this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
35 points (70.1% liked)
Progressive Politics
1037 readers
716 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's an incorrect example. For North Korea to be a Socialist paradise, it has to be Socialist first.
It's like me saying the US would've been a Socialist paradise were it not for Trump's presidency. It doesn't have a base to construct a hypothesis.
Yes, I agree. I'm not going to go into the history of communist movements turning into dictatorships every time I see someone try to pin N Korean living conditions exclusively on western action though.
I'm not trying to make an argument about the theoretical workability of a socialist society, I am trying to make an argument about the success rate of communist movements at accomplishing that, and how it is more than western action that makes it challenging.
That's a bad faith argument.
This way of binary thinking also has a Capitalsm equivalent. Some say Capitalsm ALWAYS end up in neo-liberal economies and with late stage Capitalsm with oligarchs and the death of the free market. For example oligarchs control most of the US economy and most economic policies are put forward with lobbying money. Is has become increasingly harder to start a small business in the US, hence US citizens' tendancy to romantacize the Europe. If you say that Socialist movements ALWAYS end up in dictatorships then Capitalist moves should ALWAYS end up in late stage Capitalsm and the death of the free market.
In reality no contry is purely Capitalist or Socialist anymore. Otherwise the US wouldn't put tariffs on Chinese cars to protect GM, Ford and now Tesla. A direct contradiction to free market policies. Meanwhile there isn't a huge tariff especially for US cars in China. China ended up leaning towards Capitalism than before. Scandinavian countries absorbed a lof of leftist policies into their modern day government. Most of Vienna's houses are government owned. Everyone has mixed policies because there are good in both Capitalist and Socialist principles. You just have to be implement whatever is good for the people and economy in a given climate.
I did not say that socialism always results in dictatorship, though I can see how a quick reading of my wording could be misconstrued that way. I said I am not going to go into the history of it happening (sometimes), in all the cases that I witness someone making a certain argument.
I just think you are inaccurately identifying my position and my arguments. But ultimately I do agree with you.
Oh ok. Sorry for sounding a bit harsh but it did seem to me the way you mentioned.