Topic: How Capitalism defeated socialism? (Read 420 times)

Remember: the foundation of capitalism (as well as any other economy, state form... the whole circus) is enforced levy (internal: tax, external: tribute) which is sanctionized on the due date. It is the birth of state structures, surplus production (= economy), property, interest, "money", markets ... the birth of the civilian by legislation of the most powerful. This is the contrary of human nature where one lives in communities with solidaric substinence but no individualism.

The verdict is in? Capitalism has been shown as the most amazing effective economic system for many decades. As it embraces human nature rather than trying to restructure natural urges. There are always people who will work harder, be smarter and strive to get to the top. There are others who are content at doing the bare minimum in life. Socialism tries to reorder society and reallocates resources in an ineffective method. That being said, capitalism does need strong and careful regulation to benefit people - this is constantly undermined by the richest.

The motivation for innovation is driven by the individual participation of wealth. The primary driver is - this may sound amazing to some - asset preservation and the secondary driver is asset growth (accumulation).

Within socialist societies and, by the way, also communities like the Kibbutz, general individual wealth is not sought at all, and in extreme cases (communism) it is even abolished (except for the ruling class... what a miracle). Therefore, the motivation to be innovative and therefore more competitive is far less present than in capitalistic or economic liberal societies. This leads, e.g. also in the Kibbutz, to the fact that the individuals contribute less to the general work effort, since one has nothing from it. On the contrary, so-called "heroes of labor" (who increased the expected productivity through their zeal for work) were generally hated in the former GDR.

Speaking of truth,

In my opinion the socialism system has been abandoned by many countries and switched to capitalism, socialism has received a lot of resistance from citizens because it cannot provide freedom in many ways, and China is an example of a successful country and becomes a strong country because it turns to the capitalism system.

It depends on how successfully the socialist or capitalist concept is applied to the state,
For China, it seems that their ideology has been replaced from socialist to capitalist, although not completely like that.
but what is clear is that many countries currently use the capitalist concept

Trends and changes will continue to occur, if at the beginning of the revolution socialism was widely used to regulate the country but now many countries have abandoned socialism because they have failed to make progress, even China has become a capitalist country even though the country still has a socialist concept.

In China, there are many rich businessmen, and also many of them are the richest people in the world. In my opinion, it is no longer a purely socialist country, because it has a capitalist element. where in this way the country will develop rapidly in terms of the economy, because the people are given the freedom to develop their business even though later there will be taxes that will return to all the people

Yes socialist system is suppose to be that way and take care of the citizen but I don't think things are now the way we read them back in time in the economic text books. I believe that there are now changes to what it was then. Major example of socialist countries are China, Cuba, Lao, Vietnam and take the example of China in the economic narratives is becoming a capitalist country, so much involved in trade and business including development and this is not really what Karl Max described as a socialist type of country in his theory.

The first phrase was actually perfect, but then not at all

If you live in California on the coast, where there are classes and roads - the choice of a Ferrari is logical. If you are a farmer in the outback of Texas - sorry, but in a Ferrari you will look very stupid there You probably wanted to say a little about something else - about the constant craving of people for a higher standard of living, which capitalism can provide? It is a fact. But the implementation of socialism "in the format of the USSR" is a "leveling" where you will be fed with propaganda slogans, but you will walk in 2 models of shoes all your life, and have 3 models of shirts! And you will dream of "imported jeans and sneakers", which in "the most developed, fair and resource-rich country" for some reason cost 2 middle-class salaries!
Total:
- Capitalism makes it possible. No, it does not guarantee, it just gives the opportunity and very broad rights of choice (no, there is also no complete freedom, but there are more freedoms)
- socialism (in the implementation of the USSR) is a lie, and all life is limited and guaranteed a low standard of living. At the same time, "breaking to the top" is actually not feasible because of the class model of society. You are either a proletarian and a worker, or the elite of the Central Committee or the like. And these two layers never intersect. Believe me - I personally observed this in the USSR

There are two socio-economic formations - socialism and communism.  Mankind has no experience of life under communism (war communism in Russia in the 1920s does not count). 

In particular, this is due to the fact that the technologies of the 20th century were not able to ensure the smooth operation of the planned economy.  In the 21st century, the situation has changed.  Many modern technologies are able to ensure the functioning of a humanistic communist society. 

