you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 4 days ago* (1 child)

i’ll never understand this take. Socialism doesn’t work because of corruption and greediness so the best thing we can do is capitalism, which literally is based on corruption and greediness.

Ah, but I didn't say that. I said communism didn't work. I do think socialism works. Communism is just one form of socialism.

Indeed capitalism is a form of greed, that's also bad (way worse) and I'm against it. I'm all for socialism, just not communism the way we know it. Maybe communism 2.0 which would have to be made with protection against corruption and bad leaders. So far both capitalism and communism have (had) corruption and bad leaders.

I myself am an anarchist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 4 days ago

    Ah i see then we were talking about different things. When i think of communism, i think of Karl Marx's definition. A stateless, moneyless, classless society. According to him, socialism is the transition phase between capitalism and socialism and if socialism is implemented correctly, the concepts of class, state and money just vanish over time. As far as i understand it, anarchists and communists completely agree about the end goal there.

    That's why i purposely talked about socialism, not communism. Those former projects were socialist projects as well (or at least tried to be that, however you wanna see that).

    I think this newer definition of communism vs. socialism largely stems from red scare anti communist propaganda and politicians with progressive agendas that try to distance themselves from those failed socialist experiments due to said propaganda. After all proudly proclaiming yourself to be a communist completely disqualifies you from any kind of political career. I would assume the label "anarchist" would have a similar affect 😅 . Even saying you are a "socialist" is still difficult. That's why the term "democratic socialist" emerged. I think that term is completely redundant. Socialism cannot be socialism if it is not democratic.

    About communism 2.0 and protections against bad leaders. Supposedly that is what china is doing with their concept of promotions in the party purely based on how well they do on different objective metrics. If that is actually what is happening there, i don't know. At least in theory that seems better than being able to get into a position you are wildly unqualified for purely based on populism.

  • source
  • parent