you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That sounds like conjecture rather than evidenced fact. Now I'm not gonna claim that communism is undoubtedly better (idk), but history has shown the USSR and China go from poor 3rd world countries with poor quality of life to 1st world superpowers with world-class production and vastly improve quality of life. At the same time, we can find examples of capitalist countries that have poor productivity, innovation, and living quality. So clearly it can be comparable.

This really just seems like the classic thought-terminating cliche of saying people are inherently best motivated by money, which is just demonstrably false. People do tons of unpaid work, even under capitalism, like helping their community or partaking in hobbies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (2 children)

    While I agree with the point you are making I just want to point out that neither the USSR nor China ever were first world countries. That term merely defines a countries' relationship with and position to Nato and the Warsaw pact members and has nothing to do with economic output or the development index. 1st world means being Nato aligned, 2nd world means Warsaw pact/USSR aligned and 3rd world were the unaligned countries. Sweden was technically a third world country in the cold war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments