I thought the reason why Jamestown failed was that it was populated entirely by prospectors, who spent their time looking for wealth instead of farming. It wasn't so much laziness as an imbalance of skills. Some other societies that operated a communal approach to production and distribution, such as the Thirty Reductions in Paraguay, did so successfully. So I think that this idea you often hear from Americans, that under such a system there cannot be any motivation to work and it will inevitably fail, is too simplistic.
Has there been a socialist country that's failed?
- Thread starter Bigfoot3814
- Start date
amadeus
Serenity now
You misspelled "hyperinflation."
As for one example of a great socialist failure: Tanzania. Why? Well, because Nyerere admitted it.
silver 2039
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 16,208
Native American societies could be considered socialist communal sharing of resources, no concept of land ownership, communal raising of families, equality between men and women. A socialist paradise even. They only failed because of European invasion and genocide but otherwise they could have survived for quite some time.
National Socialism != Socialism returns true.
Sharwood
Rich, doctor nephew
No, no I didn't. For your elucidation. Not arguing that Allende's reforms would work anyway - I don't think they would - but it's pretty obvious that it wasn't socialism that caused the collapse in Chile.You misspelled "hyperinflation."
As for one example of a great socialist failure: Tanzania. Why? Well, because Nyerere admitted it.
^^^ There was no East Yemen, there was South and North. I don't remember which was socialist and which wasn't though.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
The SDP took many efforts to distance themselves from Socialism once the Republic was formed, as can be seen by how they dealt with Luxemburg and Liebsknecht. Of course, the reasons Weimar failed were not because of Socialistic policies; any government during that time period in Germany would have performed similarly bad.
Fugitive Sisyphus
Escape Artist
1. Define socialism.
2. Define fail.
Some people might argue that the United States is a socialist country that is presently failing pointing to social security, Medicare, public schools and the financial crisis.
2. Define fail.
Some people might argue that the United States is a socialist country that is presently failing pointing to social security, Medicare, public schools and the financial crisis.
I suppose so, but that was more distancing itself from communism than socialism. And how they dealt with the Spartacist Uprising was probably more an indication of their lack of control over the Freicorps than there own attitude towards the USPD and the Spartakusbund (although they obviously disliked them greatly, and saw them as a threat). But it was more the extremism than the political ideology that they were afraid of and distancing themselves from. 26% of GDP was spent on welfare in 1928, almost double fifteen years previously. This was a socialist policy. Also, the rise of trade unions probably indicates socialism, not just democracy and freedom of assembly. But, yeah, these weren't the reasons for its failure. It was just a failed state that happened to be socialist.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
The United States also had trade unions at that time and before, and would not be considered socialist by any means.
I did not mean trade unions were socialist. I meant that the sudden emergence and power of them would be an indicator of a move towards socialism, or an indicator of a socialist state, especially when given real power. In 1918, the number of Germans in trade unions=0. In 1928, the number of Germans in trade unions=6 million. Trade unions are not a sign of socialism, but the rapid emergence of them is. Me thinks.
BTW- I think this sort of socialism was good, but was destined for failure due to other circumstances.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
No, trade unions ARE socialist, but their presence is not an indictment of a state as being socialist.
I think Wiemar and the SDP was well-founded, but moved too far center. They made up for this, however, when they helped found the DDR in 1945.
I think Wiemar and the SDP was well-founded, but moved too far center. They made up for this, however, when they helped found the DDR in 1945.
I got idea from my textbook, which states, "Weimar Germany became in fact the first true Sozialstaat or welfare state." So maybe I'm getting confused between a welfare state and a socialist state. But what really is the difference?
Perhaps they weren't a socialist state, but a liberal state, which seemed socialist due to the drastic change from the previous militaristic and class-conscious society, to a state that provided many freedoms, large welfare benefits, and was led, at times, by the SPD.
Never thought I'd see the day when you said that socialism was a crime.
Question: does Kerenskyite Russia count as a Socialist state?
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
I got idea from my textbook, which states, "Weimar Germany became in fact the first true Sozialstaat or welfare state." So maybe I'm getting confused between a welfare state and a socialist state. But what really is the difference?
Perhaps they weren't a socialist state, but a liberal state, which seemed socialist due to the drastic change from the previous militaristic and class-conscious society, to a state that provided many freedoms, large welfare benefits, and was led, at times, by the SPD.
A welfare state remains capitalist in nature.
Never thought I'd see the day when you said that socialism was a crime.
It was an artistic use of the term
It was going that way, but there are three important things to remember: first, that Kerensky was the only socialist in the cabinet, so he was hardly getting his way all the time, second, that the Petrograd Soviet was doing everything in its power (which was growing daily) to piss them off, often by pre-empting them in establishing socialist councils in new places (which is why it was called the USSR at the start), and after July no one really cared about him, since they saw him in a "new boss, same as the old boss" kind of light, hence the actions at the end of October.
"NORWAY!?!? What are there, 3 people in Norway??! Is Norway feeding the world? Is Norway bringing drugs to the world? What's Norway's contribution to ending hunger in Africa? ZERO!"
Erm, Norway gives 1% of its GDP to foreign aid, i know thats some sort of goal but i don't know if any other countries actually do this?
That's 26,2 billion NOK/ 3,7 billion USD. Not all of this goes to Africa of course. I haven't been able to find a source for how much goes there. But AFAIK they are one of the areas that get the most. So to say our contribution is ZERO is a bit dramatic.
The guy sounds like an idiot anyways.
Erm, Norway gives 1% of its GDP to foreign aid, i know thats some sort of goal but i don't know if any other countries actually do this?
That's 26,2 billion NOK/ 3,7 billion USD. Not all of this goes to Africa of course. I haven't been able to find a source for how much goes there. But AFAIK they are one of the areas that get the most. So to say our contribution is ZERO is a bit dramatic.
The guy sounds like an idiot anyways.
Crime Doesn't Pay
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2009
- Messages
- 279
I've never really understood the difference between communism and socialism. Every acts as if their interchangeable.
Also why do Communist governments always seem to end up as dictatorships?
Also why do Communist governments always seem to end up as dictatorships?
Similar threads
