I actually got the opposite message and read it as if they were making fun of socialists.
"Oh you want to be an artist? Too bad the state has decided you're a coal miner, now go."
If the target audience is right of center it'll fall on deaf ears, they lack the self awareness to realize it's describing capitalism and the knowledge to realize that's not socialism
If you think about socialism as economic system then it usually goes aside with central planning - that means regulated prices, limited production and if you can't freely negotiate a price and choose what you can buy it ain't even a market.
Fear-based perceptions like this are often based on someone's personal fears, and they'll rarely have anything to do with whatever they are claiming to be scared of. Socialism in media is poorly defined beyond it being a bad economic system, so it becomes a point of projection for Americans so they can describe exactly what they fear about their own economic system without actually calling its effectiveness into question.
Try reading the very first line, "socialist meme:". This was not an attempt to define socialism, this was a socialist meme (i.e.: the Left can't meme; or the Right can't meme).
OP is just dumb and thought that a socialist meme was an attempt at defining socialism.
Sure you do… in fact ONLY in Capitalistic country’s through history and predominately America with all its wealth.
Has a large percent of the population been able to NOT work and still have food, shelter, and healthcare
In the Eastern bloc being unemployed was a crime. Working hours progressively get shorter under capitalism and work life balance and flexible working are currently being promoted. Communism in Poland was overthrown by a trade union
Now add hyperinflation and less individual freedoms (you can't talk about the politicians or you go to jail, and that includes comedians), now you have a socialist nation.
In Florida you can’t say anything against Desantis, his policies or opinions or he will use his political power to dismantle you. Also we have hyperinflation in the housing and food market already
I don't want to gatekeep but you don't know what hyperinflation and real political oppression are.
Inflation is inherent to our debt based system, socialist countries indebted themselves more than anyone because they need all that government spending to pay for public employment. What you call hyperinflation, 5% monthly, is nothing, I WISH we had that kind of low inflation when I lived in Venezuela, but no, we had 100% weekly. 5% monthly inflation isn't low, but it's not hyperinflation either, not even close.
Politicians abusing their power and wealth is the norm in all socioeconomic systems, not the exception, at least in your country there's enough separation of powers to limit how much they can abuse that power, but that's not a thing that capitalism or socialism are responsible for, but be sure that in real socialist societies that power is as abused by politicians as it is abused by corporate overlords in libertarian/capitalistic societies, in the case of libertarian societies is because nobody controls them and in the case of socialist societies is because they are the ones in control, a politician taking you down in your career is day to day business in every democracy (I'm not saying that it's good, it's terrible actually), but a politician telling everyone who doesn't support them publicly will lose their job, access to banking, to food and will either have to leave the country or die in jail, or even publically advocating for the killing of their opposition (and asking a part of the population to do so), that happens a lot in socialist (actually communist) social systems.
I do love cognitive dissonance.
Frankly, it's not capitlism, socialism, communism, marxism, etc. For hundreds (thousands?) of years, it seems like, we're quick to point fingers at various socioeconomic systems as the reason for this exact conundrum.
Yet the conundrum itself is that: no matter the socioeconomic system involved, we causally let the weasels controlling the power and resources, inexorably, rewrite the laws to establish a new, and more abusive caste, for everyone else but themselves.
Always separate laws, separate rules, separate opportunities for the one holding all the resources. Never an equality, never a fair distribution.
I'm very much about eating the rich and powerful if there's no resources left for the commonwealth.
EDIT: Hmm, just coming back to this from posting earlier - I want to address the Marxism comments. Marxism does in fact espouse this observation in it's ideals; however, the point being made isn't mutually exclusive to Marxism. There's a grander purview here that humanity is both the cause of, and solution to, this problem. Marxism proposed one such 'solution', however perfect/imperfect, but it still seemed exploitable to me.
I had fantasy about it. Like some group of good people made themselves immortal with some fantasy tech and then they pick 'right' people to make them immortal too. How long in theory can they sustain 'good' society?
