Socialism or two-tier capitalism?

[Leftfemme22]

Whatever helps you sleep at night mate. Here is my truth, all you've done is staunchly defend capitalism and continue to deny that it causes large scale poverty in the 3rd World.
Half the world’s population etches out a meagre existence. Half of those again are starving. Is it because half the world’s population is under socialist control? Or is it because the most powerful countries on earth keep them impoverished to maintain the standards of living they have become accustomed to. And capitalism facilities this, in fact it requires it so that the status quo prevails?

I will not engage in a debate with some one can’t admit this inalienable truth

[Jolly Red Giant]

...back to arguing history again...what does socialism have to offer now that can't be better offered by market-based social democracies?

outside of the elimination of war, poverty and want - absolutely nothing!

And to think I had dismissed you as a utopian idealist

Funny how socialism (of the Leninist variety you favour) managed to NONE of these things or make significant advances towards them when it was actually implemented...

All of the above problems could be solved NOW. There is more than enough wealth existing on a worldwide basis to eliminate want. The problem is that 90% of the planets wealth is controlled by 10% of the people.

Even Mary Harney now acknowledges that Stalinism has nothing to do with socialism (although the Stalinist planned economy did lead to significant economic advances)

To quote James Connolly:

“Some men faint-hearted ever seek
Our Programme to retouch
And will insist when e’er they speak
That we demand too much.
‘Tis passing strange, yet I declare
Such statements cause me mirth,
For our demands most modest are:
We only want the Earth!”

[Pax]

On the other hand, knowing what we know of real-world 'equal' groups, he has yet to explain how his groups will avoid domination by cliques, or fossilisation into groupthink. Worth reading on the topic is "The Dispossessed" by Ursula LeGuin (fiction - may be out of print).

Yes I have explained it. People work within balanced job complexes and no-one has disproportionately more empowering work than others. Not sure what you mean by groupthink in this context, it's a very 'free' and libertarian vision. Anyway, the greater detail is available in the linked books.

[stringjack]

On the other hand, knowing what we know of real-world 'equal' groups, he has yet to explain how his groups will avoid domination by cliques, or fossilisation into groupthink. Worth reading on the topic is "The Dispossessed" by Ursula LeGuin (fiction - may be out of print).

Yes I have explained it. People work within balanced job complexes and no-one has disproportionately more empowering work than others. Not sure what you mean by groupthink in this context, it's a very 'free' and libertarian vision. Anyway, the greater detail is available in the linked books.

This is why my way is better.

[Pax]

On the other hand, knowing what we know of real-world 'equal' groups, he has yet to explain how his groups will avoid domination by cliques, or fossilisation into groupthink. Worth reading on the topic is "The Dispossessed" by Ursula LeGuin (fiction - may be out of print).

Yes I have explained it. People work within balanced job complexes and no-one has disproportionately more empowering work than others. Not sure what you mean by groupthink in this context, it's a very 'free' and libertarian vision. Anyway, the greater detail is available in the linked books.

This is why my way is better.

[DSCH]

I think we should really thank DSCH for pointing out how reforms are repeatedly dismantled under capitalism. A good reminder on why we must go beyond capitalism if we expect to sustain progress.

It was Liberal democracy that dismantled these “reforms”, not capitalism. The British Labour party has been in power since 97 and hasn’t brought back “the good old days”. Now Blair is nothing if not a narcissist who craves adulation. If there were popularity in the old pre Thatcher modus operandi, it would have been restored by now.

Liberal Democracy with universal suffrage is the road to Capitalism! (with Social Democracy of course).

I also note that DSCH has returned to his earlier thoughts on the lumpenproletariat and the criminal underclass junkies etc. Interesting.

I’m afraid I’ve been over exposed to them at this stage.

And we turn to full circle. Comparing capitalism only to communism, and implicitly assuming 'there are no other alternatives' is the oldest trick in the book. Socialism is not hierarchical command and control, that really should go without saying.

