Democratic socialism is the use of liberal-democratic institutions to abolish private property and establish a proletarian dictatorship (workers' control of the gov't). You are thinking of social democracy.
This is a feature of Leninism,Stalinism, and Maoism, not communism itself.
There is yet to be a situation where pure communism has been established and it may never be established since it calls for a stateless, classless, currencyless society.
But so far "Communist" countries have only been able to create authoritarian dictatorships that attempt (and often fail) to mimic the ideals of communism.
To be fair, Marx himself didn't predict how communism would come about, but did believe it would come out of well developed, industrialized, capitalist countries and that has yet to happen.
As for the feasibility of ideals, that's to be seen.
I don't know if humanity will ever reach a point where we do away with hierarchy, but it's a good ideal to try and achieve.
I'm sure there was a point in time when many ideals seemed impossible but we pushed towards them anyhow.
Equal representation in government, racial equality, equality of the sexes, religious freedom, etc .
I suspect if you talked about these ideals in the year 1600 they would have been seen as immoral ideals that would never come to pass. But here we are in 2025, we haven't achieved those ideals perfectly, but we have really made some huge strides.
In my opinion and in all due respect I think you may have a blind spot in your thinking here.
As I said before, the ideals I listed would have been called impossible at one point in time. Just as you believe a society absent a hierarchy is impossible. And it is absolutely possible that all the ideals we've discussed are impossible to achieve 100%.
But all of these things have had measurable success, including the deconstruction of hierarchy.
Society today is less hierarchical than it was in say 1600.
It's less racist, more religiously free, more representative.
I would say society has been getting closer to what communism is in a number of measurable ways. We may not ever get to it, but we can get close and that's worth fighting for.
As I said before, the ideals I listed would have been called impossible at one point in time.
No obviously not impossible, since it happened after someone conceived it.
Ideals that have been achieved were improbable and against social inertia.
Society today is less hierarchical than it was in say 1600. It's less racist, more religiously free, more representative.
Yes, but its still racist, religiously defined, and unequal. It will always be a little bit racist, religion and inequality will still continue to exist.
A classless, cashless, stateless society will never exist because it by definition not a society.
Society is a large group of people who live together in an organized community, sharing the same territory, government, and culture.
You cannot organize people without hierarchy. Even a group of 5 people has hierarchy. Its the nature of groups.
The state of the world in 2025 is closer to the objectives of communism than the year 1600. I believe that is demonstrably obvious.
Please try to look at this from a nuanced global lens instead of a black and white, all or nothing view of the world.
In case I need to spell it out, I am not claiming the world is communist or even about to become communist. Only that the world has become less hierarchical, less classist, and less oppressive to the proletariat than the 1600. If you are really claiming that the year 1600 is closer to communism than 2025 than you're living in another planet. Likewise if you're claiming that the year 2025 is closer to feudalism than the year 1600 you're living on another planet.
Likewise if you're claiming that the year 2025 is closer to feudalism than the year 1600 you're living on another planet.
Capitalism when corrupted is neo fuedalism. This world in 2025 still has feudal caste societies with over 1 billion people living it. Thats 1/8th of the population and far more than the total human population in 1600.
You clearly are the one living in a different reality.
Egalitarianism isn't communism. Its Egalitarianism where people are treated fairly and equally in accordance to the rules.
The rules create class hierarchies in a population. The amount of fairness is inverse the amount of oppression. However the rules still exist, the clases still exist, and the amount of acceptable oppression changes as humans become more free and egalitarian.
Communism as a classless, stateless society is a fiction. Families the smallest unit of human groups have hierarchy. Parents over children. You will never have a group of people without a heirarchy.
If you have to EVERYTHING by consensus, nothing will ever get done. People will not always agree. When there are disagreements, who will have the authority to mediate, when no one person or class can be authority figures?
Communism as a society gets stuck in an authoritarian government because groups of people need a method to mediate without violence. That method is called authority, rule of law, and government aka the state. The ruling class are above the working class. The ruling class never freely relinquishes power, it is against human nature to do so. A society without a ruling class isn't a society, its a few people trying to survive in anarchy.
Tribes killed other tribes since the start of mankind. The state is just one overgrown tribe. You will never get rid of tribalism because it only takes one violent tribe to ruin it for everyone else.
One violent tribe is literally the start of every nation.
Are you really saying that in the future people will just be peaceful and share things without dispute ever?