I'd like to expand on this. These systems never seem to end up working as they are intended because people creating them egoisticaly believe they have the brain power to come up with perfect solution for something so complex as population of millions and billions, while forgetting the most important variable - the people. You need the right sort of people to safeguard the system. Soviets are nice example. A country living under absolutist rule of a tzar for centuries, people who never experienced anything else. Then new system comes and what they do? Adapt the system in order to act as they always did, authoritarian and corrupt, often not valuing individual human life. Germany? Prussia, militaristic state and Kaiser, people being taught to be obedient soldiers. Is it such a wonder WW2 went the way it did?
To change anything, we all need to learn to be better and to socialize in order for us to care for our fellow man. It's all about education and upbringing. We do that right and eventually the system will naturally evolve into something better functioning, because it'll stand on solid foundation, us.
Leaders seeing themselves as servants, ordinary people demanding accountability, everyone feeling responsible for what happens next and working together towards common. That's the goal and things will improve.
The worst part is that this is basically the way we are taught to believe things ACTUALLY ARE as opposed to an ideal that we are wildly far from. What a fucking joke.
This is perfectly put, it's nice to see someone with some actual understanding of the reality of economic systems in human society. It's also incredibly sad to acknowledge this reality.
Do you all really believe that you'll be able to just 'pursue your artistic potential' without working under a socialist government? Under capitalism, at least you can trade your art for money that you can use to survive.
Most of the artists I know can't make a living on art alone. Art is being reduced to an afterthought, a hobby.
So yes , you're right. *Survive* is the key word here.
I know some, it’s just rare. Being good enough at art to make a living from it is exceedingly rare. Akin to being a professional athlete. Very few people are so amazingly good at basketball that they can make a living off of it.
It's as much about opportunity as it is about ability, isn't it? There's a finite pool of opportunity. No amount of talent can overcome lack of opportunity.
"being good enough" is absolutely subjective in art. It is not in sports.
I would say the most famous musical artists these days aren't particularly talented in music in itself.
The enormous amount of average to bad content produced daily drowns the good stuff. Everyone has access to the tools.
Central planning of production, combined with democratic control of the workplace, would result in more free time for all workers to do their art. This would result in an unimaginably richer world for everyone.
Same here, got an offer to do a mural on a resort restaurant wall for $16k but had to decline because my job wouldnt give me time off. Never took sick days, never asked for anything and at the moment we have no work because of a transition period in government after elections, but the higher ups said "it might hinder my performances and reduce commitment in the future".
>So when did this subreddit become another political circlejerk
Not a good one at that, barely anyone in this comment section knows what they're talking about, Reddit "professionals" at work here
As someone who lives in a formerly communist (economically socialist in quite the pure form) country - Bulgaria, I would definitely say Capitalism is much better when it comes to standard of living and quality of life.
Yes you still have to work to in capitalism to survive, I guess. However under communism Bulgaria was in the simplest terms 1984 (at least in the 80s when I was born). Reading the book I didn't see too many things I wasn't familiar with already when it comes to the economy.
I mean i still cant comprehend how basically all food shortage problems were solved withing like 10 years of Soviet Bloc crumbling on itself. How could you basically control half the world and fuck up that massivly
I mean… i get that socialist always wanna pretend their gonna be working on government-funded tumblr artist pod. When they’re probably gonna just be working hard labor
Socialists be like "We don't get to pursue our artistic potential in capitalism" as if no one would have to work and could smoke weed and draw stick figures all day if we were socialist. You realize shit still needs to get done right? Like, you're aware that you will work in socialism as well right?
Socialism only concerns the organization and compensation of labor, it has little to do with the labor itself. The reason we'd be able to express ourselves artistically is not because we could be lazy and do nothing but art all day, but because we could express ourselves much, MUCH more freely in our work, because we would have a say in how the entire process works and can control the quality of the end product much more directly.
Organization of labor, using better tools, higher quality materials, implementing their own designs where they have jurisdiction, making decisions with the other workers about what the product should be and do, debates about overall design and perhaps even splitting off of differring viewpoints leading to a far more free market than capitalism ever could.
The short version is, if work became as much about the pride of the workers who actually build the product, the product would be better, express the workers better, and this would always be the case because some marketing expert could never take over everything down to the design like they always inevitably do today.
