|
|
heisenbug
Tavern Dweller
|
posted February 15, 2005 01:41 PM |
|
|
"All comrades are created equal, but some comrades are more equal than others."
|
|
inabox
Tavern Dweller
Don't you oppress me....
|
|
posted February 15, 2005 02:09 PM |
|
|
|
"You dont have to be mad to post here but it helps"
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 15, 2005 11:24 PM |
|
|
Quote:
"All comrades are created equal, but some comrades are more equal than others."
Oooh, we've read George Orwell, have we? How very impressive... 
Btw, I was reading some stuff in my history book the other day, about the arrangements of economic systems in cpaitalist and "socialist" societies, and something struck me, when I read this:
Quote:
In the other form of society ["socialist" ones] productive capital in principle belongs to the public (...). In these societies the control of capital, or decisions on saving, investment, and production, are also in the hands of relatively few under some kind of central plan.
This struck me as something that should be avoided. But how do one manage a socialist society without a strong sentral authority?
I originally thought about the idea some union people and leftwing politicians planned; that the workers could own their own workplaces. But what guarantee do we have that this won't turn them into profit hungry capitalists? The answer is probably legislation in some form or other, but I'm not too sure...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
heisenbug
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 12:04 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
"All comrades are created equal, but some comrades are more equal than others."
Oooh, we've read George Orwell, have we? How very impressive...
Btw, I was reading some stuff in my history
/yawn/
|snip|
Your easily impressed eh... Stop reading your student history books so much and get out more. Maybe you'll find capitalism works and urmm, that other stuff dont.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 12:30 AM |
|
|
Not to insult you or anything, but would you be so kind and take your not-too-constructive spam somewhere else?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 01:36 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
In the other form of society ["socialist" ones] productive capital in principle belongs to the public (...). In these societies the control of capital, or decisions on saving, investment, and production, are also in the hands of relatively few under some kind of central plan.
This struck me as something that should be avoided. But how do one manage a socialist society without a strong sentral authority?
You hit the spot, comrade terje. Economic centralization is the greatest ill of socialism as we know it. Centralization contributes to socialism all those wonderful things such as corruption, inefficiency and lack of motivation.
How to solve this? I agree that central authorities should manage macroeconomic parameters within the country, major investments in infrastructure, and other capital projects. However, decentralized power for decision should be distributed and concentrated in smaller districts, whose authorities should be elected democratically. On this level, decision about public health, education, local administration, taxation, investment for medium and large business should be made.
Production menagement should be taken into an even lower level, and also subject to democratic election. I'm talking about companies functioning as small democratic units, where the workers who'd collectively own the company, would elect qualified managers as leaders. This way, workers exploitation will be prevented forever, and at the same time those qualified to lead a company will be on the right spot for that job.
In all instances, free market laws should be respected, otherwise the whole system may fall into decay and regression. No controlled prices, no production quotas, no controlled trade (except in extreme cases, such as war or post-war society). Whenever a company wont succeed on the market, the government wont allow it to parasitize on the national budget, but rather either change the menagers and get it back on its feet, or declare it bankrupted. People will lose their jobs, what will hopefully lead to the development of economic consciousness among the workers that they should listen to economic experts (championing investment and development) instead voting for those menagers who'd waste the company's profit on salaries. These economic experts may actually form parties (groups of interest, more correctly) within companies, and propose their own candidates for menagers. Kind of like a modern democratic country functions.
One last thing, I believe there must be place for private initiatives in small business. Not only they should be tolerated, but also encouraged. However, taxation policy would make sure these companies dont grow too large and create a rich class of crapitalists. Then they'll have the opportunity to sell the company to the government, with the option to stay in charge of the menagement, but not own it. After that the company is qualified as middle business and functions like the other collectively owned comapnies.
Commercials should be banned, and a specialized government agency should assess all products quality and deliver those reports to the people, as some form of guideline.
If I forgot anything, just ask me.
Well, how do u like my revised socialist model?
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 01:53 AM |
|
|
I think it looks good. There was this one issue I thought of when I read the semi-paragraph about "Commercials should be banned", but you cleared that up in the following semi-paragraph.
I agree that the market should be "preserved", since it's the best method we have today for distributing goods. In fact, it would function even better within a socialist society, I believe, since the socialist society, unlike the crapitalist one, would fulfill the requirement of "free market theory" that everyone have enough money/rescouces/currency/whatever to buy the supplied products
However, I am still better to find problems than solutions. But if you've located the problem, half the job is done. Only the solution remanins
This is one of the reasons why it, imo, is much more constructive to think critically about your own ideals than those of others. Constructive criticism strengthens your cause, while destructive criticism towards other people weakens it.
