Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments


SpiritOfTito wrote (edited )

Actually you could be murdering people on the street (much like the RAF in Germany or the Red Brigades in Italy) and I doubt many people would say those people weren't socialists.

A lot of nations call themselves democracies but by my definition they certainly aren't.

The US calls itself such a democracy it thinks it can export democracy via the gun and the bomb and wholesale murder of millions of people.

Now I dont doubt that americans think their country is a democracy.

But its a far cry from Platos definition 2000 years ago being representatives by lotto and no man can earn 6 times the wage of another.

You would have to go back to the ancient pharoahs to get the wage disparity the US now has been a minimum wage worker and say Bill Gates, Walmart family, the average politician in congress.


zombie_berkman wrote

wait a sec i thought you said that

"an idea can be socialist merely by being called socialist by its creators"

so why does this magicly not apply else where?


SpiritOfTito wrote

Socialism is way, way more vague and means different things to different socialists.

Most socialists see it as an intermediary stage before communism.

Some see it as an end game of itself IE. Worker owned production and decision making.



zombie_berkman wrote

so you in your opinion the soviet union and china were socialist and communist?


SpiritOfTito wrote (edited )

Yes right down to 1993 when 3000 communists were shot trying to stop Yeltsin illegally dissolving the Supreme Soviet when people started crossing over to capitalism.

Nobody could earn great wealth off the labour of another human being in the Soviet union Sure some leaders had great holiday dachas, big inauspicious houses outside the Kremlin and party members were privileged with consumer goods being first in line etc.

But they didn't have the capitalist mode of production that sought imperialism in the way the west does: To invest capital to accumulate more to capture more markets to invest more etc.

The spread of wealth was more like 4/1 compared to capitalisms (if you compare bill gates or forbes or koch brothers) 10000000/1 to average wage earner.

The soviet union typically made trade agreements that were outright charity or at least heavily in favour of the third world. Global capitalism does not do this but rather treats debtor nations like war spoils and colonies.

I think they were broadly considered socialist though both suffered from revisionism, the lure of the west etc.

Theres a reason China doesn't have a military base outside China and why the US has over 900 worldwide.