Socialist Country: Socialism works

Riffing on Churchill,
Capitalism is the worst system to distribute wealth, except for all the other systems we tried..

Socialist Country: Socialism works

USSR (or country itself since the fall): *plans economy* *plans agriculture* *all trade conducted through gvmt channels* *clamp down on information, propaganda is the only official authorized news* *governmt positions
filled by Party-backed ideologues with no technical knowledge of their perview.*
Socialist country: *fail as chain inefficiencies cause overproduction on some areas, and sub-par efficiency in others.*
*fail as it has given economic power to depositaries of political power effectiveely concentrating powers, a.k.a the opposite of democracy*

I'm definitely not a staunch capitalist, I do think we need some amount of state intervention and re-distribution of wealth (I'm French, after all), but socialism has failed by itself.
Their was surely US sabotage, but just as much USSR sabotage, so not an argument.

>inb4 USSR wasn't real socialism
Granted. The US is far from pure capitalism the state is an actor in the economy well beyond regalian prerogatives (currency, defense, foreign affairs)

Wow, what a spectacular argument. Guess I better go kms.

>the "DURR SWEDEN AND DENMARK ARE SOCIALIST!" argument

oh, I get it, youre an underage retard who doesnt even know what socialism is. The only country in europe thats socialist is Belorussia

>memezuela

>socialism is when the government does things

youtube.com/watch?v=SlGijkDteFA

But capitalist economies that rely on a single industry, also collapse like that.

It makes me really sad when a French person doesn't even study their own history and philosophy. Frogs have so much to be proud of, but they now just consider themselves to be generic europeans.

Your problem with it isn't that it's a "meme". It's that it failed.
If one (ONE) socialist country managed any success while holding down your ever-shifting definition of socialism you'd meme it so hard you'd forget your own name and start calling yourself Venezuela.

>Nationalize entire oil industry
>Use oil shekels to fund public sector
>International price of oil drops
>The obvious happens
>Fucking capitalism

Both are dangerous compared with libertarian capitalism.
"State capitalism" may as well be called communism. It has as just as much to do with liberty.

Cenk is always so close to being right

here
mind elaboratong upon your vast knowledge of French History?
Hardly a rebuke if you are not going to address a specific point and just thorw "you so ignorant"

>Country that has been a shithole its entire history undergoes a violent revolution in the middle of a world war
>Nearly destroyed and suffers the most of anybody in the second world war
>manages to become a superpower despite everybody else being against it
>Hurr durr it didn't work

So you're saying communism only works if its both real communism, which as we all know hasn't been tried yet, and in a vacuum?

No, it means you can't have communism until late stage capitalism because of historical dialectics. You can't just suddenly jumpstart socialism and skip eras.

>Country that has been a shithole its entire history undergoes a violent revolution in the middle of a world war
>Continues to be a shithole
FTFY

I never really got why people insist on blaming only socialism. We blame its overall failure purely on the ideology, even though there are incredibly obvious outlying factors both in and out of nearly every country that has tried to go socialist and attracted the ire of bigger entities that had the sheer resources to poop all over them. We never say " yeah, socialism couldn't overcome the opposition thrown at it because it didn't garner a popular majority. Too bad, human nature just couldn't allow for it I guess", we go "HAHA LOOK AT HOW SOCIALISM FAILED ALL ON ITS OWN CHECKMATE BUMS GO GET A JOB". It already doesn't help that Americans tend to define any time the government does stuff as "socialism", which skews the word itself to being near-impossible to define objectively (other than the Marxist variation), but we have to sort through all the bullshit about how it was entirely on socialism that it couldn't hold itself up and there was no other possible cause. I'm not saying that any socialist government was perfect, but it seems awfully biased and skewed to point the finger at socialism alone here.

>Be North Korea
>Be Socialist
>Entirely isolate yourself from American and foreign influence for over 50 years
>Military uses biplanes, people starve daily, your entire country is a dark zone with no electricity when viewed from orbit

>collapses
>hurr durr it worked!

How could I forget, capitalist societies have never collapsed. Ever.

is this before or after the US & other countries went into Russia right after WW1 because they were more sympathetic to the Tsars/White faction and were worried about losing their money? Oh that's right, you trust the US, they just care about their democracy and uh money you know ;)

Seriously. Don't get me wrong not everyone was on the Bolshies side, but they did represent workers goal's, which is why they were able to "sieze power" from the provisional government which was turning out to be a tsar-lite shit beauracracy. So, the people & the Bolshies see this and take over because the whole point of the revolution was to enact change, and not change based on people with ties to the old government. Add on that you have foreign powers come in and violently disagree with your decision to literally shed the remnanta of tsardom and you expect socialists or even Russians to have a non-paranoid or happy view of US & friends? bruh

Another retard that doesn't know what socialism is. Just because I paint a white horse with black stripes, doesn't make it a fucking zebra.

>your ever-shifting definition of socialism
Do you even know what is socialism retard?

