|
Ok, fair. I came off as a bit objectivist and I didn't mean to. I was trying to make the point that with a lack of reward structure, people aren't going to be willing to take on difficult tasks if an easier task will provide them with equivalent reward, which is what we're seeing amongst the academics at York university. I think in order to have a functioning society, there needs to be a reward structure that recognizes the exceptionalism of certain individuals, and without that, you'll see a degradation of work ethic. berenzen fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jun 26, 2018 |
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 07:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
nah gently caress that, string up all CEOs
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 07:44
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Ok, fair. I came off as a bit objectivist and I didn't mean to. I was trying to make the point that with a lack of reward structure, people aren't going to be willing to take on difficult tasks if an easier task will provide them with equivalent reward, which is what we're seeing amongst the academics at York university. Money and the accumulation of consumer goods are not the only reward you can earn by doing good works; it's only our rotting capitalist consumer culture that makes it seem that way. History is filled with creatives from art to science that created simply for the joy of it, others for status or for fame or innumerable other reasons. Once people reach a certain standard of living, most people would rather have more time to devote to their own hobbies, studies, and families than slave away at their soul-crushing day job for extra cash. Of course, capitalism is structured around the idea that wealth is and should be the primary incentive for human achievement and then has the nerve to claim that this is human nature, when in fact it's anything but. PhilippAchtel fucked around with this message at 07:52 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
I love how someone non ironically posted that anarchy is the solution to the inherent problems in the prison and or capitalism system. Appreciate the lols
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 09:14
|
|
|
PhilippAchtel posted:Money and the accumulation of consumer goods are not the only reward you can earn by doing good works; it's only our rotting capitalist consumer culture that makes it seem that way. I'm not saying that it it needs to be capital. Perhaps more vacation time, or- continuing the university example- less time spent teaching dumbass first and second year university students and more time spent to research, but reward structures in some form need to exist. When they don't, humans have a tendency to not push themselves to their limit, as can be seen in multiple case studies, both within political systems as well as business systems. Capitalism sucks because it makes the primary motivator wealth and perpetrates the wea, when it's been shown that wealth has diminishing returns. But communism sucks because it rips away all reward systems and provides nothing to replace it, and when a reward system inevitably builds itself up, it ends up being even more nepotistic than capitalist reward systems as it becomes incredibly secretive and clique-y. Communism is an idealist fantasy that can't actually work, because it doesn't take into account human psychology, and portrays an idyllic world where everybody helps for the common good. Except people loving suck, and are selfish assholes for the most part, so telling a somebody to go through more training and hold themselves to a level of excellence, but receive nothing more than the person that doesn't have to do that? That doesn't end up working out too well. berenzen fucked around with this message at 09:27 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 09:20
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Sure, but every motivating factor for humans inevitably ruins communism. It's really loving hard to get people to be motivated when they don't recieve a level of prestige. I'm going to bring up York university here, because the topic came up when I was talking about the strike there with my father (a University of Alberta professor), and his point of view was pretty enlightening on what members of the academic community feel about that particular university. This isn't a disparagement against unions, or the legitimacy of their strike. More of a critique of that particular union's policies themselves, and how it's hurt the overall education and prestige of that university over a long period of time. You don't understand the causes of the York University strike or the motivation of academics in general. Just a basic point, you do realize it's not the professor's union striking? It's the contract faculty + grad students trying to push pack against the explosive growth of non-tenured teaching positions in academia (and the attendant loss of job security). If anything York is notable only because the union is trying to push back on a process that's proceeded more or less unchecked everywhere else in North American academia. Regarding York's research output, York is in the same boat as every mid-tier non-Ivy league US college, in that it's really hard to climb up the rankings. People+researchers+donors tend to follow prestige, and this is a self-reinforcing cycle. York just happens to be in the same city as one of Canada's main research universities. To the university's credit it hasn't tried building a pointless football arena in the cargo-cult method of simulating growth popular in the US. Also good job proposing metrics and a reward scheme that will ramp up salami publishing to 11, as if it weren't bad enough. Just great ideas here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 10:05
