Current Events > Probably a good and simple answer to this, since im not educated, but:cap vs soc

(+) Yeah! (+)

This is blabla
-------------------------------
I am on the "socialist side" ... probably a little on sjw on the side, though i seem to disagree with a lot, of it ... like most of what libertarians says kinda appeal to me. Not in the US, so its hard to measure. Few americans can relate, when the right is left for you :P

Ive been pondering this a little, so im open to broaden my mind, since i cant really understand this myself:

"Captialism" or whatever its called seems to be the most natural way for one human being to trade with another human being. The larger the society grows, the less its about the induvidual, but more about the society, right? My premise might be wrong, so feel free to destroy my argument whenever im really wrong :)

I have no education in these sorts of subjects, so its more about my intuition... like its with most? But here it goes:

My biggest problem with not having a strong government is that... business doesnt seem to be able to regulate themselves when it might hurt "it".
For example: Lets imagine climate change is real - the next quarter is more important than the safety of everyone else? If its not real, should everyone accept its not? (Should cheaper lead painted toys from China be allowed to be on the market?)

------ jump further down if my thoughts are worthless -----

Here is what i wonder about, and the premise (from before) might be faulty. In countries where kings and queens are no more: How come socialism/communism gets foothold? I think theres a difference between those two terms, but some do not.

Im totally open about me being on "sjw" side and i will probably have a hard time connecting with someone who thinks business is more important than people, even though ... smart-phone... computer... internet etc
And its not like im against rich people - its more about... i kinda think they should have more responsibilityt when they bribe for votes
-------------------------------------------------------

In short: If capitalism/libertarianism is the answer, how come communism (or whatever?) is a threat? Shouldnt enough people be taken care of for that to arise at all? Its like we look at the execution, but not the crime?

I really dont get it... It feels backwards to me, even though ive grown more "conservative" the last couple of years

My thoughts. Feel free to educate me ^_^
---

To the best of my knowledge

The idea is that once capitalism "overstays it's welcome", the workers rise up in revolution and after seizing control introduce communism
---

Command economies don't work well. An example of this in the real world is North Korea vs South Korea. South Korea is a market (capitalist) economy and North Korea is communistic.

There are different reasons why command economies don't work well, such as the incentivize problem and the coordinate problem. Socialism can work (see Norway), but there's a lot less consumer choices in those economies. Pizza in Norway, for instance, is very expensive. Eating out there in general is.
---

Socialism cannot work except under the threat of violence. And even then it eventually collapses once civil war wipes out the socialists who seized power to begin with.
---

Here's how it really is:

Capitalism is unsustainable when there's a huge pile at the bottom who are left behind.
Socialism is unsustainable without a robust market economy to feed it.

Your answer is somewhere in the middle, and fighting over exactly where that middle should be is a good indicator of a working society.

Alkeez posted...

im not educated

Alkeez posted...

I am on the "socialist side"

you don't say
---

Aleph, he sounds like he's trying to learn. Why you gotta hit somebody when they're down?
---

Alkeez posted...

I am on the "socialist side"

Alkeez posted...

most of what libertarians says kinda appeal to me.

This doesn't make sense. Libertarians want small, limited government. Socialists want an all-powerful government that controls every aspect of people's lives.
---

Manocheese posted...

This doesn't make sense. Libertarians want small, limited government. Socialists want an all-powerful government that controls every aspect of people's lives.

That's not what socialists want. In fact, the first people to call themselves libertarians were socialists, and the left today is against much of what our governments do.
---

The larger the society grows, the less its about the induvidual, but more about the society, right?

No.
---

Antifar posted...

Manocheese posted...

This doesn't make sense. Libertarians want small, limited government. Socialists want an all-powerful government that controls every aspect of people's lives.

That's not what socialists want.

Of course not. They would rather their employers just give them everything they've worked their entire lives for willingly, but because that's not how it works the next best thing is to ask for Daddy Government's assistance in redistributing wealth.
---

Alkeez posted...

"Captialism" or whatever its called seems to be the most natural way for one human being to trade with another human being. The larger the society grows, the less its about the induvidual, but more about the society, right? My premise might be wrong, so feel free to destroy my argument whenever im really wrong :)

trade existed long before capitalism, and it will continue to exist after capitalism falls.

and referring to the current societal structure as "natural" assumes that human nature is static (it isn't) and that all human civilization has been structured the same way (it hasn't)

so yes, your premise is wrong.
---