Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download

🦓
Anonymous 19h

The “market economy” in question:

post
upvote 10 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 19h

Love it, but to be fair isn’t it also human nature to want a system that will benefit you? I get the point but I think human nature is over-used and is meaningless in these contexts since we are all humans and our desires are within human nature

upvote 7 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 19h

“Clueless about human nature” is fun like capitalism is “human nature” either lmfao

upvote 2 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 19h

They’ll hate you for it, but purely socialist or communist countries or states just don’t work. Too utopian and idealistic.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 19h

I don’t want to be rude, but do capitalist states work either? I would argue the U.S. is a fundamentally broken state rn

upvote 14 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 19h

No they don’t either. Pure laissez-faire capitalism also devolves due to it being too utopian. Smithian markets operate on the underlying principle that humans will keep competition fair. They don’t. Humans are greedy. As with most things in life, a balance or moderation is key. In both scenarios, the haves separate themselves from the have-nots, it’s just under two different methods. Both almost always revert to authoritarianism.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 19h

Do not mistake my disdain of communism as an endorsement of capitalism.

upvote -1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 19h

No country is communist. There are countries with more wealth redistribution policies and publicly funded utilities like energy, water, healthcare, education, etc. Sometimes these systems work well, sometimes they don’t. I wouldn’t say that public healthcare or education is blanket BAD or GOOD, it just depends how it’s operated and what resources they have access to

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 19h

yeah, society itself always naturally reverts to authoritarianism ever since the agricultural revolution, I agree with you there, it’s the role of the people to prevent that

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 19h

There are a plethora of people who would argue you to death that there are and have been “communist” countries. Wealth distribution is fine, social programs are fine, they work best in tandem with some form of democracy. You just have to ensure the checks on each part of the government operate as they should. This was somewhat possible in the US before the lobbyist era took over, and money started to dominate politics more than it had prior. The entire New Deal was American Social Democracy.

upvote 6 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 19h

It aimed to save, not replace, capitalism, so idk if I’d call it social democratic

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 18h

Capitalism and social democracy are not mutually exclusive. The two can coexist.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #4 18h

I thought that social democracy = democratic socialism?

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 18h

No those are two completely different systems of governance. The former seeks to use democracy to temper and control capitalism (regulated markets) and create a social welfare state. The latter seeks to replace capitalism with socialism and elect leaders through democratic systems.

upvote 1 downvote