|
|
|
Salami publishing is problematic, but that's why-at least at the UofA- papers published in poorly credited jounals are held in relatively low regard, if not outright discarded in terms of pay raises based in merit. But if someone's lab is publishing 10-20 mid-high quality papers, that lab and the professor in charge, deserve greater recognition than someone that's putting out a tenth of that effort. Yes, big labs will put out more papers a year- they'll have greater manpower to diversify research and produce papers, but they also require much more effort to run. I do know that it's not the professor's union striking, and I don't begrudge the non-tenured professors/grad-students striking. The issues that that particular group face is enormous, and I don't know if it's going to be something that would be cleanly resolved, even if YU was willing to negotiate. But York University is also being stripped of it's tools to entice talent by it's professor's union. It won't ever be a top-tier university, but the level in quality of research ouput by YU has been falling, even by standards of mid-tier universities in the area. Discounting UofT; UGuelph and Mcmaster are both in the GTA and offer far better levels of education and academic prospects than York University does now. berenzen fucked around with this message at 10:39 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
berenzen posted:But York University is also being stripped of it's tools to entice talent by it's professor's union. Now multiply that by 10 and you've got the federal government. quote:Under the Public Service Employment Act, Mr. Wernick said, public servants can be terminated only with “legal test of cause,” which is a “long, arduous, grueling” process. He said he would leave it to parliamentarians to propose changes to the act, but noted the importance of putting safeguards in place. So if you really want communism in your life, study hard learn french and get a union job as a federal public servant.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 13:15
|
|
|
Remember that U of O hockey player scandal where a woman accused a few of them of sexually assaulting her in a hotel room, the whole team was disbanded and all that? Well they were just found not guilty and you'll never guess why, unless perhaps you remember another recent high-profile sexual assault trialquote:[Judge Chantal] Brochu said in her judgment that she doubted the complainant's credibility, in part because several times in the woman's testimony she denied talking to or texting Donovan's roommate about the incident after the police investigation began.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 13:20
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Communism is an idealist fantasy that can't actually work, because it doesn't take into account human psychology, and portrays an idyllic world where everybody helps for the common good. Except people loving suck, and are selfish assholes for the most part, so telling a somebody to go through more training and hold themselves to a level of excellence, but receive nothing more than the person that doesn't have to do that? That doesn't end up working out too well. Who told you that everyone receives the same pay in a communist society? Because its dumb and if you are basing your overall opinion on that its very flawed. There is no reason to believe that those who choose to train themselves to provide even more to those around them wouldn't receive compensation/prestige for their skills and time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
berenzen posted:I'm not saying that it it needs to be capital. Perhaps more vacation time, or- continuing the university example- less time spent teaching dumbass first and second year university students and more time spent to research, but reward structures in some form need to exist. When they don't, humans have a tendency to not push themselves to their limit, as can be seen in multiple case studies, both within political systems as well as business systems. Capitalism sucks because it makes the primary motivator wealth and perpetrates the wea, when it's been shown that wealth has diminishing returns. But communism sucks because it rips away all reward systems and provides nothing to replace it, and when a reward system inevitably builds itself up, it ends up being even more nepotistic than capitalist reward systems as it becomes incredibly secretive and clique-y. My assertion is that the thing that stimulates creative impulses in people is not the economic incentive structure at all. Once guaranteed a certain level of economic security - and in many cases even despite its absence - creative people will create. Bonuses do not turn an uncreative person into a creative one, nor do lack of bonuses extinguish the creative impulse. Granted, even in academia, the vast majority of faculty will not push forward the boundaries of human knowledge or expression. They will, at best, perform some work at the margins, verifying this experimental result or writing a commentary of that 19th century luminary, and this is