What political parties support you?

Post Reply New Topic

Yet in a mixed economy, socialistic trends are absolutely necessary in order to provide a social safety net, and keeps the forces reactionary capital from disenfranchising the people. Without such a mixed economy in the U.S., my parents could not possibly have survived after my Dad had retired.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

You do realize, ruveyn, that there are a lot of different currents of socialism? Not all of them believe that everything should be publicly owned. Some believe that there should still be personal property (ex: books, furniture, cars, household appliances, possibly homes). Some even accept small businesses and self-employment, claiming that only the "commanding heights" of the economy should be publicly owned.

North Korea and Cuba are not socialist. Some people refer to them as "state capitalist," others as "authoritarian anti-capitalist," others still as "degenerate worker's states." But they are not socialist because the means of production, despite being sate owned, are not controlled by the people. Instead they are controlled by a party elite or (in the case of North Korea) a deranged leader. You can not look to these places (or Eastern Europe) and say that socialism has failed because they are not, nor were they ever, socialist. You can make a good case that the revolutionary path to socialism does not work and for the importance of grassroots involvement in politics, but that is all.

I do agree, however, that Sweden is not a socialist country. It is a social democratic mixed economy and welfare state.

Liberal =/= left!! Liberals are inherently centrist to centre-right.

Libertarian Party

I'm maybe social liberal. I support at the same time much freedom and a welfare state.

I think that european countriea are not socialist. In germany there is the term of the "soziale Marktwirtschaft" (social market economy).
It is almost the same capitalism as everywhere in the world.

Of course, the countries who claimed to be socialist or communist have failed. (except the capitalistic China)
But soon the global capitalism could also fail.

Cuba hasn't exactly failed. It isn't democratic, so it has failed to establish socialism, but the society keeps ticking along. It's more that it's stagnated. It is poor, but not as poor as a lot of other countries in the Caribbean. But even with the reforms being introduced it still won't be reverting to capitalism any time soon.

Just to be clear, I do not support the Castro regime. I just find Cuba to be an interesting case study for a number of reasons.

That remains to be seen. Wait until Fidel and his buddies die off and then we shall see. I suspect Cuba will revert to the typical Latin American pit of corruption that it was before Fidel.. With the possible exception of Argentina and Brazil the nations in the southern part of the Western Hemisphere just don't "get it". Actually Costa Rica isn't that bad either. They are smart enough not to have an army. But who would want to invade Costa Rica anyway?

ruveyn

Yes, I forget Cuba. It is perhaps not failed, but not too successful.
In my view every dictatorship is doomed to failure.
It's just a matter of time.

It is also interresting that after some time only very old persons are leading a socialist/communist country (Cuba, Soviet Union, GDR ...)

I'm pretty sure it already is a pit of corruption. Things are just too secretive for us to know exactly how corrupt. Regardless, I'm interested to see what will happen there.