Socialism & Capitalism

[Modder_Mode]

I thought I would create this thread as in the other thread titled Forbes glorifying Kylie Jenner it turned into a discussion regarding socialism and capitalism which started to detour from the original topic (blame me for this lol), I think this could be a very fruitful discussion as the conversation so far has been, I am always keen to learn new things.

My personal view is that Capitalism along with Christianity is the greatest gift the world has ever and will ever have and it is something that needs to be treasured at all costs and in my view the West is very close to losing both these gems that has made the fabric of Western society for some time.

Now in saying all that I am not 100% hard core against Socialism, I think Socialism has its part in any modern society, with essential services and certain types of welfare but that's the extent I think it should extend to. It really comes down to how much?

 

[Modder_Mode]

Now back to the discussion that was starting to unravel in the other thread:

Where capitalism has its failings in my book is when a monopoly of a particular niche occurs, e.g. Google, Apple, Amazon,Ebay etc. but looking at why that can happen is usually because they are providing an excellent service/product, this is when corruption and bad practices can occur.

I mean, poverty, war and fascism are kinda black marks against it, too.

We must live on a different planet (or at the very least our worldview is definitely polar opposite).
Communism with its Socialist flavor along with the Stalin and Mao Zedong despots (to name only a couple) created enormous famines starving millions of people due to the social upheaval their polices created. Not only were poor people starving, people that had something, now had nothing, and we are talking millions of people here.

The last major war, WWII with the two main antagonists Germany & Italy with Hitler and Mussolini at the helm were fiercely anti-Capitalists, Hitler and Mussolini were left leaning and certainly adopted Socialist policies, Stalin was no different in his thoughts on Capitalism and war in Europe was inevitable as ALL those leaders wanted to enforce their own twisted world view that a governments role should be to control the system and that government knows best.

Even in modern day China after adopting an Authoritarian Capitalist approach this system has literally lifted millions of people from poverty...

Hmmmm....millions dead under Socialism or millions lifted out of poverty under free market Capitalism....hmmm I know which system I would want in my country.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Hitler wasn't anti-capitalist, German industry remained in private hands through the war.
He was anti-free market since German industry was to serve the war machine.
He wasn't very socialist either, breaking free trade unions.

I'm not against free markets, they just need to be kept out of certain areas and regulated in those they are in.
Can't say I'm bothered by the decline of Christianity although I do feel people need better values than rampant consumerism.

 

[Hygro]

Categorically fascism is one expression of capitalism.

 

[Traitorfish]

My personal view is that Capitalism along with Christianity is the greatest gift the world has ever and will ever have and it is something that needs to be treasured at all costs and in my view the West is very close to losing both these gems that has made the fabric of Western society for some time.

I don't really know what you mean when you say "Capitalism", "Christianity" or "the West". I think you're leaning on clichés and just assuming that your audience will be on roughly the same page as you, rather than actually laying out a framework for comparison between cultures or societies.

Consider, specifically, what distinguishes "Capitalism" from "Communism", as you're using the terms? Both had markets, money, commerce, wage-labour. Both were monopolistic to a certain degree and competitive to another. So what actually distinguishes them, as societies, rather than just as ideological constructions advance by political leadership?

 

[Cheetah]

The last major war, WWII with the two main antagonists Germany & Italy with Hitler and Mussolini at the helm were fiercely anti-Capitalists, Hitler and Mussolini were left leaning and certainly adopted Socialist policies, Stalin was no different in his thoughts on Capitalism and war in Europe was inevitable as ALL those leaders wanted to enforce their own twisted world view that a governments role should be to control the system and that government knows best.

I think it might be fruitful to this discussion for you consider a tangential question: Would you say Otto von Bismarck was a socialist?

@All:
One thing I struggle with -- and, to be fair, something I might have asked before -- but what makes capitalism different from whatever came before? Exempli gratia: were the ancient Greeks capitalists? If not, why not? They had private property, they did business, they had free markets, some people owned other people the means of production. Surely they, and anyone who isn't a socialist, are capitalists?

 

[Modder_Mode]

Hitler wasn't anti-capitalist, German industry remained in private hands through the war.

He was very anti-capitalist, he was big on economic intervention and control. Nazi policy dictates how much workers should be paid and where capitalists should direct their capital and under what terms. The Nazi's, not consumers directed the means of production. It would be hard for you to argue that because German industry remained in private hands, that he supported capitalism when the Nazi parties very own economic policy inhibits, controls, manipulates and regulates the system.

He wasn't very socialist either, breaking free trade unions.

He was very Socialist, he was all for big government, government in Nazi Germany controlled almost everything, industry, education, transportation, health care etc. He implemented a lot of social programs throughout the country. There is a lot of contention on whether Hitler or fascism is a left or right leaning ideology, so a discussion on this is always interesting.

If the free trade unions went against Nazi government policy, then of course they would be broken up. We see this time and time again with Communism, rival factions that also support the same idea of Communism but differ even in the slightest viewpoint are eliminated by force.

Can't say I'm bothered by the decline of Christianity although I do feel people need better values than rampant consumerism.

Does it concern you though of what might replace Christianity?

 

[Modder_Mode]

Categorically fascism is one expression of capitalism.

Can you elaborate on why you think this?

 

[Traitorfish]

He was very anti-capitalist, he was big on economic intervention and control. Nazi policy dictates how much workers should be paid and where capitalists should direct their capital and under what terms.

Have you genuinely never encountered the idea of a "war economy" before?