fine. They do the small work that laborers across the economy do to keep the lights running, and we shouldn't disrespect them even if they never contribute mightily to human progress. Just as in other contexts, these workers deserve security and certain standard of living and bargain collectively to gain it. Is your assertion that Jonas Salk would not have put in the intense work to develop the polio vaccine without the prospect of material reward? Charles Darwin would not have developed his biological theories? Vincent Van Gogh would not have painted his masterpieces? Because history belies your assertion. These men and others created despite even realizing the true value of their creations in economic terms. One - like so many others in history - died almost completely unrecognized in his lifetime. You have it exactly backwards. It's not the prospect of material gain that spurs people towards great works; it's the economic security of an upper-middle class background that provides the soil in which creation can occur. Time and time again, the great artists and thinkers had family or friends or government act as patrons that liberated them from day-to-day economic anxieties and let them focus on their work. How many geniuses have been lost to the meat grinder that is our economic system of production by threat of starvation? Guarantee a level of security and you'll see creatives sprout, as if by magic, like seeds from well-tilled soil. Now, as for your well-worn criticism of communism as incapable of cultivating innovation, wouldn't you say the post-war period of Soviet science completely demolishes your point? The bureaucracy and paranoia and political careerism of the Cold-War Soviet system were their own obstacles, but to claim that the nation that produced Sputnik and the first manned space mission - a nation which, it has to be added every time this comparison is made, was a complete economic backwater in the 19th century - was ideologically incapable of producing good science is just beyond absurd. PhilippAchtel fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 13:47
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Communism is an idealist fantasy that can't actually work, because it doesn't take into account human psychology, and portrays an idyllic world where everybody helps for the common good. Except people loving suck, and are selfish assholes for the most part, so telling a somebody to go through more training and hold themselves to a level of excellence, but receive nothing more than the person that doesn't have to do that? That doesn't end up working out too well. Is there a reason that you believe human psychology is independent from the structure of the society we live in? Like human psychology is some sort of force of nature independent from the things we are taught as children, bombarded with in the media, and rewarded for in our careers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
I’d like to ask the thread a personal question. How many of you were financially secure or at least clearing an income above 60k when you got serious with your long term partners? I have a friend who tells me I can’t get a relationship because I haven’t financially elevated myself to provide the impression of safety, security, frills and thrills. With all this talk about economics and personal motivation I’d love to hear examples of how it’s impacted your personal lives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:20
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:I’d like to ask the thread a personal question. Considering that the median wage in the country is around 30k, that would disqualify half the working population from marriage. Your friend is a moron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
^Yeah, also, 30K in Ottawa isn't 30K in Chibougamou or wherever. The better question is "Can this person support themselves entirely without my help?"Kraftwerk posted:How many of you were financially secure or at least clearing an income above 60k when you got serious with your long term partners? My wife's the first person I dated who had a salaried job. I'd still have gotten serious with her because I like her a lot, but the fact that she had advanced degrees and a career was definitely a selling point. In previous relationships I'd had my concerns about whether I'd have to support my other half when our needs exceeded our means. Being really old in a provincially-run care home is a loving terrifying prospect. So is coming to resent the person you cared about because of the burden they've become in your life. Seeing that situation play out for family members and other folks in your life is a multiplier for that fear, and yeah absolutely it's led me to end relationships for lovely reasons I'm still ashamed of years after the fact. When it comes down to it though, dating ain't married and if you're already seeing situations that'll make you want out, just get out for the sake of your future selves. Back when I was selling computers and slinging bodies, I wouldn't have dated me either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Dukemont posted:Considering that the median wage in the country is around 30k, that would disqualify half the working population from marriage. Yes but I live in the GTA where I pay exhorbitant rents and am cost burdened. My experience has been that while there’s an abundance of awesome, beautiful single women here that there’s also an abundance of well off dudes who can afford to dress stylishly and splurge on bottles at Cabana on weekends and invest in 100/day diets to get ripped. So they are the entire package. Good looking, well off, successful and cool. So it makes it difficult to compete when half to 3/4ths of your salary are sunk into living expenses while you work 40hrs per week and can’t afford to take a vacation abroad. I have a unique situation in that I managed to secure a 6 figure inheritance which I spent a small fraction of to get a new Jetta because my 20 year old Camry died. I refuse to touch any of the rest of that money unless I can find a way to invest it into raising my income or securing myself so I don’t have to constantly struggle with cash flow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