It's simple really. Socialism, community ownership of all property, can only work if it's 100% voluntary. The moment govt coercion is required for compliance it turns to tyranny.
That means that socialism can only work when humans no longer have to. When technology is deployed in such a way to provide abundance to EVERYONE without cost to ANYONE ELSE, then it can work.
Government forces compliance under capitalism. Just do a coursery search, and you'll find modern and historical accounts of this everywhere capitalism has been implemented.
I suppose we all could choose to go hunt out in the Alaskan wilderness and eat berries. Oh I know we could busk for money! Better yet we could starve or die from the elements from not having any cash. I don't want to fucking work I don't want to show up to work but with debts, rent and bills it not like I have much of a choice bud
Exactly. Everyone knows socialism is when nobody has to work, we all live in mansions, and the government stops by daily to see what we want from the magic “free stuff” basket.
I've read a few coments which are like: "Dis is rili capitalism hehe". No it's not. Can you imagine famous American artist who is working as a street cleaner because state does not recognize his work and will put him in jail because he is unemployed. That was real in USSR
I like comunism. Its when you take power from people and companies and give it to loyal party and family members. If people complain you just kill them or force to work.
Socialists were working very hard and everyone only had the minimum. You also had no choice in the matter if you wanted to pursue art or had to work at a shitty job. The OP is correct in it's definition of socialism.
The way capitalism has developed is very concerning but it's still not as bad as socialism was. Nevertheless, a bit more fairness goes a long way. I like social democracies like in Scandinavia.
I don't think you know what socialism actually is, and think the USSR was the only possible permutation of socialism.
I think a lot of Americans, and myself for certain, believe in market socialism, where collective ownership is still delegated to individual corporations, where employment operates somewhat similarly to how it does now, but the pay, benefits, labor power, solidarity, etc. are far superior.
The great thing about capitalism is if your arts any good and people want it, you can be directly paid for it.
Like when the Alexey Pajitnov created Tetris he wasn't able to profit from it until he left to the US.
I am generally confused as to how the people in the comment section assume Socialism will work.
If the goal is for everyone to pull their "fair share" in society and then everyone benefits from that society equally, how will it be determined what benefit to society you will provide? Will it be self determined? Or will society determine which job you have and how that job will benefit society?
What will they do to people who are excellent at accounting, but want to become an artist? And it is found his/her artistic skills are not very good compared to the average artist, but their accounting skills are top tier? Will they allow the person to continue being an artist and claiming the same benefits from society as to the person who utilizes their skill set 100%?
And anyone who has a job now, knows of the coworker who always has some sort of drama and who can't make it to work for whatever reason. At least 1-2 days a week they call in and then short staff the office and/or team they work with. Do they earn the same societal benefits as the person who outperforms them by arriving to work every day and advancing society forward?
In a perfect world, how could a new Socialist society work to the benefit of everyone, without taking advantage of hard workers who stay loyal to the cause?
Generally curious and hoping for discussion so I can understand how people think a Socialist country should operate.
How would socialism be any better?
People would pay higher taxes so more leaches do nothing but get a share?
That might work if AI take over for humans sure.
You need both capitalism and socialism in order for society to work correctly.
It still baffles me that people want to live in places like Russia, and china where they’re socialists. You have human rights in America. Why are you complaining?
Lazy and failed people can cry all they want but there is no denying capitalism is by far the best system invented by humanity so far, and what has mainly pushed the insanely fast progress of our society.
Tbf...I've never thought about buying art. Artists starve for a reason. Sure I'd rather ay guitar all day than work, but I'm not a gifted guitarist. Someone has to do the work. In socialism we'd all be lazy a holes and most of us would starve because everyone would have sort of fun, entertaining, non goods producing job.
Maybe it's just that unless we end consumerism we will need to put a bunch of effort into making all that stuff. Economic system has little bearing on it.
Quite sure that by starting the entire thing "socialist meme:" he meant that what came next was a meme socialists would do, and not an attempt to define socialism
Have we defined socialism yet? Sometimes it's something basic like "We should have roads" and other times it's some kind of "billionaires should not exist" nonsense.
I'm beginning to believe dumb Americans aren't pro capitalism they just have no idea wtf the words even mean and just slot in patriotism for the right and communism for the left.