>social ownersship

the problem with socialist is that they dont know what words mean, and will just make up their own defintions of words, which is exactly the problem the other user was speaking about when he mentioned the ever changing definition of socialism.

All it is is a centrally controlled economy. Thats it. Controlled economies dont fucking work and free markets have always and will always BTFO. This is why you cucks have had move the goal post back and claim Bismarckian welfare systems like in the nordic countries are socialist.

>Socialism is when the workers own the means of production
>But not through the state
>And not through co-operatives
>And not through collectivization
>And not through centrally planned bureaucracies

Unironically kill yourself commie

SHUT UP NAZI!

>free markets have always and will always BTFO.
was there ever exist a "free" market? capitalism can't survive without a state and coercion.

:^)

user, take a look at the image again and compare the countries with a controlled socialist economy to ones with a free capitalist one.

>still swinging at alt-right because his pea brain cant concieve that anyone other than a nazi would realize how retarded socialism is

lol you think denmark is socialist and are shitposting now because you know you are wrong

Think what you want but the commie qties are hotter than the whales in the pol meetups

>free capitalist one.
>"free"

>traps and other 3/10s

sure thing fag

>actually being so fucking retarded that you are now arguing in favor of ancap shit

Hey user, notice how the free market ones BTFO of the centralized controlled socialist ones? What do you think that means? What happened to the socialist ones since user?

>denmark is socialist
let me guess, socialism is when government do things, right? denmark is a socdem, they still have capitalism.

>leftpol is so fucking dumb that they literally repeat the exact fucking point I was making back at me as if it is their point to make

Denmark isnt socialist. You can tell this based on the fact that its not a third world shithole

But their armpit hair user

>Be Oklahoma
>subsidize oil companies and refuse to pay teachers and pass a decent budget
>oil prices drop
>state can't extract as much taxes from oil companies and now the state has a budget crisis
capitalism at its finest!

Name one (1) socialist country.

>my model is superior
>it fails consistently, everywhere in the world.

As for the big US preying on the weak Bolshies, gimme a break. Socialist regimes faced the same international competition and aggression as evryone else,

> the whole point of the revolution was to enact change, and not change based on people with ties to the old government.
so basically every regime change ever, how does this differentiate Bolsheviks from any other revolution

I never said anything about "russians with a non-paranoid view of US" and I'm not sure I know what you mean by this. I couldn't give two shits what Russians think of americans

> but they did represent workers goal's
fucking lol, if you think there wasn't a tiny minority of over-privilieged people in USSR, you are giving me ideology, definitely not history

tl;dr: USSR didn,t crumble in 1917 when foreign powers twarted the revolution. It failed under the weight of its own absurd economical choices, after being one of the two top worldpowers for decades

>be socialist
>can't compete with a capitalist adversary
>can't stand against foreign influence unlike every other country out there
>think that means that your system is still valid
>blame everyone else when you fail
Why are leftists so childish?

>We must crush capitalism!!!
>Please, stop hitting me mr porky, I'll be good, I promise i_i

The absolute state of commies

Is that the Geography Now dude on the left?

And the French republic ended up killing thousands and collapsing, "it collapsed" isn't a valid argument.

>If it failed it wasn't actually socialism

>Ctrl+F "Allende", "Chile"
>0 results
If y'all niggas wanna just ignore how the US goverment literally overthrew a democratically elected socialist president and replaced him with a megalomaniac drunkard then go ahead. There is more than enough evidence to prove that the US has done everything in its power to fuck over any socialist regime every single time it's been attempted from 1945 onwards.

lmao. It was never a socialist state to begin with. Enjoy having your hard work exploited by fat men.

Buckle up son, you're in for one helluva history lesson:

youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0

You cannot even deny that the country had a poorly diversified economy and a corrupt ass government that was using its massive public sector to bribe its citizenry without any regards to keeping production efficient and management competent.

So socialism is pathetically weak and vulnerable?

Late stage capitalism is never going to happen though. It's got nothing more backing it up than a prediction than some ancient prophecy.

That is socialism, though. Real socialism is like one of those newly discovered elements that can only last for a fraction of a second before collapsing into something else.

You cannot have a government more efficient than the markets, that also isn't too big to sustain itself.

how many modern states can you say have collapsed?

>american time Veeky Forums
It's true what they say, marxism is dead everywhere but american universities

funny thing is, its only millennials. the other generations want no part in this shit. imagine being so toxic, that the very next generation is the complete opposite of yours, not even boomers were that bad

>implying that socialist countries are remotely powerful or influential enough to demolish anything

What is your definition of modern?

*stages a revolution in the most populous state in Europe*
*physically invades much of eastern Europe right afterwards and fails at the gates of Warsaw*
*annexes independent Baltic states*
*invades Finland*
*defeats a German invasions*
*enslaves eastern Europe*
*funds communists for the next 5 decades across the world*
*collapses in on itself*
*blames capitalism*

Socialism can't survive with a global economy. They import all their food and export all their resources. Now look where they are.

