Pup Biru

i don’t disagree, but i’d say that humans are, and will be responsible regardless of the system used

we’re living in the most peaceful time ever, with the highest quality of life… i’m not saying that fully socialist systems wouldn’t produce that, but i am saying compared with most of human history, things really aren’t that bad, and i’m not sure that it’s worth paying in human lives for a radical (and i’m using that world to mean big; not bad) change because the outcome is uncertain

Theoretically and practically. We have evidence for this throughout the last 130 years.

it sure is great that the USSR treated ukraine with respect aye… that holodomor sure is a lark

revolution remains the sole path to end the bloodshed

we are living in the most peaceful time in human history… a world with humans just isn’t going to be a utopia - we aren’t that good

Cuba today has much better LGBTQ rights than anywhere else in the world

but you’ve pulled 1 example out of many, many counter examples

Corporate bullshit and stock markets and whatnot are magnified in impact and scale in Capitalist systems

and authoritarian tendencies are magnified in impact and scale in socialist systems because they are by definition centralised - that’s not to say it’s inevitable, just that anyone living under these systems needs to be hyper aware of those issues and respond accordingly

nothing is perfect

As for “trying to keep things small,” that’s been tried. Trust busting was attempted, protectionism has been attempted, but regardless of will, material processes continue.

i think the closest we have to that is the EU with things like the DMA which is making a dent… with strong regulatory authority that’s resistant to capture, it’s not impossible to regulate these things… the same is true of socialism: you need strong regulatory authorities that are resistant to capture to stop people from abusing the system for the own personal interests

As for Socialism being a necessity, it’s true. It will have various forms, but eventually as production gains in complexity it necessitates public ownership and planning to continue to be efficient.

i think perhaps we should define what we actually mean - i think socialism is necessary in some part to tackle the issues we face (healthcare, housing, something akin to UBI, etc)

but i think no single system is going to be the silver bullet to all our problems: it’s going to take a long and sustained effort over many generations to figure out the right mix of all the systems we have, and it’s absolutely not going to happen in a big bang

theoretically

and now you’re arguing for massive bloodshed and forcing people to live the way you want, in potentially awful living conditions for a lot of people (i certainly, as an LGBT person, would not want to live in any previous or current socialist state) for a long time for theoretical improvement

just a symptom of later stages of Capitalism

i don’t disagree of course, and i wasn’t saying capitalism is the only way; i think capitalism like this is absolute trash as well… i’m simply saying that those qualities are neither intrinsic to, nor exclusively found in socialist systems

You cannot maintain the small stages forever

perhaps, but honestly i don’t think we’ve actually even tried. we jumped straight from feudalism to some form of capitalism to some socialism. we’ve never had a system that tried to keep things small - and i’m not saying we should either necessarily

but these arguments are all reasonably theoretical

Socialism is a necessity

socialism is perhaps part of a solution but dealing in absolutes is rarely ever correct

i don’t disagree, but socialism won’t solve that just by virtue of it being different… global socialism, perhaps but on the country level it’s just not. socialism just aligns local incentives

sure, but the solution then isn’t searxng; it’s whatever it’s aggregating from

the important thing is not socialism: it’s a government that deals with negative externalities

socialism tends to do better at that simply because often it often does better at long-term planning (but that’s not a given either), but capitalism without corporate bullshit, stock markets, etc (ie actual ownership over a business rather than just ownership over a vague thing where you’re only concerned with line goes up not long term business health) has pretty much the same drivers: long term sustainability and this holding others to account for their negative externalities

all of the above listed counties have very solid healthcare and are not entirely socialist. what’s your point?

socialism is not a requirement for being a place that treats people with respect and dignity; nor is it a silver bullet

and you believe a revolution in the US will help the third world?

socialist countries are plenty capable of being exploitative too. a revolution doesn’t change the people - it changes the power structures

the nordic states seem to be doing pretty well at riding a good line, and whilst australia is far from socialist, what we have is working great too

accident? no of course not… but consistency… a big bang “revolution” is the easy way out… it’s so easy to say you’ll fight for what you believe in when you don’t have to see what it’ll entail or what will come out the other side of it but the reality is far more bloody and is absolutely not what you have in your head afterwards

given that it’s an aggregator, you’d want to ensure it aggregates from EU sources i assume, so it’s not a solution to the EU issue

perhaps, or perhaps it could be replaced by something worse. there are no guarantees

revolution is easy to say on the internet but at the end of the day a lot of people die

it’s a long road with a lot more steps but simply “destroying” the notion that democrats are the good guys simply gets you republicans and that’s gotta be the worst way to shift left ever

hopefully people will see through it and it’ll backfire and just reinforce people staying strong

the world is not going back. we waited 4 years last time, sighed with relief, and said “thank fuck that’s enough of that”

… and here we are

the trust is lost; there are no more chances

the “hit em in the fuckin head so they don’t suffer” requirement?

i thought it was just that if the country you’re in taxed you less than what the US would, then you have to pay the difference to the IRS?

… and there’s no way in hell the US taxes less than sweden (and for anyone that hasn’t had an ice pick lobotomy that’s a good thing)

*edit: foreign tax credit