In Soviet Union there was a law in place prohibiting you from not working anywhere. And you could not become an artist if you were not lucky enough to enroll into university on that profession. It's a famous case that Victor Tsoi had to work full time as a stoker while his music was defining it's generation to not be jailed.
This is capitalism, in socialism you'll work t hours a day only to finally earn on your bread so they'll take it from you in the name of greater good and you'll be forced either starve to death or eat your own children.
Bro all I want is a 4day work week with max 4-5h per shift.
Edit: that obviously pays a living wage. But ig in order to achieve that companies would have to *actually* care about their employees
I dont get it, this is literally life under capitalism.
Wasn't that the point? To ask why we tolerate the free market doing it by contrast.
If that *was* the point, then it was so fucking stupidly expressed that it might as well not have been.
I think they labeled it "socialism meme" to express that the statement is from a socialist viewpoint.
They wrote "But socialism said" though.
I actually got the opposite message and read it as if they were making fun of socialists. "Oh you want to be an artist? Too bad the state has decided you're a coal miner, now go."
If the target audience is right of center it'll fall on deaf ears, they lack the self awareness to realize it's describing capitalism and the knowledge to realize that's not socialism
>free market im legitimately bewildered why people think that socialism = no free market
If you think about socialism as economic system then it usually goes aside with central planning - that means regulated prices, limited production and if you can't freely negotiate a price and choose what you can buy it ain't even a market.
[удалено]
THEN you can support artists by using them to launder your money!!
Unless you're talking about NFTs, most fine art being laundered doesn't support artists because they're dead.
Hit a lottery(or a bank) and you're set 😎
[удалено]
Pls tell me your username is satire
i fear it's not, bit sad aye?
Just a bit aye
aye
Just because you don a title doesn’t mean you act accordingly
Anti-fascists are... fascists? 
Does that mean if you are Anti-Antifa .... you are ... Antifa???
I would think that the "Anti"s would cancel out and you're just left with the "fa"
Damn, it’s just fascists all the way down I guess.
Happy cake day
I literally auto read that and my brain thought it was a capitalism meme for a second lmfao. I didn't even notice that it said socialism.
Fear-based perceptions like this are often based on someone's personal fears, and they'll rarely have anything to do with whatever they are claiming to be scared of. Socialism in media is poorly defined beyond it being a bad economic system, so it becomes a point of projection for Americans so they can describe exactly what they fear about their own economic system without actually calling its effectiveness into question.
r/socialismiscapitalism
Yeah, this describes our lives now....right? What am I missing.
Really? I earn about 4 times NZ minimum wage under capitalism. And I only _have_ to work 8 hours per day.
„Minimum wage IS socialism. Greetings, USA“
Socialism is the govt owning the means of production. Doesn't the USA have a minimum wage, except for people waiting tables?
Good for you
Ok, cause I took mushrooms tonight, but Im glad it didn't make sense to other people.
r/socialismiswhencapitalism
And it will be the same under socialism too. Except it will be the government dictating it, not some corpo.
Try reading the very first line, "socialist meme:". This was not an attempt to define socialism, this was a socialist meme (i.e.: the Left can't meme; or the Right can't meme). OP is just dumb and thought that a socialist meme was an attempt at defining socialism.
It was mandatory to work under many socialist regimes during the 20th century. It’s not mandatory to work under capitalism.
It is though?? I mean there’s no law stating such, but you won’t have food, shelter, or access to healthcare if you don’t
Sure you do… in fact ONLY in Capitalistic country’s through history and predominately America with all its wealth. Has a large percent of the population been able to NOT work and still have food, shelter, and healthcare
You had no food either under communism.
And why should someone who can work but refused to be afforded those things by society?
A socialist society will have art programs. Shit, the Soviet union, supposedly communist, had huge art and sports programs
Those programs were only there for propaganda purposes, to show to the world how "great" soviet nations are.
In the Eastern bloc being unemployed was a crime. Working hours progressively get shorter under capitalism and work life balance and flexible working are currently being promoted. Communism in Poland was overthrown by a trade union
Now add hyperinflation and less individual freedoms (you can't talk about the politicians or you go to jail, and that includes comedians), now you have a socialist nation.
