this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2025
225 points (77.6% liked)
Memes
52036 readers
807 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You have it backwards. Greed is the root of our capitalism epidemic. And you think communist leaders are immune to greed? Just look at NK. The people share what little scraps there are while government officials live very easy lives
Found the problem
I don't follow, Communism in the Marxian sense has administration and thus leadership. Are you suggesting a different structure?
I can't look at NK because the world capitalist economy isolated them, so I'm not going to argue about their material conditions. I don't think anyone is immune to greed, but I think having a system that rewards greed is going to turn it from an aberration to an epidemic.
To your first point, let's pretend you're right and look at it in the abstract. What is to be done? Do you want to kill greed? How would you do that?
It's a hereditary dictatorship that isolates itself to control all information its public can access.
Simping for alternative authoritarian regimes is NOT an effective way of fighting the tyranny of Capital.
Not trying to simp. Just saying you and I don't know what's really going on over there because of how our dear leaders control all the information that comes out.
Whose dear leaders? When reporters visit North Korea, who is controlling their movements and managing what they are allowed to see?
You're getting somewhere! First, don't point your finger at capitalism as the problem. Second, acknowledge & understand greed and how it is inherent in all human nature. Third, build systems that minimize the damage done by individual or corporate greed. Check against consolidation, monopolization, and short term Wall St like thinking of endless growth. Four, make sure socialist programs exist to support everyone, and capitalism is not the only way to live, it's optional. When you think like that, the European nations seem to be doing things quite alright, but they are still vulnerable to greed. And so they must be vigilant against greed, not capitalism.
You already lost me
I would rather acknowledge and encourage humans inherent nature to cooperate and grow together.
Like building an economy that doesn't inherently reward greed? I wonder what that would look like.
These things exist because of capitalism
That's social welfare. Being socialist means the workers own the means of production
It's so easy to live in the USA and just not do capitalism /s
Do you understand that their wealth was pillaged from the global south?
Can you give me a description of what makes socialism bad solely based on how it works (not referencing any country who may have attempted it)?
I know, many here have have an automatic trigger on 'capitalism', but I appreciate you trying. I will try to respond sincerely.
Me too! Cooperation is the good against the evil of greed. But greed still exists, you can't wish it away, you have to strategize against.
Greed is rewarded in every economy.
No, they exist because of greed & corruption and failure of systems to contain those things.
No, socialist systems like free housing, healthcare, education can exist alongside capitalism. Worker owned systems like cooperatives still operate in a market.
It's impossible in the USA, I'm with you.
Yes, the British East India company uprooted my own ancestors and erased all culture. I'm against imperialism as much as you, but this has nothing to do with it.
Cowbee is mostly correct so I'm not going to address everything but there are 2 pieces I want to respond to.
That doesn't seem to be true. Like an economy that doesn't funnel money into individuals. Or even moneyless economies like Library or Gift. (Though moneyless economies imply we're achieving actual communism, going beyond socialism)
Are you talking about free housing (etc) programs being managed as a cooperative, alongside a commodities market of cooperatives? If yes, that's not capitalism, that's socialism. If no, then you must be talking about a welfare state like what's in Scandinavia, which isn't socialist.
Kind of relevant to both points, there are a few different schools of socialism so you could see if any make more sense to you.
The first half of your comment is attributing a static and supernatural quality to the concept of "greed" in a manner that obfuscates the underlying material structures, and why greed is expressed in different ways and degrees depending on the system. This is wrong.
Secondly, Social Programs are not Socialism. Socialism is an economy where Public Ownership is the principle aspect of the economy, while Capitalism is where Private Ownership is the principle. Whichever has firm control of the state, large firms, and key industries is the principle aspect. A cooperative in the US is not a single fragment of Socialism, just like a market in the PRC is not simply Capitalism.
Now, for your five points:
This is not a problem with Socialism in any capacity. I truly don't understand what you mean by saying standardization is an issue with Socialism.
Price fixing is not Socialism itself, but a tool. Socialist systems can and do employ price fixing on some goods, but this is a tool that works well in some situtations and not so well in others, and as such Socialist systems can apply them where needed.
Markets are not Capitalism. Markets work well at lower stages in development, but gradually monopolize and centralize over time, making it more effective to publicly own and plan. You agree with Marx when you say you can't wish them away, but you imply they will always be useful based on a biological need to trade, which does not exist.
Regulations and oversight exists within Socialism, directly breaking the law can be punished and audited. This point is silly.
Checks and balances can be better implemented in Socialist systems where private individuals do not weild massive armies of influence. This is another silly point.
I recommend you read up on Marxism, I keep an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list you can check out. If you haven't investigated a subject, why speak as though you have?
Greed is not an intrinsic human characteristic, as I already explained, and further life under brutal sanctions and embargo is difficult for everyone. The DPRK manages to scrape by with what they can, and which is why lifting the embargo and sanctions is the best thing we can do for the Northern Korean people.
I think the best thing for the people of North Korea is to not force them to live under a brutal dictator.
The people of the DPRK support the system they have, whether it truly has a dictator or not. To overthrow their system by force, ie what the US did in Iraq, would be greatly opposed by the people of the DPRK and yet again the US would end up slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Korean civilians, just like they did in the 50s.
Lifting the sanctions and embargo would dramatically improve their conditions, all the embargo has done is starve people to death during particularly harsh periods, like the Arduous March in the 90s when the Soviet Union, the DPRK's primary trading partner, dissolved. It isn't showing any chances of hurting the legitimacy of the DPRK's government, it's purely to torture the Korean People into opening up their economy so the US can loot and pilliage it like it did to Iraq.
I thought the US killed millions, not 100,000s?
Estimates on the exact distribution of millitary vs Civilian deaths are not known, though millions died in total. That's just from direct involvement in the war, and not the results of sanctions and embargo or other inflicted terror. I use "hundreds of thousands" because it's
It's quite possible that civilian casualties do reach the millions, especially if you include the South Koreans killed by the US and the ROK government in areas like Jeju Island.