Reply to: Komrade Kolonel Korbyn

[greenlake]

Squirrels.

That might just be the most intelligent answer you have ever given to any question ever...

Yeah, don't mess with the squirrels....

[Mordac]

Squirrels.

That might just be the most intelligent answer you have ever given to any question ever...

[northernladyuk]

What's the point to risk your neck in risky revolution and then give up the power to somebody else?

Squirrels.

[AtW]

What's the point to risk your neck in risky revolution and then give up the power to somebody else?

[northernladyuk]

So in reality what you are saying is that actual socialism has never existed/been tried because we only ever get as far as a Socialist Dictatorship where in reality the workers are really just slaves to the dictator?

And so it was not a Socialist Dictatorship - more just a dictatorship (in much the same way as the Nazi's were?)

No. I don't think we've ever got to socialist dictatorship either, because the workers did not control the means of production so it was not socialist. The term that makes most sense to me for Soviet communism is state capitalism (the state now owns and controls the means of production, and ensures that the surplus of production is distributed to the benefit of the new political, bureaucratic and managerial ruling class). But state capitalism is a contentious idea.

My view of Maoism and Stalin is is they are examples of the tendency for revolutionary states to tend towards dictatorship (a pattern that extends before socialist theory - see the Cromwellian protectorate or Napoleon). But they are clearly not socialist societies in any accepted meaning of the term. It is muddled because they called themselves socialist, but then the DPRK calls itself democratic.

There is a much easier critique of socialism in that it fails to establish itself. Lost of arguments to be had around why that is. Blame human nature, or blame the capitalist class's squeeze on bourgeois democratic systems. Or blame something else.

[original PM]

The Nazis weren't socialist. They were a national party - like the National Front or the British National Party whose brand of "socialism" extended to "if you are the right genetic make up, then you're welcome to use those with different genetic make up". Socialism does not segregate or discriminate against people based on skin colour or religion. Unless you are saying that UKIP and the Tories are loony left socialist pinko commies.

Sorry I mean the Nazi's were a dictatorship (whether it was socialist or capitalist does not matter right now).

[WTFH]

And so it was not a Socialist Dictatorship - more just a dictatorship (in much the same way as the Nazi's were?)

The Nazis weren't socialist. They were a national party - like the National Front or the British National Party whose brand of "socialism" extended to "if you are the right genetic make up, then you're welcome to use those with different genetic make up". Socialism does not segregate or discriminate against people based on skin colour or religion. Unless you are saying that UKIP and the Tories are loony left socialist pinko commies.

[original PM]

So I think what is going on here is a view that only free market capitalism is 'real capitalism', and that command control capitalism is not 'real capitalism'. Capitalism is broad and can encompass either forms (but is usually a hybrid at some point of a continuum between them). The reality is that the Nazis removed sectors of production from state hands to private hands. This is a type of capitalism.

But the real point of this line of argument is to show that you cannot claim that Mao and Stalin are examples of 'real socialism' (when clearly the means of production were owned by a dictatorial state, and not by the workers), while claiming that Nazism was not 'real capitalism' (even though capitalism moved away from state ownership within a previously reasonably democratic state towards more private ownership).

So in reality what you are saying is that actual socialism has never existed/been tried because we only ever get as far as a Socialist Dictatorship where in reality the workers are really just slaves to the dictator?

And so it was not a Socialist Dictatorship - more just a dictatorship (in much the same way as the Nazi's were?)

[northernladyuk]

Yes but did they not privatise it by effectively giving people government money and they bought the industries?

e.g. it was not private endeavours but state sponsored endeavours?

As ultimately it all was still completely answerable to Hitler?

So I think what is going on here is a view that only free market capitalism is 'real capitalism', and that command control capitalism is not 'real capitalism'. Capitalism is broad and can encompass either forms (but is usually a hybrid at some point of a continuum between them). The reality is that the Nazis removed sectors of production from state hands to private hands. This is a type of capitalism.

But the real point of this line of argument is to show that you cannot claim that Mao and Stalin are examples of 'real socialism' (when clearly the means of production were owned by a dictatorial state, and not by the workers), while claiming that Nazism was not 'real capitalism' (even though capitalism moved away from state ownership within a previously reasonably democratic state towards more private ownership).

[NigelJK]

IME the only Socialist regimes that work are those funded by Capitalism.

[original PM]

Then why did the Nazis privatise so many state owned industries? They moved more of the means of production into private ownership.

Yes but did they not privatise it by effectively giving people government money and they bought the industries?

e.g. it was not private endeavours but state sponsored endeavours?

As ultimately it all was still completely answerable to Hitler?

[northernladyuk]

National socialism comes very close to communism, you can see this extremely well with Corbyn. the only difference is that nazi's don't pretend the workers are in charge, whereas the commies do. They both support the own people first ideology.

Then why did the Nazis privatise so many state owned industries? They moved more of the means of production into private ownership.

[original PM]

Capitalism works by paying poor people to make shineys for the less poor to buy.

It will fail when people either realise there is more to life than shineys, or the are no more poor people to exploit, because thry’ve got their shineys now...

Indeed - do you know what makes poor people?

Wars -

[stek]

Capitalism works by paying poor people to make shineys for the less poor to buy.

It will fail when people either realise there is more to life than shineys, or the are no more poor people to exploit, because thry’ve got their shineys now...

[Eirikur]

National socialism comes very close to communism, you can see this extremely well with Corbyn. the only difference is that nazi's don't pretend the workers are in charge, whereas the commies do. They both support the own people first ideology.