Same guy. I'll bring up the list of states that have collapsed. I just want to know the cutoff date. I'd say Wiemar Republic is good for cutting off modern, but that's kind of last century.

Current century, there haven't really been any national failures yet, like a state has to be partitioned for some reason. Most have just been regime changes, because in a democracy, it isn't the state that failed, its the people running the state. I can list the failed governments, but I can't list failed states, because it isn't like they've been annexed, or the people all left. Hence, these places that are absolutely backwards keep existing.

I have a list of states that probably won't exist in the future, but it is more popular for a state to be created at this point in time, for example Catalonia.

This is even when said state has no way of supporting itself, for example South Sudan.

To be honest, it has been quite a good time for the lifespan of nations. I can't find any nations that have died in the 21st century. To be fair, it has only been 17 years, so I can't say it is a new trend. Also, the methods of dealing with a failed state have changed. Before, it would have been partitioned. Now, we just elect a new leader.

Oh, and the things that causes the most nation death, wars of conquest, have not really happened yet. Even when they have, they only took pieces of land (Russia). Finally, there are no nations that really want unification. Maybe Belarus and Russia, but that's probably just a meme. The only case I can see this happening is with ISIS proclaiming its nationhood in the event of a victory, leading to failed Iraq and Syria. I doubt this will happen though.

>only good thing in this entire thread
>literally no responses

Fuck I hate Veeky Forums

there has never been and never will be a socialist country.

Socialism suceeded in the sense that notions of wealth re-distribution and state intervention have permeated all systems and nations. Even the US.

But socialism as a way of running countries has failed, because of incoherences inhent to planned economies.
No doubt US put all their might to cruch socialism, but USSR did just the same, with just as much might (at least for a few decades), yet no free market economy collapsed into lawless socialism later to be dismantled to instaure state socialism. The opposite is more or less what happens to every socialist country. (judgng by your comment, you seem subtle enough to not focus on the word socialism. France had many socialist presidents, up to the last one, but is definitively not a socialist country., and right now it's Last of the Mohicans for the french socialist party. Macron pummeled them so bad they may disappear, they are selling their historical HQ, lating off 2/3 of their staff)

Ultimately absolute collectivism/communism/socialismand absolute libertarianism/capitalism have the same goal, concentrating economical and political power.

Coms
>muh greedy business men. Gib production and wealth to party officals for better distribution.

Caps:
>muh lazy bums and useless officials. Gib political power because our capacity to make money proves we know how to run shit.

In both case, it makes for endemic corruption, the first stepping stone in state failure.

>socialist country
>gets btfo by capitalist countries at every turn
>eventually collapse because it can't compete
If your perfect system can't withstand outside aggressive forces, then it's a shit system.

>free
>aren't allowed to run a business
Why are commietards so dumb?

They all collapsed or transitioned to capitalism.

>the absolute state

I came here to laugh at you.

Now go and cry about the big baddie Veeky Forums with your circlejerk friends, retard

And Veeky Forums wonders why we kill commies

God bless boland :DDDDdd

In a post scarsity world it could, but that's hundreds of years in the future.

They only collapsed if more inbreeds like you were allowed to live

ITT: faggots who don't understand the difference between socialism and social democracy
Socialism is basically all workers splitting their enterprise's profits (in this case all revenue not spent on overhead costs) as their pay rather than having wages, supposedly giving them more than what they otherwise would for their work.
It's basically a scheme of taking profit sharing to its extreme.
Social Democracy is all the gibsmedates like single payer healthcare and cash handouts to people who don't work. Socialism is the fairest system there is and (((they))) don't want you knowing what it actually entails cause it means debasing their power.

Inb4

>omg retard

>if I say it’s the jews they will surely follow me, r right

You know it's true. Or I could use the /leftypol/ porky meme instead if that make you feel a bit better.

>implying I don't run 2 dental practices
>implying I am not myself the capitalist, stacking capital
jej

>Europe
>Socialist
Okay, retard.

You don't though, that's why you're on Veeky Forums. Veeky Forums isn't even a mainstream board where you can pretend you're a Trump voter and this is the hot new place for newfags to talk about him.

Why is it that every discussion about socialism is just debating the meaning of socialism?

desu I'm only here because I'm always on /k/ for the WWII threads, then I found you fags.

government doing things

>Socialist country: overly rich faggots are overrated
>American business elite: Oy vey, commies are planning a fucking shoah!

...

>/pol/ is literally more diverse than the retards that think diversity is a virtue
Lmao

You realise we live in neo liberalism not capitalism now, and also communists and communist countries sabotage it

>source: Fox News

>2017
>not subscribing to Juche ideals
Smh

>Implying Socialism = Communism
W E W L A D

nordic countries achieved socialism through extremely advanced capitalism and they are the best countries to live in

special hats off to denmark and finland for not having large amount of exploitable resources through their history

>Neo Liberalism and capitalism are mutually exclusive
What?

>Europe
>Socialist
What