getfiscal posted:deadken posted:what if i dont want a toaster or some chicken but do want immense quantities of steel, three hundred grams of black bread, and full communism
that might be because you don't value other people's lives that much, maybe because you don't have kids or even a wife, which makes communism seem like a fun game or art project instead of a game of russian roullete.
communism has always been an art project
HenryKrinkle posted:life expectancy in china under mao increased dramatically.
getfiscal knows this and said so in the past.
life expectancy increased pretty much everywhere in the world in the 20th Century. the only places that didn't were flooded with either arms or troops by the soviet union or they got AIDS.
Lessons posted:they were complaining about market inefficiency in production, and they were right then and they're right now. the relative failure of the soviet light industry is neither here nor there.
if they can spot market inefficiencies so well then why don't they go to a bank and tell them they know of a way to invest in production chains that don't have those inefficiencies and then become rich and give that money to socialism.
deadken posted:america giving u a bunch of rape dollars doesnt count
then china and ussr dont count
Superabound posted:you didnt say socialism tho you said "planned economy" which China definitely is. its state capitalism
wow yeah that's a good point... for me to poop on.
Crow posted:hahaha it's really cool to sit around and play Mister Grown Man Miming Responsibility or whatever but i'm sittin here in One cool lil police state trick that a single CIA mom picked up after the fall of the soviet union, here, in the real world, where people get blacklisted and their livelihoods ruined while some tinpot dictator is building a disney nightmare. and these little, pronouncements, about Maturity and the dignity of ignorance seem really very silly and VERY naughty. Come here you bad boy. lemme spank you. Naughty naughty
thats nice
If the aim of western society is to make the conscious unconscious and to subvert everyone's will, do you need to reverse that before you could embark on any sort of marxist project. Or can you just start from the start.
How does the dispersion of production affect workers owning means of production? I just don't know anything
Crow posted:after the fall of the soviet union, here, in the real world, where people get blacklisted and their livelihoods ruined while some tinpot dictator is building a disney nightmare.
maybe those people did something wrong, like all those jews under stalin did.
OR you can keep on doing that insightful political economy analysis consisting of some half-assed propaganda, familial guilt, and "Police state is bad, but so is The bad stuff", because it is simply stunning, and very good, And you're a very smart young man, and so mature for his age too
getfiscal posted:Crow posted:after the fall of the soviet union, here, in the real world, where people get blacklisted and their livelihoods ruined while some tinpot dictator is building a disney nightmare.
maybe those people did something wrong, like all those jews under stalin did.
haha oh yeah all those jews that had high government positions and were leaders of culture and industry until the collapse of the soviet union
Crow posted:look i mean i know you guys have some serious problems with like your brain and family issues but maybe you should then intensify your therapy and finish that CIA application instead of trying to do some voodoo transference onto nations and peoples faraway, and stop trying to infect other people with your pestilent degenerate virus?? because all you're doing is bashing your head against the wall
OR you can keep on doing that insightful political economy analysis consisting of some half-assed propaganda, familial guilt, and "Police state is bad, but so is The bad stuff", because it is simply stunning, and very good, And you're a very smart young man, and so mature for his age too
you know i'm not like going to change anything either way right. i could join the IDF and shoot all day at kids with rocks and it would have as much effect on the world as if i quit my unemployment job and became a vanguard organizer for socialist justice. "enjoy the ride" - bill hicks.
Crow posted:look i mean i know you guys have some serious problems with like your brain and family issues but maybe you should then intensify your therapy and finish that CIA application instead of trying to do some voodoo transference onto nations and peoples faraway, and stop trying to infect other people with your pestilent degenerate virus?? because all you're doing is bashing your head against the wall
OR you can keep on doing that insightful political economy analysis consisting of some half-assed propaganda, familial guilt, and "Police state is bad, but so is The bad stuff", because it is simply stunning, and very good, And you're a very smart young man, and so mature for his age too
don't let donald and tom get to you my dude
Edited by babyfinland ()
Lessons posted:getfiscal posted:
people seem to forget that marxists believed that capitalism was restraining growth to an incredible degree. like the argument in the 1930s and such was oh well with a planned economy we could have huge rates of growth forever. so a bunch of countries tried that out and not so much. like yeah if you have a bunch of lazy farmers maybe you can threaten to kill them, force them into cities, and hold a gun to their heads while they crank out a few huge slabs of steel. but it turns out that's not a great model if you want things like a toaster or some chicken.
