20-03-2003 23:39									#31
	Put an end to popups!

They're no different.

What we need to ensure is that the people will get the things they want, and that they'll get high quality products. you don't need a free market to do this. Some rigid quality control will do, as well as product checking groups. Basically, the same techniques currently used by corporations.

	20-03-2003 23:51									#32
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: well, for one thing, the whole society are workers, not elite coroprate owners...

If there is a "workers' council" of some company that sees an opportunity to make a buck on the back of the rest of society, do you think they wouldn't do it? Say, there is a severe shortage of a certain necessary product. why do you think that the workers will behave any better than exectives? As long as there is a competition for profit, the thing that would happen if the syndicatists would get their way, they'll try to speculate their way into more profit.

	21-03-2003 05:18									#33
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Kidicious [/SIZE] The market is inefficient at allocating resources. Almost always, there is either a shortage of a surplus. Even when there seems to be an equilibrium what is produced is not what society really wants. The producers have no idea what each other are doing, or really how much demand there will be for their product in the future.

BUT, what the market can do is show everbody what the cost of things really is. Since a price is not an absolute, but rather a dynamic variable (new technologies, better infrastructure etc...) everybody can easily see what things cost.

In a more totalitarian society all prices are desided by some sort of comitee. This leads to all sorts of strange and WASTEFULL use of rescources. So all things equall a market is quite a bit more efficient.

Oh, and by the way, who are you to decide what "society really wants"

In a Market-economy you get freedom to buy want you want, which companies will then producem while in State-economy a central comitee decides what the factories should produce and ultimately what the customers should be able to buy.


On last thing...
That line about "USSR and China wasnt socialist..." well they tried very hard to be... anyway, going along we the same line we could just say that "USA isnt really capitalist..."

	21-03-2003 05:27									#34
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Illyrien In a Market-economy you get freedom to buy want you want, which companies will then producem while in State-economy a central comitee decides what the factories should produce and ultimately what the customers should be able to buy.

Partly in answer to Az : I was talking about the State "dictating" prices, production etc. because it is a common misconception topwards socialism, that comes from the Soviet experience.
A socialist society needs its companies to be public, it doesn't necessarily mean they are state-owned.

quote: What would prevent those workers from being as assholish as the corporations of today?

Nothing that I know of, in theory. In my opinion (hwhich doesn't reflect marxist theory), the State should have an economic importance about as high as in social-democracies, except that it'll have to deal only with employees rather than a caste of shareholders and managers.

	21-03-2003 06:13									#35
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Slowwhand did an excellent job of describing it. Gotta give credit where credit is due.

As far as movements go, shake 'em up in a bag and try and tell them apart. Very generally, communists believe that socialism can only be acheived by revolution, and that it will very likely be violent (though not by choice). Even this isn't a good explanation, because you have groups like the British Socialist Workers Party who call themselves revolutionary socialists and the Communist Parties in Europe have pretty much abandoned revolution and persue parlimentarism.

I call myself either depending on what I feel like typing at the moment. I'm a revolutionary Marxist and a Leninist and I'm not afraid to call myself a communist. Sometimes I'm just feeling a little more mellow.

	21-03-2003 06:19									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Sava What about Social-Democracy? Or is it all just red-commie nonsense?

Social-Democracy is very opposite to socialism and communism. Social democracy doesn't intend to overthrow capitalism. At the contrary it attempts to seethe soothe the gaps created by capitalism in order to make it last longer.
Marx called the social-democrats "cretins"

Edited

	21-03-2003 06:23									#37
	Put an end to popups!

Soothe, not seethe. Seethe means to be very angry.

	21-03-2003 06:32									#38
	Full PM-box? Change here!

so a Communist is someone who follows (or would like to follow) Marx's teachings
and
a Socialist is just someone who wants free education, free healthcare, and free parking?

	21-03-2003 06:34									#39
	Increase Your PM Length

Sava -

quote: I think some form of Social-Democracy is probably the best form of government. One of the biggest problems in the US is the amount of lobbying power that special interest groups and corporations have.

The reason we have those high-powered lobbyists is because we are on the road to social democracy. When government has more power over our lives, especially the power to "re-distribute" wealth, there will be more people trying to buy the votes of politicians. You've identified a symptom of "social democracy" and deluded yourself into believing more social democracy will be better.

	21-03-2003 06:35									#40
	Remove this text

Space05us : nope.
Both communists and socialists want to overthrow capitalism. The aftermath is different. The modern definitions of communism and socialism vary so much, I don't imagine summarize them (heck, I don't even know part of them).

Only wanting free education, healthcare and such is called social-democracy. It has nothing to do with socialism and communism. Its purpose is to keep capitalism alive, by reducing its most glaring inequalities.

	21-03-2003 06:39									#41
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Berzerker Sava - The reason we have those high-powered lobbyists is because we are on the road to social democracy. When government has more power over our lives, especially the power to "re-distribute" wealth, there will be more people trying to buy the votes of politicians. You've identified a symptom of "social democracy" and deluded yourself into believing more social democracy will be better.

In France and Germany, lobbying is very different and less significant than in the US, while these countries are much more social-democrat than the US. OTOH, there is a strong US-like lobbyism in EU institutions, although they are much more pro-free market (heck, let's call it "Liberal - European Meaning", and be done with it).
Not that I'm saying there is necessarily an opposite correlation, but I think your theory doesn't hold water.

	21-03-2003 06:41									#42
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

where's the big difference that makes people so pissed if you call them Communits when they are a Socialist and Socialist when they are Communist?

	21-03-2003 06:43									#43
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Communists are murderers and Socialists are weenies. At least, that's how they tend to see each other.



And don't I know, someone (or even several someone's) is gonna quote my first sentence.