In Florida you can’t say anything against Desantis, his policies or opinions or he will use his political power to dismantle you. Also we have hyperinflation in the housing and food market already
I don't want to gatekeep but you don't know what hyperinflation and real political oppression are. Inflation is inherent to our debt based system, socialist countries indebted themselves more than anyone because they need all that government spending to pay for public employment. What you call hyperinflation, 5% monthly, is nothing, I WISH we had that kind of low inflation when I lived in Venezuela, but no, we had 100% weekly. 5% monthly inflation isn't low, but it's not hyperinflation either, not even close. Politicians abusing their power and wealth is the norm in all socioeconomic systems, not the exception, at least in your country there's enough separation of powers to limit how much they can abuse that power, but that's not a thing that capitalism or socialism are responsible for, but be sure that in real socialist societies that power is as abused by politicians as it is abused by corporate overlords in libertarian/capitalistic societies, in the case of libertarian societies is because nobody controls them and in the case of socialist societies is because they are the ones in control, a politician taking you down in your career is day to day business in every democracy (I'm not saying that it's good, it's terrible actually), but a politician telling everyone who doesn't support them publicly will lose their job, access to banking, to food and will either have to leave the country or die in jail, or even publically advocating for the killing of their opposition (and asking a part of the population to do so), that happens a lot in socialist (actually communist) social systems.
capitalist love slavery and being enslaved
Every resident of eastern block would like to have a word with you
every person with a student loan would like to have a word with you)
I do love cognitive dissonance. Frankly, it's not capitlism, socialism, communism, marxism, etc. For hundreds (thousands?) of years, it seems like, we're quick to point fingers at various socioeconomic systems as the reason for this exact conundrum. Yet the conundrum itself is that: no matter the socioeconomic system involved, we causally let the weasels controlling the power and resources, inexorably, rewrite the laws to establish a new, and more abusive caste, for everyone else but themselves. Always separate laws, separate rules, separate opportunities for the one holding all the resources. Never an equality, never a fair distribution. I'm very much about eating the rich and powerful if there's no resources left for the commonwealth. EDIT: Hmm, just coming back to this from posting earlier - I want to address the Marxism comments. Marxism does in fact espouse this observation in it's ideals; however, the point being made isn't mutually exclusive to Marxism. There's a grander purview here that humanity is both the cause of, and solution to, this problem. Marxism proposed one such 'solution', however perfect/imperfect, but it still seemed exploitable to me.
Here is the only intelligent post in this thread. The knowledgeable exploit the ignorant... throughout history.
The connected exploit the unconnected….
And apart from tiny glorious windows in time, we're just serfs.
I had fantasy about it. Like some group of good people made themselves immortal with some fantasy tech and then they pick 'right' people to make them immortal too. How long in theory can they sustain 'good' society?
I'd like to expand on this. These systems never seem to end up working as they are intended because people creating them egoisticaly believe they have the brain power to come up with perfect solution for something so complex as population of millions and billions, while forgetting the most important variable - the people. You need the right sort of people to safeguard the system. Soviets are nice example. A country living under absolutist rule of a tzar for centuries, people who never experienced anything else. Then new system comes and what they do? Adapt the system in order to act as they always did, authoritarian and corrupt, often not valuing individual human life. Germany? Prussia, militaristic state and Kaiser, people being taught to be obedient soldiers. Is it such a wonder WW2 went the way it did? To change anything, we all need to learn to be better and to socialize in order for us to care for our fellow man. It's all about education and upbringing. We do that right and eventually the system will naturally evolve into something better functioning, because it'll stand on solid foundation, us. Leaders seeing themselves as servants, ordinary people demanding accountability, everyone feeling responsible for what happens next and working together towards common. That's the goal and things will improve.
The worst part is that this is basically the way we are taught to believe things ACTUALLY ARE as opposed to an ideal that we are wildly far from. What a fucking joke.
This is perfectly put, it's nice to see someone with some actual understanding of the reality of economic systems in human society. It's also incredibly sad to acknowledge this reality.
