this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
38 points (67.3% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26701 readers
1923 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics.


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 36 points 10 months ago

Democratic control over the means of production by workers

[–] [email protected] 33 points 10 months ago

It provides a safety net by pooling the resources of the community to support the less fortunate. This prevents people from having to sacrifice their long term goals because their short term needs may not be otherwise met.

Also in contrast to capitalism that treats society as a zero sum game ("I can't get ahead unless I take something from someone else") socialism is a benefit multiplier ("I'm part of the community. By making the life of everyone in the community better I'm also improving my own life").

[–] [email protected] 28 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Few movements self-identify as "Socialist", at best it's a taxonomical label. Attempting to talk about the finer points of socialism is akin to debating the pros/cons of "Animals" -- it's an overly broad topic and doomed to spiral into bike-shedding over semantics as soon as the conversation starts to look interesting.

With that being said, let's talk about some more concrete terms -- apologies in advance for wielding only slightly less clumsy terminology in my bullets:

  • Socialized Medicine: Healthcare is a human right. I am pro human rights.
  • Unions: Mostly positive. Nothing's perfect, but come on... you'd have to be blind not to see and feel for how exploited lower-class workers are without them
  • Democratic Socialists of America: I'm a member -- that means I like them. I think their platform represents the ideal incrementalist approach to improving the current status quo
  • European Welfare States (e.g.: Denmark): Too fuzzy to have a solid opinion on, but certainly a battle-tested template. I like most of their ideas most of the time
  • Marxism: A genius body of economic philosophy, but increasingly out of place as time marches onward. I'd be for a by-the-book implementation (insofar as that's possible) in 1923, but not 2023
  • Maoism/Leninism: Not exactly success stories. It's easier to appreciate their noble ideas & intentions with the distance lent by history, but that's altogether different from "liking"
  • Communism: As a whole? I think the template holds promise and can be made to work in a modern context, but viability =/= realizability. The world would have to get turned upside-down first and it's questionable exactly how many of us would live through that... but never say never.
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Well, the biggest political party in Denmark for my entire life is called Socialdemokratiet, which is social democracy coming from socialism.

I think it's a pretty big movement.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Marxism: A genius body of economic philosophy, but increasingly out of place as time marches onward. I'd be for a by-the-book implementation (insofar as that's possible) in 1923, but not 2023

One of the most insightful critiques of Marxism I've ever seen is that there is literally no solidly prescribed actual economic policy. Marx spoke at length about social policy and issues. Freeing the workers from the bourgeoisie and the bourgeoisie from themselves. But almost never and nowhere. Did he ever go into in-depth detail about economics. Or the economies that we would specifically have to go through to achieve his social vision. Which is what allowed bastardizations like those of Lenin, Mao, and the Ill families neptocracy.

Specifically ignoring the stateless part of his stateless, classes communism. Conflating the state that shouldn't exist with the workers who were supposed to own the means and tools they used for production themselves. Etc.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

I've lived in a country with socialism for my entire life, and have studied the laws in my own and other countries without socialism.

I will talk about socialism as it is in Scandinavia, more specifically Denmark. Here's a few things other than paid education and free healthcare:

  • Getting paid to study: You get paid to study as soon as you turn 18. In that way you don't need a job while you studying. Basic salary when living away from parents: 1.000 USD/month.

  • UBI: In Denmark we have UBI for people being poor, basically. If you don't have a job, is sick and can't work, or any other reason you might be screwed, you get paid by the government to... well yeah, exist basically. You have to meet some requirements and actively trying to get better or find a job though, which seems fair I think. If the government thinks it's not possible to get better, you can get the money permanently for the rest of your life without doing anything. (this is used for people with disabilities, both mental and physical, both born with it or obtained later in life)

  • Shared heating system: This is maybe the biggest "socialism" thing I can mention. In Denmark your house or apartment can be hooked up to a country wide heating system, which means we all share the same heat. This is a way to make heat distribution centralised, which has major advantages such as; price, availability, maintenance. (Fun fact: every data center build in Denmark needs to be hooked up to this system, as they will "donate" all their excess heat from their servers to the central heating system)

  • Flex jobbing: If you are no longer able to work 37 hours a week, you can be a flex worker. This basically means that you can work 15 hours a week and still get paid a full salary. The government will cover the rest of the pay and also cover some expenses for the company having the flex worker. This system is great for peoples mental health, as they still can feel a part of society even though they can't work full time. While they still can live a worthy life because their pay is fine. It's a win-win for the country, the companies and the people needing this.