	21-03-2003 06:43									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Space05us : their sheer sectarism
More seriously, there are differences. Read SlowwHand's answer page 1, it is short and straight to the point. Read my previous answers if you want more details. Ask Che if you want to read the Capital

	21-03-2003 08:39									#45
	Tired of ads?

a Socialist is just someone who wants free education, free healthcare, and free parking?

No, parking should definitely not be free. Of course, I am more of a Social Democrat than a Socialist, so I don't know the traditional Socialist stance on parking. I'm sure some of the other people here have read long manifestoes on the subject and are willing to enlighten you.

	21-03-2003 09:11									#46
	Inflate your Upload Space

Spiffor -

quote: In France and Germany, lobbying is very different and less significant than in the US, while these countries are much more social-democrat than the US. OTOH, there is a strong US-like lobbyism in EU institutions, although they are much more pro-free market (heck, let's call it "Liberal - European Meaning", and be done with it). Not that I'm saying there is necessarily an opposite correlation, but I think your theory doesn't hold water.

Nothing you said contradicts my assertion that special interest lobbying here has increased as we travel down the road to a European "social democratic" system where government assumes more control over people, especially with wealth being viewed as the property of the state. As for the EU being more susceptible to lobbying and more free market oriented, there would be NO lobbying of the EU if there was a free market there. When wine producers in France want either a government subsidy or tariff on competition, do they have to pay off French politicians to get what they want? If not, that still doesn't mean France doesn't have lobbyists corrupting their political system, it just means the politicians and lobbyists have a different method for vote buying and selling.

	21-03-2003 09:52									#47
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Actually, the lobbying in the EU is a wide array of political, social, international and economic concerns just like in the US. And a very efficient lobbying is exerted by businesses which demand a faster and more complete liberalization within EU. They have professionals who use all the flaws in the current EU institutions to get to their views.
Was the EU completely liberalized, you'd see many worker's lobbies or unions pushing for social legislations, and the same businesses pushing for holding the upper hand as well.
Lobbying has to do with the political structure, not the economic one. In France, the politicians are rather "father-know-best" and doesn't strongly feel the need to thouroughly ask interest groupstheir opinions on an issue (things are slowly changing). In the EU, lobbies are considered a valuable asset to understand what society wants.
Again, it has hardly anything to do with economics.

	21-03-2003 13:25									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

How did you exactly get from communism to parliamentary lobbying?

	21-03-2003 14:06									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Well, there are a wide variety of socialist movements, but they all revolve around the idea of worker control over the means of production. Now, the idea of worker control is where the various movements diverge. In the one extreme, you have Stalinism, where "control" is exclusively exercised through the state, and on the other extreme you have individualist anarchism which rejects the state totally, where control is exercised directly by the workers.

	21-03-2003 14:08									#50
	Tired of ads?

So, Ramo, how will that "worker's control", be any better than capitalism, as long as the whole system is still driven by profit?

	21-03-2003 14:17									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger I am mainly a communist, pretty much a Marxist communist. But I am still working out if violent struggle is required, or democracy can lead to communism.

I agree with U.R.. The thing that I disagree with Communism the most is the fact that Marx and HIS communist ideals revolve around violent struggle. I believe that there can be change, but it should be done in a slow-to-moderate manner.

Violent change would create resentment in those who outwardly despise communistic ideals. I would rather there be gradual reform of governmental policies that are more communistic. Socialism and socialist parties (IMHO) have gotten off on the right foot, but have a lot more to go.

	21-03-2003 14:18									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

I'm not sure exactly what your question is, Dal.

The way socialism is better than capitalism is that workers have less constraints in their actions under a socialist system than under a capitalist system (all else being equal). They get to determine how their businesses are run.

In addition, there will be much more of a pressure for wages to be more egalitarian, a lesser degree of hierarchy, a greater sense of communal solidarity, and greater worker productivity.

	21-03-2003 14:22									#53
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Furthermore, (IMHO)

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx constantly uses overt and covert inflammatory remarks to spark violence. I think that (like Che says)

Communists are more prone to violence than Socialists. Communists are more "voice their opinion and gripe" whereas Socialists keep a lower profile and try to change the system gradually within the bounds of the government.

	22-03-2003 04:24									#54
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Frankychan I agree with U.R.. The thing that I disagree with Communism the most is the fact that Marx and HIS communist ideals revolve around violent struggle. I believe that there can be change, but it should be done in a slow-to-moderate manner.

Marx once wrote that in democratic societies where the state had not fully formed (the US, the UK and the Netherlands were specifically listed--but that day is long gone) it might be possible to achieve socialism by parliamentary means. It would be more accurate to say we believe in forceful revolution. Hopefully it will be forceful enough that the counter-revolutionary elements will be deterred from using violence.

	22-03-2003 04:27									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: I'm not sure exactly what your question is, Dal.

Under such a decentralized, what's it's name... "Syndicalist" way, what would prevent these companies from screwing the people, except the fact that they're controlled by workers, and workers would obviously never do that to each other.

	22-03-2003 04:29									#56
	Remove this text

I'm leaning towards a system that is mixed centralized and syndicality. Workers control the means of production, but we elect boards to determine macro questions of production while the workers deal with the micro questions.

	22-03-2003 04:31									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Yeah, well, I don't see how this can be done. A syndicalist system is based on profit and thus, nothing changes.

	22-03-2003 04:33									#58
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Communists are murderers and Socialists are weenies. At least, that's how they tend to see each other.

communists are stuck up relics of the past (where they belong) and socialists are sold out to capitalism - is another way they see eachother

	22-03-2003 04:34									#59
	Get a bigger avatar today!

and who are you?

	22-03-2003 04:36									#60
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

neither