I agree it's a dumb argument. I was in a happy and fulfilling long-term relationship while we were both starving grad students living under the LICO without external financial support (besides meager scholarships and student loans). There's more to life and happiness than the accumulation of wealth. My current partner and I have decided to greatly downsize and live a simpler life. We couldn't be happier. We don't need a big house, a fancy car, a lavish wedding, or numerous status symbols. We spend time together and with the kids. We travel frugally. That's good enough for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
So stop "competing" with conspicuous consumers over the attention of the small subset of women who want to live like they're in a rap video? Living rich ain't being rich.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Accumulation of wealth doesn't have to mean living lavishly. You can accrue wealth for the purpose of having something to give your children (assuming you are not a millennial with a pet-child instead of a real one) and live frugally. You don't get and stay rich splashing cash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:I’d like to ask the thread a personal question. Hmm, you want to know if the ladies don't like you because of your income or just because of you. Probably you bro. I mean, there's a number of variables here but if you're strugging to make rent, you're probably stressed and can't afford or have time to do fun stuff. If you had a good attitude and were over 6', you'd probably do ok at least with partners making less than you are. Maybe try dating a homeless girl and then take to heart that that's how someone making 80k sees dating someone making 30k. Your friend is probably right though, if you can't motivate yourself to get a decent job, how're you gonna motivate yourself to be a good father and husband? no girl is looking to start something long term with a layabout video game weedlord house husband. And you don't need to invest 100/day to get ripped, that's way wrong. Kraftwerk posted:Yes but I live in the GTA where I pay exhorbitant rents and am cost burdened. My experience has been that while there’s an abundance of awesome, beautiful single women here that there’s also an abundance of well off dudes who can afford to dress stylishly and splurge on bottles at Cabana on weekends and invest in 100/day diets to get ripped. So they are the entire package. Good looking, well off, successful and cool. So it makes it difficult to compete when half to 3/4ths of your salary are sunk into living expenses while you work 40hrs per week and can’t afford to take a vacation abroad. I have a unique situation in that I managed to secure a 6 figure inheritance which I spent a small fraction of to get a new Jetta because my 20 year old Camry died. I refuse to touch any of the rest of that money unless I can find a way to invest it into raising my income or securing myself so I don’t have to constantly struggle with cash flow. Literally all this is missing from this being full blown incel talk is calling those guys chads and the girls wendys or something I don't remember the girl one. Take many steps back from this way of thinking. Postess with the Mostest fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:51
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Literally all this is missing from this being full blown incel talk is calling those guys chads and the girls wendys or something I don't remember the girl one. Take many steps back from this way of thinking. It's Staceys And yeah, this is some loving nonsense. There are almost six and a half million people in the GTA, a very large number of whom are not fully ripped and ballin' every weekend and somehow manage to lead reasonably fulfilling lives with less than a six figure family income. You're setting yourself up for some serious disillusionment if your standard for social interaction is the Toronto club scene. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought that was a quote from Reddit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 15:55
|
|
|
