Please say something which contributes to the discussion.
1 Like
Hey: Piketty, doofus.
Read up on the most important work of economics of our time, then get back to us when youâre actually informed.
R>G.
9 Likes
So most countries in Europe? Or rather, most countries⌠period. Are you talking about democratic socialism (i.e. Sanders socialism) or Marxian socialism? Because the latter has never existed in the wild, though attempts to force it have. Democratic socialism is already integrated into the fabric of most (actually, I believe itâs all) Western democracies. The only issue is the extent to which it is integrated.
26 Likes
People are always looking at the USSR and China and saying, âThatâs the failure of communism,â without considering how well non-communist murderous kleptocracies fare. It turns out when you oppress your citizens and kill them on a massive scale so they wonât argue when you take all of their wealth for yourself things donât work out great. It also turns out that many violent revolutions replace one oppressor with another. For some reason we pretend that isnât what happened in communist nations, that communism is what happened.
17 Likes
Bernie Sanders on socialism:
âTwenty years ago, when people here thought about socialism they were thinking about the Soviet Union, about Albania. Now they think about Scandinavia. In Vermont people understand Iâm talking about democratic socialism.â
And:
In terms of socialism, I think there is a lot to be learned from Scandinavia and from some of the work, very good work that people have done in Europe. In countries like Finland, Norway, Denmark, poverty has almost been eliminated. All people have health care as a right of citizenship. College education is available to all people, regardless of income, virtually free. I have been very aggressive in trying to move to sustainable energy. They have a lot of political participation, high voter turnouts. I think there is a lot to be learned from countries that have created more egalitarian societies than has the United States of America.â
Okla Elliot writes in The Hill:
The Sanders brand of democratic socialism is not Latin American-style socialism where businesses and utilities are seized and nationalized. It is also not Chinese or Soviet-style communism where much of the economy is centrally controlled and the rights of individuals are trampled under the heavy boot of government. To see the difference between communism and social democracy, we need look no further than one of the major theorists and architects of the Russian revolution, Leon Trotsky, who was such a vehement opponent of social democrats in Western Europe that he blamed them for saving capitalism and preventing communist revolutions in places like Germany and France.
To equate democratic socialism or social democracy with revolutionary communism is therefore both definitionally and historically inaccurate. The closest models are ones Sanders regularly cites â countries such as Canada, Denmark, England, and Germany.
So now, Gerard, if youâd like to explain how Finland, Norway, Denmark, Canada, England and Germany have failed, please go ahead.
19 Likes
I say he doesnât have to until you go read some frigginâ history, n00b. Come back when you can tell the difference between communism and social democracy.
11 Likes
It turns out when you oppress your citizens and kill them on a massive scale so they wonât argue when you take all of their wealth for yourself things donât work out great. It also turns out that many violent revolutions replace one oppressor with another. For some reason we pretend that isnât what happened in communist nations, that communism is what happened.
Valid, but incomplete. Letâs not leave out the massive factor of capitalist resistance to, undercutting and overthrowing of efforts towards communism.
13 Likes
They (England in particular) have failed to the extent that theyâve allowed the scumbag plutocracy to pillage the commons.
13 Likes
Whew! FTFY ⌠again! Youâre welcome. 
And @kimmo, @milliefink and @crashproof ⌠everyone, actually ⌠weâre trying to engage with the issues youâre trying to discuss.
Read Piketty ⌠Sheri Berman.
Or maybe ask some questions?
Youâre among friends here. Thereâs no need to come on so strong.
14 Likes
Welfare âreformâ + trade agreements + Reaganomics + evangelical intolerance + time = unregulated capitalism + cultural misrecognition = 
Did I get it right, @tropo?
9 Likes
The record for capitalism is not good. Pretty much all the progress weâve made in equality and democracy doesnât come from the monied elite, but from below. While some of those have been small business owners, they are often going with the tide of social unrest for more equality because itâs a financial benefit. The opposite was often also true, where some small business owners fought against things like integration, even when it would have been an economic boon for them.
Go read the chapter on civil rights and consumerism by Lizabeth Cohen, no pro-socialist by any stretch of the imagination:
Then go read up on the unleashed id of neo-liberalism via Naomi Klein to get a sense of how lives were destroyed in the wake of the fall of the soviet union:
http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
Both capitalist and communist countries during the Cold War did some shitty things that destroyed lives. To not understand that, is to dismiss actual history altogether. Youâre the only one here making it about capitalism vs. communism. The real struggle has always been the people vs. large-scale institutions, run by people out for their own interests. Thatâs history.
26 Likes
12 Likes
I wonder how often historians are told they donât understand history by economists.
21 Likes
Youâre among friends here. Thereâs no need to come on so strong.
Why Iâm happy to stay out let yâall take this dorkâs yammering. Later after happy hour, the story might turn a bit.
5 Likes
Sorry about that. I was more interested in the idea posited that you might actually be some sort of advanced AI. Since you are human, and the Free Market drivel you espouse isnât really my cup of tea, Iâll just bow out of the conversation at this point.
4 Likes
Clinton is going to win the popular vote (partly helped because sheâs won primaries and lost caucuses) and probably the pledged delegates - but looking at the trajectory of who is the more popular candidate nationally, she could easily be behind Sanders in terms of who people prefer by the time of the convention.
She might not be, too - but if she is - what then?
The people will have had their say, but what if theyâve changed their minds during a long primary season? Might be that Clinton benefitted from Sandersâ relatively low profile at the start of the campaign and her smart move to encourage early voting.
4 Likes
This seems relevant:
They Donât Just Hide Their Money. Economist Says Most of Billionaire Wealth is Unearned.
7 Likes
Itâs happening somewhere RIGHT NOW I promise!
11 Likes
Itâs probably at about the same rate that everyone is told they donât understanding anything by engineers!
13 Likes