I could go on, but I don't want to be that guy praising my own country all the time. We Scandinavians tend to do that.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Sounds like the Danish welfare system is more robust than the one we have here in Sweden - however, I would like to point out that what we have is not socialism. The central ethos of socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production (usually through the government), and our economies are first and foremost rather successful capitalist mixed market economies with strong regulations and a certain degree of government ownership in limited (usually critical) areas of society. With the help of our capitalist economies, we create and tax the wealth and productivity needed to fund a rather robust welfare system.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

In general Sweden and Denmark is mostly run the same way. Non of the countries are pure socialism, but they are sure very successful on physical and mental well-being for their citizens, and giving them a high living standard because of this welfare driven from ideologies of socialism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I love how people think that benefits are now called UBI.

I guess the billionaires successfully stamped that idea out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think it's right to call it UBI when you get a basic income. The universal part is maybe not true though.

And I don't get what you mean about billionaires.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The universal part is basically the point of UBI. It's income for everyone, no strings attached. So calling it UBI is definitely misleading I'm afraid

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago

I like working and feeling like I'm helping others or working towards a larger goal without the constant ever present exploitation of myself and others.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago

The concept of helping people.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Personal greed cannot grow to unlimited dimensions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago

It's one of the better -isms currently available.

Workers owning the means of production is the way it should be. Until we can mature further.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago

that it holds that social practices are created from social practice and not inherited from immutable law, enabling criticism of the underlying machinations of society without being hindered by the argument that such machinations are an inherited and instinctual product of nature and thus unalterable.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

The part where the workers own the means of production.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

A friendly reminder that socialism is not communism. The latter is closer to capitalism as it's just state-owned instead of privately owned. However, socialism and capitalism can coexist, which cannot be said the same about communism.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Friendly reminder that Communism isn't communism. Communism is "nominally" socialist, 100% authoritarian ideology that completely disregards most of what was supposed to actually define communism. You are accurate in calling it, especially in China's case, state capitalism.

Where as communism is 100% a type of socialism. And ultimate end goal of most socialist ideologies. Basically Communists are communists in the same way capitalists are libertarians.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Socialism is a political philosophy and movement encompassing a range of economic and social systems[1] characterised by social ownership of the means of production,[2] as opposed to private ownership.[3][4][5]

Hard disagree. Capitalism with a handful of social systems implemented is not socialism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That it's anticorporatist.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wish there was a movement called anti corporatism, literally. I feel like we need something new since anything socialism related is automatically bad to a lot of people...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Those people tend to be the ones benefiting most from socialism without realizing it. There also is a lot of confusing communism with socialism in here, they are not the same thing

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

What I like is that when there is progress, the progress is actually experienced by everybody and not just by a wider or narrower elite.

For instance, I love robotics but I can't stand that adding robots to society results in unemployment. You can't just let the owners scoop up all the capital gain.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

I'd prefer the profits of robotics to be socialized rather than putting a limit on the jobs that can be eliminated.

Where's our utopia where we don't have to work to survive? Automation should make that a reality.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago

I like the idea of a deliberate and rational society. Unfortunately we need to be cautious with this kind of thing and pay attention to where others have failed in the past.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The idea behind it, making life that little bit more fair. It wouldn't work, but as miguided as it might be, it's born of empathy and that's worth something.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago

reduction in suffering and increase in dignity of our whole race.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

I like some of the goals of it (like evening out the economical inequalities), but I don’t think socialism is the right way to do it. Democratic welfare state systems found in Western European countries are much better solutions (and hasn’t turned into authoritarian tyrannies).

UBI might also be a good option, but currently there have been no large scale implementation of it yet.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You cannot even out the real inequalities without demolishing the capitalist class, pretty much by definition. If you want to make everyone equal part of the capitalist class, that is pretty much socialism by definition.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

You cannot even out the real inequalities without demolishing the capitalist class

Absent rhat happening, you still can improve the situation quite a lot with strong, well enforced regulations on their activities.

Employment laws are usually a good place to start.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

It addresses the crudeness of the hand that deals some people, rather than assume equal opportunism is automatic.

load more comments
view more: next ›