Printer-friendly version
Author:
On the surface this seems like an incomplete question. But it is not, because one of the words in the question is not defined.
Your comments and questions are solicited.
T
BigCloset TopShelf
TopShelf TG Fiction in the BigCloset!
The Hatbox
Checks can be made out & sent to:
Joyce Melton
1001 Third St.
Space 80
Calimesa, CA 92320
USA
Note: $6000 is the operating, maintenance and upgrade budget. Amounts received in excess of the $6000 will be applied to long term debt accrued over the last 19 years.
If you prefer, you can donate through Patreon:
Become a Patron!
Thank you!
Comments
_
You are probably thinking that this is a trick question.
I suppose it could be seen that way, but it really isn't.
Let me phrase it a little differently. "What is the difference between socialism?"
Of course, now you know which word is the problem in the original question.
I'm wanting to talk with you guys about the difficulty we (mankind) have engaging in accurate communication with each other. There are a LOT of very sharp people here at BCTS, and I believe that if we put our heads together we might make some progress in this area.
As always, questions and comments are solicited.
T
my read
Would have been you were asking for the comparison between the two forms (for either) a single term could take
The actualities of the concepts, and
What propaganda mills claim they are in their efforts to control people
*
The two forms of capitalism and socialism are, IMO, market and crony.
*
The crony versions of each are essentially identical. There are are differences of course, but such details don't count for much. They both fail because they rely on trying to turn all citizens into a monolithic machine.
** Do THIS, or else
** DO NOT DO THAT, or else
** If you are this race or that religion, you are toast
China will ultimately fail for this reason. But it is powerful, and it might not fail before it destroys some or all of the rest of the world.
*
The market versions of each are a bit more diverse. They work because they rely on the support of the people in doing what each of them, as an individual, wants to do. No race, no religion, or any of that BS.
** A short list of do nots (murder, assault, fraud and so on)
**In case you haven't noticed, not many modern societies that claim to be market oriented actually qualify.
*
Market versions of socialism are a lot like market versions of capitalism.
* But they have higher taxes.
* But they also have better safety nets.
* And they tend to be a lot slower in terms of advancement into the future.
I could be happy in a market socialist country. But I'd rather live in a market capitalist country
T
In the late, unlamented Soviet Union...
...it is said that among disaffected workers the question was asked: What is the difference between Capitalism and Communism? The answer given: In Capitalism, man exploits man; in Communism, the positions are reversed.
Capitalism as, defined by Adam Smith (he was a professor of moral philosophy) in his work "The Wealth Of Nations" was an idealized system in which people made decisions in their enlightened self interest and everyone had access to the same information at the same time for making their decisions. His definition of "the wealth of nations" was the labor of workers.
Communism as envisioned by Karl Marx was a variation of socialism. To be quite honest, it is a very complex and self contradictory economic philosophy.
Believe it or not, Marx and Smith were both envisioning utopian systems in response to the failures and exploitations of the economic systems in effect at the time of their writings. For Smith it was the utterly immoral and exploitive system of Mercantilism and for Marx it was the human abuses practiced in laissez faire capitalism.
FWIW, Communism, as practiced has never been what Marx envisioned and Capitalism, whether practiced in a democracy, a monarchy, a dictatorship or any other form of politicial organization has been what Smith envisioned.
Invisible Hand Hit by Hammer
Capitalism craters when monopolies flourish. Today's monopolies have purchased our politicians.
Jill
Angela Rasch (Jill M I)
*
yes,
This is an example of the crony side of capitalism (almost identical to the crony side of socialism/marxism).
I have wondered, of late, if it might be possible to outlaw politics. But then ... who would enforce it?
T
*
Hi There, GR,
Chuckle. Chortle, Guffaw. ROFL. Thanks - I've not heard that before. But it is a great way to compare the words if they are not prefixed with the two modifiers I'm suggesting we start using.
*
Utopian manifestos are interesting, in an academic sense. But they always end up being mostly fantasy.
I'm not sure Smith intended to write a utopian manifesto, but he did. Marx and Hitler did intend to do so. IMO. That is just the nature of the collectivist mind.
*
I have speculated about an essay or article (NOT a book) with the title "An Inquiry Into The Nature And Causes of the Wealth of Individuals".
People, IMO, are more important than nations. Nations are important, of course. But people are more important.
Thanks again,
T
Competing economic systems….
Idealized Communism fails to account for greed. The only successful communal economies have all been small and tribal. National scale communal economies founder on individual greed.
Capitalist economies enshrine greed as a core value. Successful greed that is. They fail the test of kindness. Greed overwhelms common humanity. Bernie Madoff and Enron follow apace.
Neither system is fool proof. Communism seems to corrupt faster and become tyranny easier.
Capitalism begins corrupt but takes longer to tyranny.
Enlightened self interest is rarely found.
BAK 0.25tspgirl
The only successful communal
.
You are EXACTLY correct about this. Collectivist schemes work very well for families and for small communities. Places where everyone knows everyone.
In fact, it seems almost impossible for an individualist scheme to work in such a situation. But it also seems very unlikely that a family or a small community would even try to organize itself into an individualist system.
This is why our schools and our prisons are working so poorly. Their populations are too large. It is no longer possible for an inmate or a warden (or a student or a teacher) to recognize every person they see each day.
This allows the "bad guys" in the school or the prison to do things anonymously.
And this is a VERY BAD THING.
T
Cybernetic Theocracy
Since we don't seem smart enough to govern ourselves
let's build a giant benevolent all knowing supercomputer,
call it God and let it tell us what to do---both collectively
and individually---where all questions and all prayers
will be answered as long as you don't forget your password...
~there's a TG story in there somewhere, Veronica
And remember...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifLqzLEB3E0
*
cute
But rather than telling us what to do, why wouldn't it just talk to us?
A real God could talk to all of us at the same time.
Say, like at breakfast at IHOP
We could all see God talking to all of the other families while He was talking to us.
And the other families could see God talking to us.
Real Gods can do that sort of stuff. It is called omnipotence.
Cool, huh?
T
Yet another old saw
There is that other old saw: "You are not a capitalist. You are a worker with Stockholm syndrome."
We do tend to get confused though. No modern western society is pure this or pure that. We tend to argue more around the edges than we do about the core. We could also argue that most economic value is created through unaccounted trade in good will and favors. For example, I';d venture to say that very few households are organized on capitalistic lines. Usually households pool resources or gift to each other without any form of strict accounting. What's more, we can say that households that fall to strict accounting tend to fail before long.
Just because there is not a balance sheet does not mean that no value is being exchanged.
Friend circles, professional organizations, extended families, and tribes ted to work in a similar way. I loan you my shovel when you need it. Later on you loan me a hand saw and so on. There is huge value in these activities. And they are not capitalistic.
Thanks for the prompt. This was fun.
Your friend
Crash
*
As capitalism exists today, I suppose you are more or less correct.
The REAL battle, in terns of philosophy, is individualism versus collectivism.
In most advanced cultures these days the best that can be said about them is that they are part market capitalist and part crony capitalist. But crony capitalist is the same as crony marxist. The only difference is who collects the cash,
See some of my recent comments in this thread about market and crony versions of capitalism and socialism/marxism
T