Well it’s hard to compare capitalism, which has absorbed much of the old socialist agenda, with a “system” that has been tested and found to be faultless in Never Never Land. Sounds like the old fantasy of autonomous workers and peasants committees given a coat of gloss to try and make them relevant in the age of IT and consumerism

[stringjack]

This is why my way is better.

You'll have to repeat yourself less often if you explain it properly, from the beginning. I believe we'd gotten as far as indicative prices for bread and wine.

[DSCH]

Liverpool only became a Labour heartland as a result of the work of the left in Liverpool druing the late 1960's and particularly in the 1970's - being consolidated during the Socialist Council of the mid-1980's.

Ah Liverpool city council in the 1980s! The model Trot experiment in municipal govt. Seems the locals had a bit much of Deggsy Hatton et al, and the Lib Dems are now firmly in control.

The only people who propagated the idea that Labour in Britain were unelectable in the 1980's because it was too left-wing, was the Murdoch media and the Tories. It suited their interests to emasculate the LP and Kinnock & co. fell for it hook, line and sinker.

There was the little matter of the national electorate as well.

Question - If the LP needed to dump socialist policies to get elected - how did the Tories win in 1992? By 1992 the left had been dumped out of the party and socialist polices were non-existant.

The memories of the winter of discontent and the Foot interregnum, and the Looney Left were still fresh in the memory. The theology was still in the party bible. It wasn’t until all mention of socialism was ditched that Labour could get elected.

Also why - if the LP are now electable that the LP has slumped to its lowest poll ratings since 1983? It's hardly because the left are once more causing a problem in the LP?

For the labour party to win 3 elections in a row, in a country where the Tories are the natural party of govt was a magnificent achievent. The victories coincided with the purging of militiant tendency and the abandonment of socialism. When Labour went (very) moderate, the tories were exposed as nasty and extreme. Extremism sucks with the electorate.

The people are fed up with Blair et al. The Tories are no longer nasty. The Lib Dems are an option for those who don’t like the other two.

The Radical left are nowhere. Gone Forever

[Pax]

I think we should really thank DSCH for pointing out how reforms are repeatedly dismantled under capitalism. A good reminder on why we must go beyond capitalism if we expect to sustain progress.

It was Liberal democracy that dismantled these “reforms”, not capitalism. The British Labour party has been in power since 97 and hasn’t brought back “the good old days”. Now Blair is nothing if not a narcissist who craves adulation.

Your preoccupation with Britain probably blinds you to the wider point I'm making.

If there were popularity in the old pre Thatcher modus operandi, it would have been restored by now.

Swap Atlee for Thatcher and see how that one works.

Liberal Democracy with universal suffrage is the road to Capitalism! (with Social Democracy of course).

Reality check - after more than a half-century of alternating in and out of power, European social democratic parties have lost sight of the difference between "reformer of" and "apologist for" capitalism.
If modern day capitalism is the end to progress then the Earth is preparing an awakening...

And we turn to full circle. Comparing capitalism only to communism, and implicitly assuming 'there are no other alternatives' is the oldest trick in the book. Socialism is not hierarchical command and control, that really should go without saying.

Well it’s hard to compare capitalism, which has absorbed much of the old socialist agenda, with a “system” that has been tested and found to be faultless in Never Never Land. Sounds like the old fantasy of autonomous workers and peasants committees given a coat of gloss to try and make them relevant in the age of IT and consumerism

More, 'there is no alternative' Ludditery mixed with capitalism's a bit socialist...no really. Perhaps you could fault the model
http://www.zmag.org/books/5.htm instead of cheap jibes?

Of course this from a fan of the 'liberal democratic' form of capitalism since 1979, who tries to temper that with the from of 'social democracy' espoused by Blair. Old Trevelyan really would be proud of your 'end of history' meme!

[Pax]

This is why my way is better.

You'll have to repeat yourself less often if you explain it properly, from the beginning. I believe we'd gotten as far as indicative prices for bread and wine.

You were looking for a simplified model and after informing you of the full institutions in a previous post I posted it here. Please map any bread and wine on it you like.