they were complaining about market inefficiency in production, and they were right then and they're right now. the relative failure of the soviet light industry is neither here nor there.
hahah how can you say this when other non-communist coutnries like ROK went from being peasant-strewn hellholes to world class manufacturers of heavy and light goods in a few generations.
but like what does ha-joon chang say, being one of the leading developmental state theorists and a korean. oh he says that the market was integral to korea's take-off, that it was almost completely a domestic policy success, that it's easy to imagine foreign aid without translating it into sustainable growth, that other developing countries should focus on a sort of dirigiste capitalism, and that he considers socialism to be a failure.
babyfinland posted:ya whatever ill just stop. crow youre a good dude and im not trying to criticize you or your country or whatever. my relation to this argument is more about young americans taking marxism as a messianic truth, which i feel is an easy out and kind of perverse; i'm not criticizing the actual post-socialist states or even socialism generally
dude you've basically become the eqivalent of an internet atheist, except with marxism. no one can mention it without you tripping over yourself to tell us how wrong it is, but instead of dawkins quotes and wikipedia links to logical fallacies, it's impenetrable pomo quotes and quranic passages. is this like some deliberate parody, payback for all the people that teased you about your own literal beliefs in messianic truth, or are you actually becoming what you hate?
getfiscal posted:but like what does ha-joon chang say, being one of the leading developmental state theorists and a korean. oh he says that the market was integral to korea's take-off, that it was almost completely a domestic policy success, that it's easy to imagine foreign aid without translating it into sustainable growth, that other developing countries should focus on a sort of dirigiste capitalism, and that he considers socialism to be a failure.
that's a really self-serving reading of his work. Bad Samaritans isn't about how the market led South Korea to economic glory, but almost the opposite, how firmly it was based on government intervention, planning, and opposition to the conventional market wisdom of the benefits of free trade. he's still a staunch capitalist but if anything it's a direct refutation of what IWC's standard Western propaganda take on Korea.
Lessons posted:that's a really self-serving reading of his work. Bad Samaritans isn't about how the market led South Korea to economic glory, but almost the opposite, how firmly it was based on government intervention, planning, and opposition to the conventional market wisdom of the benefits of free trade. he's still a staunch capitalist but if anything it's a direct refutation of what IWC's standard Western propaganda take on Korea.
actually it's explicitly about the combination of state leadership with markets, and his imagined example for a poor country getting rich in the future is trying to compete for high-value exports in emerging sectors. the thing is that his main target is neoliberalism so he has to focus on arguing that state intervention is not intrinsically socialist. but his argument is not a slippery slope, you can't go oh well if more state intervention works then total state control must work even better. his argument is precisely that the state can make the market better, not that the state can surpass the market.
Lessons posted:getfiscal posted:
but like what does ha-joon chang say, being one of the leading developmental state theorists and a korean. oh he says that the market was integral to korea's take-off, that it was almost completely a domestic policy success, that it's easy to imagine foreign aid without translating it into sustainable growth, that other developing countries should focus on a sort of dirigiste capitalism, and that he considers socialism to be a failure.
that's a really self-serving reading of his work. Bad Samaritans isn't about how the market led South Korea to economic glory, but almost the opposite, how firmly it was based on government intervention, planning, and opposition to the conventional market wisdom of the benefits of free trade. he's still a staunch capitalist but if anything it's a direct refutation of what IWC's standard Western propaganda take on Korea.
yeah but i'm not saying "free-trade" made south korea rich which is the standard western line which is obviously wrong. It was quite clearly state capitalism i.e. not a Marxist state, while the full-on Marxist state next door stagnated and descended into poverty