For example, DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations).  Imagine that all people on earth are members of the DAD "Communist Society".  This will make it possible to build a system for managing society and the opportunity for all people to directly participate in the management process.  The digitization of all socio-economic processes in society in the future makes it possible to build digital communism.  Its goal will not be to make a profit (as under capitalism), but to develop a roadmap for the development of Humanity. 

At the same time, the interests of specific individuals will be harmoniously combined with the goal of the survival of mankind as a species of living beings.

Personally, in my opinion, your question has been answered in the millennial era now, in the digital era and in the btc era, socialism is slowly disappearing, it can be said that actually we have entered the capitalist world for a long time, maybe the comparison is now 70-30, people who using socialists is likely only 30%.

Some countries still have socialist understanding such as North Korea, Cuba and China, and in my opinion China has left a socialist system because it gives freedom to individuals and private to actively do business in China, while Cuba and North Korea still do not allow the private sector, making it difficult for the country to develop.

I think I'd probably qualify that, we are partly selfish and therefore democratic capitalism suits us the best.

Pure socialism doesn't work, because it relies on everyone being totally selfless. But they aren't, so the system is very easy to exploit.
Pure capitalism in practice would be almost indistinguishable from pure socialism in practice... winner becomes fabulously wealthy, majority of the population are so poor that they struggle to survive.

What makes things work is democracy (however imperfect it may be). This is because it provides an essential counterweight against extremist ideology. People often disagree quite vehemently about how governments should behave, and the extent to which they should work for the populace against the extent to which they should enable businesses to flourish... but it's generally simply a question of degree. Most people would agree that any system that lacks a counterweight would be a terrible idea, and cause a lot of suffering.

I can support this view in both senses.  It was the unbalanced imposition of capitalist society that led to the formation of the "99 vs 1" movement in the US in early 2011. The influence of capitalism clearly manifests influential views throughout the region politics where the power of money dominates, the democracy of the people is overwhelmed. 

In contrast, socialism does not bring generosity like painted and beautified pictures, equality, and fairness are not definitive.  Pursuing purely economic interests to ignore democracy and sovereignty will succeed in the future???  Oh no.  It will have to happen a new, a trade-off for change.  My view is that both of these democracies have vulnerabilities that any orientation will cost.

Socialism has become a understanding that many countries abandoned, Vietnam is a country that successfully leaves socialism because to stop the turmoil of citizens is a difficult thing, even China which is the center of communist today does not see any influence of socialism in life every day, only becomes a symbol of the state There is no real practice.

I ask a question that has capital been practiced truely with the way that it is suppose to be without the corruption and government influence that captures all the infrastructure in the hands of few. The system of capitalism is suppose to be free but I see it having some influencing of the government people inside of it. They say what they say and go on to take over with the general people wealth to convert as the for them and family around them. This is not pure capitalism that can allow the individual genuine investment and why support is from government.

There is a good reason for nations that have high happiness and good amount of money all end up with a mixed situation. Sure, you could have a capitalist system where a business could make billions of dollars worth profit, one of the richest man in the world is a French guy who owns clothing companies after all.

However, you also ask them to pay their fair share and get rich after that. They encourage you to make 20 billion dollars in profit, they help you do that as much as they can, they even ignore some stuff and lax regulations for it, but after you do that, they tax you heavily so that you would have to pay for it. Elon Musk says he paid a shit ton of tax, meanwhile Tesla keeps on reinvesting all their profits and do not really pay a lot, that is not how it works in Europe, that is the difference.

Capitalism is just human nature.

Ferrari make cars. Toyota make cars too. And yet, most people would prefer Ferrari to Toyota if they had the riches. Replace Ferrari with BMW and you'll get the same results.

There is a whole difference between living in an apartment flat and a mansion. According to socialism, they are both living. According to capitalism, apartment dude is not living which is pretty much true when you compare the apartment dude's life to the mansion guy.

Socialism makes people happy on paper but the reality is different. People don't want to get taxed. People don't want to pay for insurances. We are selfish and therefore capitalism suits us the best.

Of course socialism is indeed a lie of equality. Even in the Soviet Union there were rich people, there were just very few of them. There was even corruption. There are many examples and proofs of this.  It is better to live in capitalism and be able to climb the ladder of life than to live on the same level with everyone.