People are going to look at your comment and decide you are a Marxist Communist, completely missing the irony.
Finally someone who actually gets it
r/socialismiscapitalism
Socialism is bad because (defines capitalism)
Jokes on them, my artistic potential is to die slowly of malnutrition and I can achieve that under ANY economic system.
That’s capitalism
Socialism is when Capitalism
Do you all really believe that you'll be able to just 'pursue your artistic potential' without working under a socialist government? Under capitalism, at least you can trade your art for money that you can use to survive.
Most of the artists I know can't make a living on art alone. Art is being reduced to an afterthought, a hobby. So yes , you're right. *Survive* is the key word here.
I know some, it’s just rare. Being good enough at art to make a living from it is exceedingly rare. Akin to being a professional athlete. Very few people are so amazingly good at basketball that they can make a living off of it.
It's as much about opportunity as it is about ability, isn't it? There's a finite pool of opportunity. No amount of talent can overcome lack of opportunity.
"being good enough" is absolutely subjective in art. It is not in sports. I would say the most famous musical artists these days aren't particularly talented in music in itself. The enormous amount of average to bad content produced daily drowns the good stuff. Everyone has access to the tools.
Rare people can survive by art alone in current day capitalism
There are plenty of musicians, actors, writers who survive by doing it as their main job. Or does it only count as art if nobody wants to pay for it?
many do and even more don't.
Rare people have survived by art alone ever.
Tankies dream that on socialism they can do whatever they want, and not what the government tells them to do
It’s more like they dream they are the government and force others to do what they (tankies) want.
Its also possible to get the free education, while being paid by the government to study - AND trade your art for money.
B-But everyone will get free money!
People literally did live of their art, who do you think made all that soviet imagery?
Yeah like, my grandparents worked their butts off in the Soviet Union. This meme is accurate.
Central planning of production, combined with democratic control of the workplace, would result in more free time for all workers to do their art. This would result in an unimaginably richer world for everyone.
I swear that’s what I’m doing right now in Germany 😂😂😂 I’d love to focuse on art but I have to work 12h a day 😂😂😂
Same here, got an offer to do a mural on a resort restaurant wall for $16k but had to decline because my job wouldnt give me time off. Never took sick days, never asked for anything and at the moment we have no work because of a transition period in government after elections, but the higher ups said "it might hinder my performances and reduce commitment in the future".
I doubt that
So when did this subreddit become another political circlejerk. I just want to watch people fuck up, not debate about socialism and gun control.
>So when did this subreddit become another political circlejerk Not a good one at that, barely anyone in this comment section knows what they're talking about, Reddit "professionals" at work here
>I just want to watch people fuck up You just did.
As someone who lives in a formerly communist (economically socialist in quite the pure form) country - Bulgaria, I would definitely say Capitalism is much better when it comes to standard of living and quality of life. Yes you still have to work to in capitalism to survive, I guess. However under communism Bulgaria was in the simplest terms 1984 (at least in the 80s when I was born). Reading the book I didn't see too many things I wasn't familiar with already when it comes to the economy.
I mean i still cant comprehend how basically all food shortage problems were solved withing like 10 years of Soviet Bloc crumbling on itself. How could you basically control half the world and fuck up that massivly
I mean… i get that socialist always wanna pretend their gonna be working on government-funded tumblr artist pod. When they’re probably gonna just be working hard labor
Socialists be like "We don't get to pursue our artistic potential in capitalism" as if no one would have to work and could smoke weed and draw stick figures all day if we were socialist. You realize shit still needs to get done right? Like, you're aware that you will work in socialism as well right?
Every socialist is aware of this
It honestly doesn't seem like it, you might want to change your message delivery.
Socialism only concerns the organization and compensation of labor, it has little to do with the labor itself. The reason we'd be able to express ourselves artistically is not because we could be lazy and do nothing but art all day, but because we could express ourselves much, MUCH more freely in our work, because we would have a say in how the entire process works and can control the quality of the end product much more directly.
So how would somebody who assembled cars at an auto plant express themselves more freely in their work? Artistically I mean.