Anyway, here's the new problem I've been thinking about:
I "love" human rights. But I also "love" socialism. And I don't think these two "things" go very well together (most likely better than crapitalism and human rights, but still).
Why? Because one of the most central human rights is the right to political freedom. And although I'm a supporter of "free elections" within the socialist communities, I have my doubts. There will still be people who don't think socialism is any good, and these people will probably try to overthrow the government.
Now, we could apply Robespierre's theories about "enemies of the state" to the issue, but this doesn't really appeal to me, since this would make us no better than Stalinists. Another option would be to ban non-socialist parties, or have one party where different kinds of socialists/communists are represented. Of these to models, I prefer the latter since it imo is the one which puts the least restrictions to the political rights of the people.
Also, it could be nice to preserve some kind of opposition or right to free speech, since we don't wanna become or enemies, i.e. remove the rights our predecessors have spend the last 250 years fighting for. Besides, having someone who disagrees with you in your society is healthy, since this could stimulate you into thinking in ways you wouldn't even considered before. It will also perhaps open your eyes to things that are wrong in the society...
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 02:07 AM |
|
|
Easy. A socialist society will be possible the moment when the majority understands its "superiorness" (through education of the masses). Since I'm a die-hard utilitarianist I dont think we should impose anything on the people. In a democratic socialism, I believe all sorts of parties should be allowed to exist and propose candidates for elections, just for the sake of free speech. Even though, it also wouldnt be a disaster if only parties of socialist profile would be allowed to take part in elections.
I believe in socialist terror only when the will of the people (strive towards socialism) is impossible to effectualize through the system, i.e. democratic means. And that was the case with Robespiere.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
posted February 16, 2005 02:14 AM |
|
|
At last, this thread is beginning to get some substance!
Hehe, I have been a little too much of a revolution romantic for a time, so my minds been somewhat clogged (if that's a word  ).
Btw, you know why the Zulu's were able to beat the Brits at a battle during the Zulu wars? (It was either the battle of Ulundi, or Ishandlwana...) IT was because after they had fired the first shots, they could not see their enemies coming, because of all the gunsmoke...
A fitting metaphor for the mind of (unnecessary) revolutionaries, me thinks...
EDIT: I was gonna edit some more, but it slipped from my mind...
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Marelt_Ekiran
Promising
Famous Hero
Watcher of All
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 02:55 AM |
|
|
If I may offer a small comment here...
Svarog, I have read over your system. It looks awfully similar to a known proposed system that is known as State Capitalism. Effectively, it is just capitalism, except for the point that the owners of the means of production are not private owners, but the state itself.
I personally have a few problems with this system. First of all, in this system, who determines the wages (wages being compensation of any form for the work that is being done)? Letting the government do this is just the right recipe for a complete corruption stew.
If all factories are owned and operated by workers, but there are no quotas, then what incentive to they have to work hard? That would have to be profit, but then you are back at the point where you started. But you plan to confiscate businesses once they get too large? How large is large? Who decides this? Wouldn't there be ways for the more successful businesses to buy their way around the system?
____________
Perception is everything.
|
|
inabox
Tavern Dweller
Don't you oppress me....
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 12:14 PM |
|
|
Doh
We'll just keep on making the same mistakes every 100 years or so.
And the people that use big words will think they saw it coming. But they created it in the first place.
Ask a Cuban...
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 02:06 PM |
|
|
Marelt, I cannot answer on Svarog's behalf on the other points you raised, but I believe I can shed some light on this:
Quote:
If all factories are owned and operated by workers, but there are no quotas, then what incentive to they have to work hard? That would have to be profit, but then you are back at the point where you started.
I think he said that ineffective buisnesses would be shut down, and the people there fired:
Quote:
Whenever a company wont succeed on the market, the government wont allow it to parasitize on the national budget, but rather either change the menagers and get it back on its feet, or declare it bankrupted. People will lose their jobs, what will hopefully lead to the development of economic consciousness among the workers that they should listen to economic experts (championing investment and development) instead voting for those menagers who'd waste the company's profit on salaries. These economic experts may actually form parties (groups of interest, more correctly) within companies, and propose their own candidates for menagers. Kind of like a modern democratic country functions.
Did that answer your question?