 

[Modder_Mode]

I don't really know what you mean when you say "Capitalism", "Christianity" or "the West". I think you're leaning on clichés and just assuming that your audience will be on roughly the same page as you, rather than actually laying out a framework for comparison between cultures or societies.

That's a fair call and I agree it does demand clarification. Why I conflated Capitalism, Christianity and the West together is because for quite some time academics have been trying to work out why Capitalism only arose in the West, its exclusivity to the West has remained a mystery and various ideas as to how it happened have arose. Reading about the links to the three including Christianity aligns me with the idea that Christianity had a large role in this.

 

[AmazonQueen]

He was very anti-capitalist, he was big on economic intervention and control. Nazi policy dictates how much workers should be paid and where capitalists should direct their capital and under what terms. The Nazi's, not consumers directed the means of production. It would be hard for you to argue that because German industry remained in private hands, that he supported capitalism when the Nazi parties very own economic policy inhibits, controls, manipulates and regulates the system.

He didn't support capitalism but he didn't get rid of it either. Capitalism/industry was there to serve the needs of Germany as he saw it which was basically building up a powerful war machine. He wasn't socialist because redistribution of wealth and power to the masses weren't of interest to him.

He was very Socialist, he was all for big government, government in Nazi Germany controlled almost everything, industry, education, transportation, health care etc. He implemented a lot of social programs throughout the country. There is a lot of contention on whether Hitler or fascism is a left or right leaning ideology, so a discussion on this is always interesting.

Controlling everything is totalitarian, not socialist. He built some roads, holiday camps and distributed food and clothing to the poorest via Winter Aid. These were mainly funded with confiscated trade union funds and semi-compulsory donations.

If the free trade unions went against Nazi government policy, then of course they would be broken up. We see this time and time again with Communism, rival factions that also support the same idea of Communism but differ even in the slightest viewpoint are eliminated by force.

Again totalitarian, not socialist. Fascism and Marxist-Leninist Communism are both totalitarian. Fascism certainly wasn't socialist and its debateable to what extent the USSR was.

Does it concern you though of what might replace Christianity?

To some degree but that doesn't make me blind to its flaws or able to believe in it.

 

[Traitorfish]

That's a fair call and I agree it does demand clarification. Why I conflated Capitalism, Christianity and the West together is because for quite some time academics have been trying to work out why Capitalism only arose in the West, its exclusivity to the West has remained a mystery and various ideas as to how it happened have arose. Reading about the links to the three including Christianity aligns me with the idea that Christianity had a large role in this.

I still don't know what any of these terms mean, as you are using them. Without some sort of definition they all seem pretty circular: "the West" is "the culture of Christian Capitalists", "capitalism" is "the economics of Western Christians", and "Christianity" is "the religion of Western Capitalists". They're statements of identity, rather than describing anything.

That "capitalism" emerged in the "Christian" "West" becomes less of a question than a tautology, because, by definition, it must have done.

 

[Hygro]

That's a fair call and I agree it does demand clarification. Why I conflated Capitalism, Christianity and the West together is because for quite some time academics have been trying to work out why Capitalism only arose in the West, its exclusivity to the West has remained a mystery and various ideas as to how it happened have arose. Reading about the links to the three including Christianity aligns me with the idea that Christianity had a large role in this.

Mechanical clocks and decentralized warring states, and the need for insurance and underwriting.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Is this a thread about actual capitalism ?
Or does the OP make the common mistake of conflating capitalism and market economy ?

 

[Zkribbler]

Communism with its Socialist flavor along with the Stalin and Mao Zedong despots (to name only a couple) created enormous famines starving millions of people due to the social upheaval their polices created. Not only were poor people starving, people that had something, now had nothing, and we are talking millions of people here.

...he said, blushinging ignoring the democratic socialism of Scandinavia, which has given its people the world's highest standard of living, the greatest amount of opportunity for economic advancement, the greatest happiness, and the most education.

The Berlin Wall has fallen, the Evil Empire has collapsed due to its own rot, the Cold War is long over. Stop fighting, you've won.

But don't try and hide democratic socialism's successes behind Stalin's despotic fiascos.

 

[Cheetah]

There's always more words and terms, but unless we all agree what they mean, we won't get very far...

Can someone define capitalism and socialism, at least the way we will use it in this thread, please?

We in the Nordic countries call our systems "social democratic", not "democratic socialism". We're capitalists, as far as I understand it, and not socialists, as we still have private ownership of the means of production, and no plans to do it differently. Not that we don't have coops and such as well, but it's perfectly legal, and ubiquitous, with private ownership.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

...he said, blushinging ignoring the democratic socialism of Scandinavia, which has given its people the world's highest standard of living, the greatest amount of opportunity for economic advancement, the greatest happiness, and the most education.

I don't want to be a pedant, but that's not democratic socialism, that's capitalism with some safeguards to mitigate the worst side effets of capitalism.

 

[Zkribbler]

that's not democratic socialism, ...

That's what democratic socialists call it.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

That's what democratic socialists call it.

That's what American "democratic socialists" call it because a lot of stuff Americans call "socialist" is just "centrist" in (Northern) Europe.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I don't want to be a pedant, but that's not democratic socialism, that's capitalism with some safeguards to mitigate the worst side effets of capitalism.

Its the road to serfdom if you believe the free marketeers.
Its certainly not pure, unfettered capitalism.
The nearest we've had to that since the 19th century was Pinochet's Chile.