Vaush Discusses the Merits of Socialism vs Social Democracy

[DocWatts]

Another excellent discussion between from Vaush with Denims on the relative merits of Socialism vs Social Democracy. 

I'd really like to give kudos to Vaush for how respectful and productive his discussions tend to be with people who represent different socio-political belief systems from his own. Granted Socialism and Social Democracy aren't that far apart politically, but I've also seen him have perfectly amiable and respectful discussions with Libertarians and young Conservatives. I consider him to be one of the best personalities on Youtube when it comes to discussing politics (granted I'll fully own that there's a lot of overlap between Vaush and my own socio-political worldview).

That said, while Vaush makes a number of excellent points in this video, I do think that Social Democracy is preferable as a matter of pragmatism. I could see the United States transitioning to a Social Democracy within my lifetime;  market Socialism on the other hand, even if preferable in many ways, still seems like a long way off, if it ever happens. Don't let the Perfect become the enemy of the Good, and all that.
 

 

[Leo Gura]

Socialism will simply not happen in America for 50 years at least, so it's rather moot to talk about.

Social Democracy is what we are realistically fighting for.

[DocWatts]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Socialism will simply not happen in America for 50 years at least, so it's rather moot to talk about.

Social Democracy is what we are realistically fighting for.

Agreed %100.

[Leo Gura]

I am not at all convinced socialism works. There are no workable implementations of socialism yet. Maybe in 200 years it will be viable when everyone moves way up the Spiral.

Vaush's and Wolff's socialist ideas are way too naive. It's not gonna work in current society.

[DocWatts]

14 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I am not at all convinced socialism works. There are no workable implementations of socialism yet. Maybe in 200 years it will be viable when everyone moves way up the Spiral.

Vaush's and Wolff's socialist ideas are way too naive. It's not gonna work in current society.

Isn't a certain amount of Idealism healthy for a society though? A lot of the progress we take for granted today would have certainly been deemed naïve idealism in the past.

[Leo Gura]

It's all about balance.

[DocWatts]

27 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It's all about balance.

For sure. I'd also contend that in order to put in the work to make a better world, you first have to believe that a better world is possible; which is what idealism excels at. I would also contend that in addition it provides moral grounding to more pragmatic political aims, and leaves open to possibility of further progress.

Also as far as socialism not having a workable implementation so far (which is also my main critique of it), isn't it true that some nation would have to be the first to implement it successfully, without a template to work from? Just like there would have to be a first for representative democracy, a first for capitalism, for universal suffrage, etc, etc.

Edited January 15, 2021 by DocWatts

[Yog]

When you make a mayo, you stir that egg, and while doing that you slowly add oil, drop by drop, slowly. You don't just pour the whole bottle in.

The end result is nor egg, nor oil, its mayo!!

Mayo is comprised of 80+ % oil, but the oil as we knew it previously.

I think socialism is more like a mayo and less like an oil.

Damn I want to cook now!

 

[DocWatts]

11 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

It's not fair to say socialism failed, or hasn't worked yet as the definition of 'work' varies per person. We do have many snippets and clues throughout history and real life to point that it does work.

Between that and the long history of the CIA launching coups against countries experimenting with Socialism, it might at least be fair to say that Socialism hasn't exactly given a fair chance to compete. Allowing countries and political parties to experiment with (non authoritarian) socialism will at least give us case studies to consider, but that will never happen if every experiment is strangled in the cradle by outside parties. 

[Leo Gura]

There are far more problems for socialism than outside meddling.

Every socialist system eventually had to revert back to capitalism to meet the needs of the people.

China, Russia, Norway, even North Korea.

[Yog]

The whole "socialism" thing works fine and makes perfect sense in concept land. I do not know any examples of it working in the real world. I tried to find, but couldn't.

This is what I feel is the greatest mistake. Its people wanting to implement the whole thing, or huge chunks at once.

Imagine having a great and huge business plan, if executed well, you are going to be the most successful business man in the country, its a big and complex plan involving many things, on paper all the systems are in line, everything makes sense and fits well together..... now you implement it and something goes horribly wrong, How do you know where is the fault, you cant, you implemented 100 things at once and now all the gears are turning, you try to move one piece to fix it, everything moves along with it resulting in even more damage. its almost guaranteed to fail if implemented in this way. Historically this is what we have done.

So what we need is, to slowly inject the system with such policies and see how they really stand. Test, refine, QA, build upon it.  In some time we will have a socialist-capitalist blend.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Yog
typos

[DocWatts]

44 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There are far more problems for socialism than outside meddling.

Every socialist system eventually had to revert back to capitalism to meet the needs of the people.

China, Russia, Norway, even North Korea.

China, Russia, and North Korea were all Command Economies with Central Planning, which I'll concede is completely untenable.