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 02:53 PM |
|
|
Well, I think I can solve all your problems. I have recently had my name changed to "The Workers." This, of course, means that I control the means of production. You guys don't need to worry yourselves about the problems associated with centralized socialist government since you can just remind yourself that everything is controlled by The Workers and thus your not in danger of having all the evils of a capitalist society without any of the benefits!
Now give me that damn muffin you're eating.
____________
Drive by posting.
|
|
The_Workers
Hired Hero
Red Menace of HC
|
|
posted February 16, 2005 10:47 PM |
|
|
Sorry comrade bort, but you're too slow
____________
Workers Of All Countries, Unite! 
...the ruling ideas are the rulers' ideas...
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted February 17, 2005 04:01 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Svarog, I have read over your system. It looks awfully similar to a known proposed system that is known as State Capitalism. Effectively, it is just capitalism, except for the point that the owners of the means of production are not private owners, but the state itself.
lol. Well effectively, you do know a lot about crapitalism and socialism, only you have no idea about their basic principles.
Quote:
First of all, in this system, who determines the wages (wages being compensation of any form for the work that is being done)? Letting the government do this is just the right recipe for a complete corruption stew.
Of course it’s not the government, but the company’s menagers, in a way that is proportional to the effects of their work. The government may only set borad percentage margins for regulation of wages (and other economic parameters concerning company menagement for that matter) with relation to the overall wage fund of the company and depending on the hierarchical rank of each work position.
Quote:
If all factories are owned and operated by workers, but there are no quotas, then what incentive to they have to work hard?
Same as today – wages. And menagers will also have incentive to implement wage regulation for the sake of effectiveness, since their jobs (and salary; a menager salary should be proportional to the company profit) depend on it. And workers will have the incentive to support the menagers decision, since again, their jobs (and bonuses proportional to the company profit; standard wage guaranteed) depend on it. A magical socialist circle.
Quote:
But you plan to confiscate businesses once they get too large? How large is large? Who decides this? Wouldn't there be ways for the more successful businesses to buy their way around the system?
I guess, equally as all the other systems, it’s prone to corruption. Its important that there isnt anything innate which makes it more vulnerable, as it was the case with all its quasi-variants. Law regulation and full transparency required by law in government actions is there to prevent abusement, as well as inspections, financial police etc.
I cant discuss the standard of large business now, but it should be dependant on the overall flow of finances per year I guess. Say, businisses with under $1 million overall flow of worth per year are taxed with 10% of all tranasactions, businesses between $1 and 3 million are taxed with 20% etc, with “really big” businisses (exceeding say $50 million) being taxed with 70%, which is a point where it isnt really productive for you to keep developing your business, so you might want to sell it to the state (which is not obligatory confiscation) and stay and work there as a manager. In this way, you might choose to maintain your small business with some 10-20 employees and pay reasonable taxes, or expand it and then sell it for a higher price. I mean, this is just speculation on my behalf, just to give a plastic example. Far from the actual laws.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Trogdor
Legendary Hero
Words in a custom title
|
|
posted February 18, 2005 11:15 AM |
|
|
We are going to take the breweries of the world, and then when we own them all we'll retire in Cuba.
____________
"Through the power of the dollar you can communicate with the dead." - Artu
|
|
The_Workers
Hired Hero
Red Menace of HC
|
|
posted February 21, 2005 12:42 AM |
|
|
I found, I found! The lyrics to The International, in two English translations, and the french original lyrics:
[url]http://www.marxists.org/history/ussr/sounds/lyrics/internat.htm[/url]
____________
Workers Of All Countries, Unite!
...the ruling ideas are the rulers' ideas...
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 21, 2005 12:48 AM |
|
|
My gratitude, Comrade! That site proved to be a gold mine of info on the history of  !!
http://www.marxists.org/history/
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
|
Paladin
Adventuring Hero
Huh?
|
|
posted February 28, 2005 12:10 PM |
|
|
Has this thread died or something?
I'll post a nice picture to revive:
____________
Questions are a burden - and answers a prison for oneself.
|
|
terje_the_ma...
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Disciple of Herodotus
|
|
posted February 28, 2005 10:04 PM |
|
|
Bless you for reviving!
Nice pic, I think I've seen it somewhere before.
Kinda ironic, though, that Socialism comes in the form of an angel.
____________
"Sometimes I think everyone's just pretending to be brave, and none of us really are. Maybe pretending to be brave is how you get brave, I don't know."
- Grenn, A Storm of Swords.
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