I got nothing to do with Incels. I realize how my posts are coming across right now but please understand it’s because I’ve hit a bit of a rut emotionally. I’m 6’4”. I clean up and take care of myself. I don’t look anything like an incel or neck beard. Most people tell me I look good. I do get dates. It’s just things haven’t been working out for a long time and I haven’t been able to determine why. That’s when the narrative you’re seeing started to take shape with certain people in my social circle explaining that it’s money. Not necessarily the money itself but rather how having or not having enough money makes you feel. I work a white collar job you’d never think I was a loser by looking at me. But sometimes I definitely feel like one. I trust me when I tell you that all I want to do is improve my situation and get better. I have no ill will towards anyone. I’ve just been trying to identify areas and means of improvement so my situation changed. When you get to that level of despondency you tend to be easily influenced. So I posted here at risk of looking like a laughing stock because I felt deep down inside there’s something wrong with the income based explanation and there might be a better way to resolve this issue. So please before calling me an incel recognize that I’ve self flagellated and blamed myself for these problems for years and all I want is to fix it and move on to live a happier and more fulfilling life and I’m asking for help. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
More money won’t fix your brain issues my man. You should see a therapist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
You seem to be self selecting examples that will prove your point. Or something. People (both genders) that will care about bottle service at a club will also care about flashy clothes, expensive cars, and baller lifestyles. Gonna pull a number out of my rear end and say that's maybe 20% of people in their twenties and thirties? I dunno, I live in Vancouver, and don't make a ton of money or anything, and for the kind of people I like to date, my income makes approximately zero difference, provided I have enough money to go out for dinner or a drink with them maybe once a week while getting to know them. Accordingly, I've dated people who make less, and people who make way way more, and it's slightly nicer with the rich ones 'cause they sometimes treat me to something nice, but overall, it does make almost no difference. You seem really down on yourself, and I'm not going to make large sweeping assumptions, but I tend to date better when I'm happy and cheerful. If I show up and just start unloading my problems on some poor girl, I doubt she'd stick around. Even if you try not to show it, that poo poo bleeds through. drat that's a lot of words in a really inappropriate thread. tl;dr it's not money, those people telling you it is are garbage incel  robots and  edit: to be clear, I appreciate that you're asking people outside of your bias-confirming social circle, so I'm not calling you the incel
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
Toalpaz posted:Deterrence is a joke, and no one calculates the cost benefit analysis of an action before committing a crime. Well, except for large corporations with actuarial departments.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Fair points thanks everyone. Sorry for the meltdown. I won’t derail the thread any further. I don’t unload my problems on women I date but I do struggle with that “spark” and that bleedthrough is likely a part of the problem. I refuse to become a casualty of self reinforcing group opinions and will challenge my beliefs as much as I can. Kraftwerk fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
Find the money and go to a BJJ school. You get therapy, meditation, the physical and psychological benefits of exercise and a positive atmosphere and probably some cool new friends who don't care how much you make. Forget about dating for a year and work on yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
Don't go to Cabana, go find women elsewhere. I just saved you some cash at from a psych. Open tinder, swipe right
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
CPC: Liberals are bringing too much foreign influence into Canada and selling us out Also CPC: The Liberals are driving away all the foreign money by being progressive! https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1011628057591996417
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:CPC: Liberals are bringing too much foreign influence into Canada and selling us out How many terms has Poilievre been in office again?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
Kraftwerk posted:Yes but I live in the GTA where I pay exhorbitant rents and am cost burdened. My experience has been that while there’s an abundance of awesome, beautiful single women here that there’s also an abundance of well off dudes who can afford to dress stylishly and splurge on bottles at Cabana on weekends and invest in 100/day diets to get ripped. So they are the entire package. Good looking, well off, successful and cool. So it makes it difficult to compete when half to 3/4ths of your salary are sunk into living expenses while you work 40hrs per week and can’t afford to take a vacation abroad. I have a unique situation in that I managed to secure a 6 figure inheritance which I spent a small fraction of to get a new Jetta because my 20 year old Camry died. I refuse to touch any of the rest of that money unless I can find a way to invest it into raising my income or securing myself so I don’t have to constantly struggle with cash flow. Not to nitpick but if you want to be ripped you don't need an expensive meal plan. Eat fewer calories, buy groceries instead of eating out and perform body weight exercises every morning or every night, jog in thr summer, get a cheap YMCA membership or just use the local community centre's free weight room and pool. Poor people gain weight because of mental health issues not because being fit is too expensive. You can