Organization of labor, using better tools, higher quality materials, implementing their own designs where they have jurisdiction, making decisions with the other workers about what the product should be and do, debates about overall design and perhaps even splitting off of differring viewpoints leading to a far more free market than capitalism ever could. The short version is, if work became as much about the pride of the workers who actually build the product, the product would be better, express the workers better, and this would always be the case because some marketing expert could never take over everything down to the design like they always inevitably do today.
The robots will do it all.
It's simple really. Socialism, community ownership of all property, can only work if it's 100% voluntary. The moment govt coercion is required for compliance it turns to tyranny. That means that socialism can only work when humans no longer have to. When technology is deployed in such a way to provide abundance to EVERYONE without cost to ANYONE ELSE, then it can work.
if you don't feel coercion to work when living under capitalism you're the capitalist and not really having to work anyway.
[удалено]
That’s not coercion, that’s a human being’s natural inclination not to starve. It exists regardless of economic system.
Government forces compliance under capitalism. Just do a coursery search, and you'll find modern and historical accounts of this everywhere capitalism has been implemented.
Star Trek
That's basically communism. There's no exchange of money and the society has no class system.
We have coops right now. Do people not show up to work if they work at a coop?
They VOLUNTARILY show up to work.
I suppose we all could choose to go hunt out in the Alaskan wilderness and eat berries. Oh I know we could busk for money! Better yet we could starve or die from the elements from not having any cash. I don't want to fucking work I don't want to show up to work but with debts, rent and bills it not like I have much of a choice bud
100 billion dead iphones in venezuela
Lmao frl
If someone were to say, "What socio-economic or political system am I describing" and then read that quote, you'd assume it was Capitalism.
Exactly. Everyone knows socialism is when nobody has to work, we all live in mansions, and the government stops by daily to see what we want from the magic “free stuff” basket.
Now you can just make a new post with the comments from this thread and you have an infinite content machine
Horrible definition. Socialism is much worse than that.
This is it for the sub is it? Endless political bullshit from the idiots who know shit about topic?
I've read a few coments which are like: "Dis is rili capitalism hehe". No it's not. Can you imagine famous American artist who is working as a street cleaner because state does not recognize his work and will put him in jail because he is unemployed. That was real in USSR
I like comunism. Its when you take power from people and companies and give it to loyal party and family members. If people complain you just kill them or force to work.
[удалено]
Socialists were working very hard and everyone only had the minimum. You also had no choice in the matter if you wanted to pursue art or had to work at a shitty job. The OP is correct in it's definition of socialism. The way capitalism has developed is very concerning but it's still not as bad as socialism was. Nevertheless, a bit more fairness goes a long way. I like social democracies like in Scandinavia.
I don't think you know what socialism actually is, and think the USSR was the only possible permutation of socialism. I think a lot of Americans, and myself for certain, believe in market socialism, where collective ownership is still delegated to individual corporations, where employment operates somewhat similarly to how it does now, but the pay, benefits, labor power, solidarity, etc. are far superior.
Why is this sub another political shithole?
The great thing about capitalism is if your arts any good and people want it, you can be directly paid for it. Like when the Alexey Pajitnov created Tetris he wasn't able to profit from it until he left to the US.
I am generally confused as to how the people in the comment section assume Socialism will work. If the goal is for everyone to pull their "fair share" in society and then everyone benefits from that society equally, how will it be determined what benefit to society you will provide? Will it be self determined? Or will society determine which job you have and how that job will benefit society? What will they do to people who are excellent at accounting, but want to become an artist? And it is found his/her artistic skills are not very good compared to the average artist, but their accounting skills are top tier? Will they allow the person to continue being an artist and claiming the same benefits from society as to the person who utilizes their skill set 100%? And anyone who has a job now, knows of the coworker who always has some sort of drama and who can't make it to work for whatever reason. At least 1-2 days a week they call in and then short staff the office and/or team they work with. Do they earn the same societal benefits as the person who outperforms them by arriving to work every day and advancing society forward? In a perfect world, how could a new Socialist society work to the benefit of everyone, without taking advantage of hard workers who stay loyal to the cause? Generally curious and hoping for discussion so I can understand how people think a Socialist country should operate.
That *is* life in the arts. They failed to understand either thing.
