Socialism

[Anonymous No.14876378]

Socialists: we live in a capitalist system where everybody slaves away for the rich.

Also socialists: we want to tax the shit out of the rich so that they can slave away for us.

Today in most European country there are literally millions of people on state welfare. How is it any different? If one person is working and another one isn't, it doesn't matter who's working and who isn't.

Seems like a double standard.

[Anonymous No.14876382]

Oh forgot to ask, what are some books that will teach me "real socialism"?

Because apparently no matter what I read people always tell me I got the wrong book. Even Marx's definition of socialism as a transition state doesn't seem to be accepted by most socialists.

[Anonymous No.14876383]

>>14876378
You have no idea what socialism is.

[Anonymous No.14876386]

>>14876383
Fucking KEK, got in there a few seconds before you >>14876382 but good job proving my point. I could literally quote a dictionary and socialists will say "that's not socialism!"

[Anonymous No.14876387]

>>14876378
>tax the shit out of the rich so that they can slave away for us.
how can one be a slave and be rich at the same time, dumbass?

[Anonymous No.14876388]

real socialism has never been tried

[Anonymous No.14876392]

Socialism does not work

[Anonymous No.14876396]

>>14876382
“Real Socialism” is, just as the defense “Real Communism”, horseshit.

[Anonymous No.14876399]

>he thinks the rich do the work
are you retarded dude? Yeah man... I work at the Stocks Factory and make 1000000 dollars an hour thats why my net worth is in the billions.

[Anonymous No.14876404]

>>14876378
>Also socialists: we want to tax the shit out of the rich so that they can slave away for us.
Not a commie, but it's my understanding that the welfare state is meant to prevent communist revolution... make capitalism liveable.

[Anonymous No.14876405]

>I could literally quote a dictionary
fucking retards who think that there's actually a central authority on the meaning of words. What is a dictionary publisher? God? Fucking idiot. Fucking plebeian, neophyte, dilettante, unthinking shiteater. Read a book.

[Anonymous No.14876406]

>>14876378
>>14876382
>>14876386
Socialism is any economic system in which workers keep what they earn.

[Anonymous No.14876411]

>>14876405
>central authority on the meaning of words
the french have the Académie française

[Anonymous No.14876415]

>>14876396
because "socialism" means whatever you want it to mean. "socialism" means everything from 5 year plans to "muh decentralized worker's run factories economy" syndicalism to social democratic welfare states. you're talking about 3 different economic models, and each of their supporters wants to claim that theirs is the "true socialism." The other part of it is what you're talking about, which are people wanting to avoid talking about the flaws of their systems by pinning its problems on a specific person/administration/set of circumstances (If I was in charge, I would have...)

[Anonymous No.14876419]

>>14876382
'Socialism' is a word. A word has no inherent meaning. Take the word 'curry', you could say 'chicken tikka is my favourite curry' but you could also say 'I hope to curry favour with her'. Because language is arbitrary these sorts of things can happen.

To say 'what does curry mean?', get two answers and then assume it therefore doesn't have a meaning is very, very, very stupid.

So if Lenin and Ocasio-Cortez both use the term socialism but use it to refer to OBVIOUSLY DIFFERENT things then your inability to see the nuance is a sign that it is you, not them, who are very, very, very stupid.

[Anonymous No.14876420]

Socialism isn't real

[Anonymous No.14876422]

>>14876405
i define those words as a compliment.

[Anonymous No.14876423]

>>14876387
If you work for me and I do nothing then you're my slave in a away. Slavery isn't just cotton picking and being whipped.

>>14876399
Another bird brain who thinks work = labour. Rich people work by creating value or providing services by whatever means.

[Anonymous No.14876425]

>>14876420

>>14876420
real isnt scoialism

[Anonymous No.14876426]

>>14876404
Interesting point. Welfare was indeed invented by right-wing parties in the UK as a way to avoid free market collapse. Unfortunately there are way too many people on benefits these days which is becoming a burden in itself.

[Anonymous No.14876428]

>it/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

[Anonymous No.14876431]

>>14876405
Where does the meaning of words come from? If through collective use, then the definition is simply the most commonly used one.

[Anonymous No.14876432]

>>14876428
eh better politics than another guenon thread

[Anonymous No.14876435]

>>14876419
You're right, there is Leninism, Stalinism, Marxism, Maoism, and their various combinations. I am actually aware of all these, the problem is that the people I talk to aren't showing nuance, they are just saying "no, my definition is the correct one". If people were actually nuanced like you I'd take them more seriously.

[Anonymous No.14876440]

>>14876378
Socialism is a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country’s wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries.

[Anonymous No.14876442]

>>14876428
We're talking about socialist books. Hide the thread and go away if you don't like it you sap.

[Anonymous No.14876448]

>>14876442
cope, no book has been mentioned in this thread let alone OP, any mention of a book from henceforth is a token namedrop for the sake of appearances.

[Anonymous No.14876454]

>>14876435
Might the 'people you talk to', perchance, be anonymous randos on the internet?

[Anonymous No.14876455]

>>14876440
Lol, no.

[Anonymous No.14876462]

>>14876440
>the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country’s wealth
where does this idea come from? inequality of outcome is not eliminated in socialism. the point is that people get what (marxists believe) they deserve (according to the labour theory of value)

[Anonymous No.14876468]

>>14876428
What the fuck do you even gain by posting this? Explain your mindset to me you fucking troglodyte.

[Anonymous No.14876469]

>>14876399
>I work at the Stocks Factory and make 1000000 dollars an hour thats why my net worth is in the billions.
I bet any of you socialist wake up early to post in this tea afitionado forum
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/27/tim-cook-reveals-the-morning-routine-that-sets-him-up-for-success.html

[Anonymous No.14876490]

>>14876415
Let's use your definitions then.
>5 year plans
This is the classic socialist implementation that people consider "not real socialism". Interestingly, during the growth of the Soviet Union (when the economy was fine and dandy), many thought that Marxism-Leninism made sense as a catalyst and ultimately as a path to Communism. It wasn't until the failure of agriculture and the other industries that intellectuals started to backtrack. Today only one person (Zizek) thinks Leninism might work.

>decentralized worker's run factories economy
>syndicalism
I'll group these two together. I think these are - when implemented on a national scale - closer to communism because of 1) collective ownership of means of production and 2) decentralisation. You can argue that there's still money around but this is just a logistic convenience in this day and age.

>social democratic welfare states.
Once tax reaches a certain stage and the size of public services becomes very large, and we have things like UBI, the system is very much into socialist territory. This functions as a modern definition of socialism because we no longer work in "factories". Some Luddites might not consider this socialism because they're using a literal definition, but ignoring the mechanics the ideology is the same.

So I'm going to ignore the first two definitions for the reasons given and assume we're talking about the third. In such a scenario, isn't there a large proportion of the population who gets to enjoy their life while others (the middle class) provide most of the taxes?

[Anonymous No.14876490,1]

mods are fags