lose weight by simply eating less, you can build muscle by exercising regularly and consuming more protein. I suspect your bigger problem is that you sound really unhappy and also like you probably spend too much time working. If you're truly unhappy and actually have some money in the bank then maybe you need to worry less about income for a while and focus more on yourself. Having secure finances should be a pathway to greater happiness, if you're sacrificing the best years of your life and feeling miserable it might be time to change things up. I would also consider whether the women you're most attracted to are maybe it the right match for you. If you spend your free time on something awful but find the girls you desire are out at the club getting bottle service there might be a mismatch between what you want and what actually makes sense. If you want more than dates and hookups the safest way is to find group activities you're passionate about that include the opposite sex. That could be clubbing and dancing but it could also be some kind of campaign, a book club, a volunteer thing, etc Helsing fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Jun 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Find the money and go to a BJJ school. You get therapy, meditation, the physical and psychological benefits of exercise and a positive atmosphere and probably some cool new friends who don't care how much you make. Forget about dating for a year and work on yourself. Good advice but you left our the part where you armbar capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
Reading all the poo poo in the Trump thread makes me depressed because while I hate what the country is doing I still care about it because of basic human empathy. And I hope that they can curtail the evil happening down there before we get sucked into it as well. Are there any good news stories happening up here?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:15
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Reading all the poo poo in the Trump thread makes me depressed because while I hate what the country is doing I still care about it because of basic human empathy. And I hope that they can curtail the evil happening down there before we get sucked into it as well. legal weed 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:18
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Reading all the poo poo in the Trump thread makes me depressed because while I hate what the country is doing I still care about it because of basic human empathy. And I hope that they can curtail the evil happening down there before we get sucked into it as well. Call your mp and ask to end the safe third country agreement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
Just lol if you think that in academia, that publication number and impact has anything to do with effort or ability. Metrics are garbage and they are anathema to good science. Metrics discourage risk-taking, they encourage cargo-culting, they discourage dissemination and sharing of data, they prevent publication or negative data and replication of findings, they create barriers for new researchers, they enrich and empower old researchers, they slow down science in general, they create toxic departmental environments, they stifle collaboration, and just in general they delay and slow scientific progress. The only people who like impact metrics are lazy admins, established bigwigs, and stupid loving boot strap loving grad students who are too dumb to realize they are coasting on their bigwig PI’s name.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:28
|
|
|
On the previous point, its a serious misconception that a core tenet of socialism that "everyone gets paid the same". Rather, the core tenet is democracy extended to the economic sphere. As it stands we might have a fairly functional democracy in the political sphere, but economic life, where people spend half their waking hours, is comprised of a patchwork of dictatorships, hereditary monarchies, and oligarchies. Once economic life is democratized (inshallah), people's pay will as a consequence become much more equal, but people would still be able to make more money for performing work that is more needed, more unpleasant, more dangerous, and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
As it turns out, people's opinions of how socialism actually works in practice have been largely coloured by the self-identifying socialist and communist states which have actually existed. Shocking, really.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 19:27 |
|
|
Shockingly, as it turns out people's opinions of how socialist states work in practice have been coloured far more by ubiquitous anti-socialist propaganda than by how the socialist states of the 20th century actually looked. But the whole idea that there's only one socialism and that it's Russia in 1935 is ridiculous anyway. Even within the old marxist-leninist states there was considerable variation. Russia was different from Yugoslavia was different from Cuba was different from China. If there can be considerable variations in the states formed along the template of "vanguard party takes power and will implement socialism, political democracy is no longer necessary", then a democratic socialist government in a developed country could obviously be very different from and better than any of them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2018 17:55
|
|