiot here, feel free to ignore me if I'm off base. But isn't the point that with a Soc-Dem system that those things you need to protect and fight against are inherent parts of the system that must, paradoxically, also be maintained and supported indefinitely?

            • sozialdemokraten [none/use name]
              ·
              4 years ago

              The people managing the co-ops would be capitalist class, if that makes any sense. Its more like expanding the capitalist class to include everyone rather than destroying the capitalist class.

              • Indifference_Engine [comrade/them, any]
                ·
                4 years ago

                But then doesn't that just leave you back where we started with this social democracy at the mercy of a potentially ascendant and power-hungry capitalist class?

                • sozialdemokraten [none/use name]
                  ·
                  4 years ago

                  Honestly Im still learning and I dont know how to respond to this. My opinion is that as long as actual democracy is protected(and not the debauched money-corrupted democracy that we have today), as long as society actually operates on the principle of one-man-one-vote, then the moneyed class will have the power commensurate to their demographic position (i.e only. 2-3% of the vote). Of course this is not what is observed in real life, which is why my struggle is entirely about democracy (hence the name social-democracy). A strong democracy will inevitably lead to socialism, but that socialism will not look like DPRK. I cant predict what it will look like, but probably there will be worker co-ops and nationalization of key industries.

                  • Sus [none/use name]
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    What you're talking about is anarcho-syndicalism but with capitalists. This is unstable and will fail because the two systems cannot coexist.

                    Capitalists are not a necessary component of a business - capital can be mutually owned by all members of a company and democratically controlled. Check out the Mondragon corporation for a kind of loose example of a company organized along those lines.

                  • vccx [they/them]
                    ·
                    4 years ago

                    The DPRK is fine. They have a security state because they are literally 30 minutes away from destruction by NATO at any given time. There are literal nuclear warheads pointed at Pyongyang and NATO has been practicing invasion drills at its border for literally 70 years.