this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
742 points (85.0% liked)

Comics

5984 readers
222 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine 🇵🇸 . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Filthmontane@lemmy.world 24 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Russia devolved into capitalism. Funding a military is incredibly expensive and necessary when a communist country wants to exist in a world with the United States. This creates a militant economy that must be centrally governed to coordinate this military might. True democratic socialism is impossible as long as the United States exists as an imperialist force.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (5 children)

True democratic socialism is impossible as long as the United States exists as an imperialist force.

1, That's silly, there's tons of democratic socialist countries that are doing just fine - today! Bolivia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand - think the US fucks with their way of governing?

2, the USSR was never a type of democratic socialism. Period. They literally called it 'soviet democracy' distinctly, and it meant something WILDLY different that the kinds of democratic socialism we see in the above listed countries.

Your premise is faulty, built upon an imagined soviet union that did not practice the tenants you're endorsing.

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

1, That’s silly, there’s tons of democratic socialist countries that are doing just fine - today! Bolivia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand - think the US fucks with their way of governing?

All of these countries are free market economies, though. If you classify a country that has public programs as socialist, then USA is a socialist country.

Also, just as a detail, Switzerland is probably one of the most capitalistic countries in the world. They have nearly a flat tax rate, very small amounts of corporate / capital gains taxation and a health care system that is nearly privatized. And it's all working pretty damned well for them.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Canada

Ok, how did Canada managed to get on this list? And Switszerland?

They literally called it 'soviet democracy'

Parlamentary democracy is real thing. Usually it is called parlamentary republic. Nothing special, most of Europe works this way.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

soviet democracy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_democracy

Parlamentary democracy is real thing.

yeah, it is, and it's not what the soviets were doing.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

yeah, it is, and it's not what the soviets were doing.

Even article you linked says it was parlament with delegates.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

few parliaments are made out of soviets - worker delegations - lol.

but if you'd actually read the article I linked you'd have seen:

In contrast to earlier democratic models à la John Locke and Montesquieu, no separation of powers exists in soviet democracy.

show me where that's a thing. no, actually, don't bother.

you're too stupid to continue engaging, I'm not going to enlighten you, and you aren't going to bullshit me any further.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago

In contrast to earlier democratic models à la John Locke and Montesquieu, no separation of powers exists in soviet democracy.

And I'm didn't say parlament should be strictly legislative body.

I don't think they are socialist democracy but social democracy. There is a distinction. I don't think any country is a socialist country in morden history. There where some movement that were trying to be socialist but it either fell into dictatorship (USSR, North Korea, etc)or it was squashed by USA(Chile, and other central/ south american countries). The most successful one was that of Chile, until US backed coup overthrew the democratically elected government in favour of dictatorship.

[–] Filthmontane@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

None of those are socialist countries. They're all capitalist

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I guess you can stick your head into the ground and pretend democratic socialism isn't a thing.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/top-15-democratic-socialist-countries-181857008.html

it's stupid, but stupidity is always an option.

Of course, if you just toss these countries' accomplishments away, you're really just undermining the entire premise, because without these successes the record of 'socialism' gets a whole fucking lot worse.

lol

[–] Filthmontane@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're citing a capitalist finance website to prove your point about socialism. You seem to be confused between social democracy and democratic socialism. I understand because they seem so similar that they must be basically the same thing, right? Nope.

The Nordic model is a form of social democracy. They take many of the benefits that socialism provides and builds them into a capitalist economy. Democratic socialism is an actual form of a worker owned an operated economy.

If you're ever in doubt, ask the question, "who owns the means of production?" If the answer is huge megacorporations and wealthy billionaires, then it's a capitalist economy. If the answer is the working class, it's socialist.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

if you just toss these countries’ accomplishments away, you’re really just undermining the entire premise, because without these successes the record of ‘socialism’ gets a whole fucking lot worse.

Ok, then.

[–] SurpriZe@lemm.ee -1 points 3 months ago

What makes it require capitalism suddenly?

[–] uis@lemm.ee -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

True democratic socialism is impossible as long as the United States exists as an imperialist force.

Not sure how to explain, but I don't think so.

[–] Filthmontane@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

The US has destroyed every socialist country in history that didn't have a strong enough military to fight them off