Would you extend that critique to market socialism as well (where workers own and control their workplaces democratically but still use a market based system to produce and distribute goods)? It seems like Market Socialism could offers a potential avenue to a workable system that blends positive aspects of both socialism and capitalism.

Edited January 16, 2021 by DocWatts

[Girzo]

Who really cares about these labels? Socialism, capitalism, it says nothing, every normal person has their own imagination of what these words mean and they don't care about educating themselves.

What we should really focus on is policy. Because policy is what is actually implemented and advertised to people. Whether you could call a policy socialist or capitalist is not important, because there are both good and bad socialist policies and good and bad capitalist policies, so you can't even use these terms to easily differentiate what you should support.

[Danioover9000]

@Yog

2 hours ago, Yog said:

When you make a mayo, you stir that egg, and while doing that you slowly add oil, drop by drop, slowly. You don't just pour the whole bottle in.

The end result is nor egg, nor oil, its mayo!!

Mayo is comprised of 80+ % oil, but the oil as we knew it previously.

I think socialism is more like a mayo and less like an oil.

Damn I want to cook now!

 

   Beautiful example! 

[Girzo]

24 minutes ago, Yog said:

The whole "socialism" thing works fine and makes perfect sense in concept land. I do not know any examples of it working in the real world. I tried to find, but couldn't.

The thing is: neoliberal policies and ideas currently at work in our current economic system are also castles in the sky, they belong to fantasy land. They simply don't work as advertised, none of the big heads implementing them have predicted the 2008 crisis.

Here's Alan Greenspan who has been guiding US monetary policy for 18 years, deregulating banking industry:

Quote

I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organisations, specifically banks and others, were such that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms,

Quote

Dem. Henry Waxman: You found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working?

Greenspan: That's precisely the reason I was shocked because I'd been going for 40 years or so with considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.

And considering that looking at the statistics the relative situation for an average worker in the US has been getting worse, I would be suspicious of the "it was working exceptionally well for 40 years or so" claim.

But to be fair, Neoliberals has gotten a few things right, so it's not like this ideology is all bad. They have predicted effects like recession-inflation, but on the other hand they stripped Americans of a chance to get Universal Basic Income implemented by Nixon. So sad guys, you were so close to becoming more communist than communists, haha. Instead you have got privatized healthcare and unregulated banking sector.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Girzo

[Leo Gura]

52 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Would you extend that critique to market socialism as well (where workers own and control their workplaces democratically but still use a market based system to produce and distribute goods)? It seems like Market Socialism could offers a potential avenue to a workable system that blends positive aspects of both socialism and capitalism.

Point to examples of it working in the real world.

And if you can't find examples then the burden is on you to articulate in painful detail how your system will work and handle all the complexities that the current system handles.

It's easy to see Social Democracy working. Much harder to see pure socialism working.

[Leo Gura]

45 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Alright, but in all do seriousness it does eliminate the issue of exploitation in Capitalism (since there's no single boss to exploit the business) whilst keeping the positives of a trading market economy.

It doesn't eliminate anything if it doesn't work as a whole.

[Girzo]

Organizations like Buurtzorg (Dutch home-care organization, working in self-managed teams) or companies like Haier (Chinese giant home appliance manufacturer, also organizing its workers in self-managed teams) work.

I think it's the most possible vector of change, coming from grass-roots organizations and entrepreneurs themselves. The government has just to curb the "too big to fail" players who abuse and lobby the system. The government should also only take control of parts of crucial infrastructure like healthcare, information, food, housing, education, transport.

A lot of challenges coming in the next 30 years for sure with all that space mining, global warming, AI and shit. Do I believe we will have in that time an AI that could become our machine overlord? Nope. Do I believe we will have an AI that wipes out need for 90% of truck drivers, graphic designers, coders, etc.? 100% yes.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Girzo

[DocWatts]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Point to examples of it working in the real world.

And if you can't find examples then the burden is on you to articulate in painful detail how your system will work and handle all the complexities that the current system handles.

It's easy to see Social Democracy working. Much harder to see pure socialism working.

That's fair. And for what it's worth I'm an advocate for Social Democracy, but at the same time I don't see why that can't also be a springboard to explore other forward thinking socio-economic ideas within that framework.

I could point to examples of successful worker co-ops, such as The Mondragon Corporation in Spain (the largest worker cooperative in the world), as evidence for aspects of market socialism that have been successful.

Gradualism and experimentation seem the way to go; afterall Social Democracy, while a huge improvement over what we have now, of course isn't perfect and can be improved upon.

Edited January 16, 2021 by DocWatts

[Leo Gura]

38 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

I could point to examples of successful worker co-ops, such as The Mondragon Corporation in Spain (the largest worker cooperative in the world), as evidence for aspects of market socialism that have been successful.

Not nearly good enough because that is a tiny island within a capitalist system. That is not the same as replacing the whole capitalist system in which that island survives.