Search Results
7/26/2025, 4:50:58 AM
>>17870406
>You don't have to have Marxist ideology or a goal to create an ill-defined "communist society" to have a socialist command economy.
Well, sure. The command economies were based at least in part on World War I war economies. They looked at that as a potential model for socializing production, and there are points of contact with Marx who wanted to do that, but Marx wasn't an economic planner.
>Prove that it will never work well.
Can't prove a negative.
>Sure, living under it sucks if you're starving and getting shot en masse. Does it suck if you live in austerity? You live in Soviet Russia at it's peak.
They accomplished certain things, industrialization. But it ran on scarcity. Do you remember during COVID when certain items like toilet paper would run out, and you'd have to know people if you didn't have any, and you wanted some? It was like that in Soviet Russia for virtually everything all the time. If you saw a line, you got in line and then asked "what are they giving," because whatever it was, it was probably not going to be available again for awhile. That was the reality. Let alone living in communal apartments where there were 9 or 10 families sharing a single bathroom and kitchen.
>What's wrong? You want cake and a comfy couch?
That's be nice. But the main problem is that when the state took charge of people's economic lives, the idea that it would have no need to interfere in other aspects of people's lives proved to false. These were states that dictated what people were supposed to think. It also created an ideology for them, and tried to govern people's emotional lives as well as setting up a code of conduct, and as far as possible tried to isolate them from the outside world. It was like being shut up in an artificial world. So when people who traveled abroad (and there weren't very many) came back and said, hey, in those other countries, you can go into a store and buy whatever you want, people didn't really believe that -- at first.
>You don't have to have Marxist ideology or a goal to create an ill-defined "communist society" to have a socialist command economy.
Well, sure. The command economies were based at least in part on World War I war economies. They looked at that as a potential model for socializing production, and there are points of contact with Marx who wanted to do that, but Marx wasn't an economic planner.
>Prove that it will never work well.
Can't prove a negative.
>Sure, living under it sucks if you're starving and getting shot en masse. Does it suck if you live in austerity? You live in Soviet Russia at it's peak.
They accomplished certain things, industrialization. But it ran on scarcity. Do you remember during COVID when certain items like toilet paper would run out, and you'd have to know people if you didn't have any, and you wanted some? It was like that in Soviet Russia for virtually everything all the time. If you saw a line, you got in line and then asked "what are they giving," because whatever it was, it was probably not going to be available again for awhile. That was the reality. Let alone living in communal apartments where there were 9 or 10 families sharing a single bathroom and kitchen.
>What's wrong? You want cake and a comfy couch?
That's be nice. But the main problem is that when the state took charge of people's economic lives, the idea that it would have no need to interfere in other aspects of people's lives proved to false. These were states that dictated what people were supposed to think. It also created an ideology for them, and tried to govern people's emotional lives as well as setting up a code of conduct, and as far as possible tried to isolate them from the outside world. It was like being shut up in an artificial world. So when people who traveled abroad (and there weren't very many) came back and said, hey, in those other countries, you can go into a store and buy whatever you want, people didn't really believe that -- at first.
Page 1