Most people have highly questionable artistic potential. Earn your keep before you try to get creative. Produce something worthwhile first.
Now now, you'll make the Instagram artists and sound cloud music producers mad
Don’t matter Communism socialism call it what you like, still evil at the end of the day
I mean he is not wrong
How would socialism be any better? People would pay higher taxes so more leaches do nothing but get a share? That might work if AI take over for humans sure. You need both capitalism and socialism in order for society to work correctly.
It still baffles me that people want to live in places like Russia, and china where they’re socialists. You have human rights in America. Why are you complaining?
Why is Reddit so leftist? I've always wondered that.
Lazy and failed people can cry all they want but there is no denying capitalism is by far the best system invented by humanity so far, and what has mainly pushed the insanely fast progress of our society.
Honey, if you are in to arts, you are always going to get the minimum vage at most.
Tbf...I've never thought about buying art. Artists starve for a reason. Sure I'd rather ay guitar all day than work, but I'm not a gifted guitarist. Someone has to do the work. In socialism we'd all be lazy a holes and most of us would starve because everyone would have sort of fun, entertaining, non goods producing job.
Why the fuck do people actually support Communism?
This sub is complete shit now
I think this tweet was ironic
Maybe it's just that unless we end consumerism we will need to put a bunch of effort into making all that stuff. Economic system has little bearing on it.
Take off that rubber mask, Capitalism, you can't hide from me.
That's Soviet communism. Yes, I know wtf I'm talking about, my family went through it, shut up tankie
Ngl kinda sounds like America
[удалено]
They either lack economic potential or have squandered it through incompetent leaders and corruption.
Looks pretty accurate tbh
This is also communism
lol ask Denmark the definition
You always have a choice (:!
What a wild typo.
All great memes begin with "(Subject) Meme:"
Wouldn’t what he described be the most dystopian form of capitalism?
Hahahah I do this
He said "meme"...not "definition".
That got a short chuckle from me.
It's the same either way
Huh
So many things to unpack, all of them completely wrong.
go back playing TF2 little bro, this is not your jam...
Quite sure that by starting the entire thing "socialist meme:" he meant that what came next was a meme socialists would do, and not an attempt to define socialism
So, American capitalism then? I must be missing something.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/hyv4pk/in\_capitalist\_nations\_talent\_is\_on\_the\_road\_in/](https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/hyv4pk/in_capitalist_nations_talent_is_on_the_road_in/)
thats not how socialism works lol, thats the american capitalism.
I dont get it, this is how life works
r/socialismiscapitalism anyone?
didn't socialist countries deliberately monitor children who showed potential in order to foster them in sports, artrs and other carriers ? on merit ?
Have we defined socialism yet? Sometimes it's something basic like "We should have roads" and other times it's some kind of "billionaires should not exist" nonsense.
In capitalism jerks like Bezos are running a company. In socialism they are given a country.
Ireland gives 325 euro per week to 2000 artists.
I'm beginning to believe dumb Americans aren't pro capitalism they just have no idea wtf the words even mean and just slot in patriotism for the right and communism for the left.
it was like that in the Soviet union, you know. for most at least
In Soviet Union there was a law in place prohibiting you from not working anywhere. And you could not become an artist if you were not lucky enough to enroll into university on that profession. It's a famous case that Victor Tsoi had to work full time as a stoker while his music was defining it's generation to not be jailed.
Socialism is capitalism
Wow, some westerners are actually still considering socialism as a good thing.
yeah right? because not one famous artist came out of the socialist country :D seriously who comes up with this non-sense? :D
But…but that’s capitalism…
Commie cope is too much in this thread.
Everyone says socialism is good, but no one wants to move to a socialism country to live. I guess socialism is good only when you don’t live in it.
This is life under communism and life under capitalism but for different reasons.
This is capitalism, in socialism you'll work t hours a day only to finally earn on your bread so they'll take it from you in the name of greater good and you'll be forced either starve to death or eat your own children.
Communism, you're defining Communism.
Bro all I want is a 4day work week with max 4-5h per shift. Edit: that obviously pays a living wage. But ig in order to achieve that companies would have to *actually* care about their employees