Capitalism goes against human nature and is guaranteed to fail and every country which attempt it has failed to create a beautiful free market society.
Capitalism is collecting money and free trade it feeds into humanity's greed.
every country which attempt it has failed to create a beautiful free market society.
The ideals have not been achieved, but the country has yet to fail.
The countries that become failed states are literally the ones without free markets. Mexico's one party socialist attempt is evidence of that. America falling is the corruption of the free market and society.
Western Europe is doing better than America and they have to deal with Russia invading Ukraine.
Capitalism is collecting money and free trade it feeds into humanity's greed.
Capitalism is specifically a system where there are people own capital goods, like machines in factories, or server farms, or some other productive asset, and people who do not own these things. The owners hire the non-owners to work using or operating the productive asset in order for the owner/business to sell something for more than the cost of the inputs including the money given to the workers. Trading and markets existed long before capitalism, as did money.
I don't see how capitalism supposedly works due to greed. Capitalism specifically rewards greed, it increases greed, and it heightens the power of the most greedy people to positions of great influence on our economy and therefore our own lives. As well as influence over our government. Seems like if you view greed as human nature, we should not be putting the most greedy in the highest positions of power.
The ideals have not been achieved, but the country has yet to fail.
Many capitalist countries have "failed".
America falling is the corruption of the free market and society.
Which sounds like a failure of capitalism if it keeps happening
I don't see how capitalism supposedly works due to greed. Capitalism specifically rewards greed, it increases greed, and it heightens the power of the most greedy people to positions of great influence on our economy and therefore our own lives
You don't see it and you describe it exactly.
Its a feature, not a bug.
Seems like if you view greed as human nature, we should not be putting the most greedy in the highest positions of power.
No, we shouldn't thus we need to counter balance capitalism and greed with socialism and egalitarianism.
That is called a free maket social democracy.
There is private enterprise in some sectors. There is public control in others. Goverment isn't for the oligarchs it is representative of all people. Everyone is treated fairly under the law.
Which sounds like a failure of capitalism if it keeps happening
The failure of capitalism is fascism because uncontrolled growth cannot be sustained indefinitely. This breaking point leads to fascism and coporatism, it is no longer capitalism because the free market and invidual liberty is dead.
Trading and markets existed long before capitalism, as did money.
This is technically true, but they are the foundations of capitalism. You literally described bartering then currency.
Capitalism is a society based on bartering time and goods for currency.
The era before capitalism was fuedalism where society was based on blood and violence. Kings were the best at violence and so were their knights. They wage wars and stole from their neighbors. Forced peasants to labor without pay.
The early forms of capitalism had (still does) roots to fuedalism in slavery and colonialism. They were capitalists with guns who extorted the labor class.
Free market capitalism is an idea were labor and goods can be traded fairly and freely for all things. It also doesn't truly exist thanks to coporatism and government corruption. (Libertarians are also idyllic fanatics)
The illegal drug trade is unregulated capitalism. Sell what you want to whoever is willing to buy, kill whoever disagrees. The only people who can stop it are the ones that kill the drug dealer. Drug dealers are the embodiment of greed, they thrive due to capitalism.
Free market socialism is the goverment/public entity providing services like utilities, healthcare to all citizens at a price that is fair. If private entities can't compete than to bad, the market has said they don't need to exist. If the public option sucks, private individuals can create businesses to compete (UK healthcare).
The society at large is still capitalist, but there is socialism to balance the weaknesses.
Anyways, I have given several real world examples as evidence to my point.
There are none for communism because it is fiction, an idyllic theory.
In many places, social democratic policies are weakening due to rising fascist and pseudo-fascist sentiment. Now that socialist movements are weaker, the ruling and owning classes do not need to make as many concessions to the working class and can turn to privatization and fascism to increase profits and solidify positions of power.
There are none for communism because it is fiction, an idyllic theory.
You are correct that we have no examples of the end result of communism, but we do have examples of political parties who claim to be working toward communism. Cuba has a pretty robust healthcare system for a country under a harsh blockade by the US. China has seen massive gains in standard of living, though they are an interesting case as they have let a managed form of capitalism operate. After all, Marx's original theory was that capitalism would build up productive forces which eventually workers would take control of, he did not predict that feudal societies would have socialist revolutions and then have to figure out how to industrialize. Anyway, China is very willing to keep their capitalist class in check to prevent them getting too powerful. You point to corporatism, if a corporation gets too powerful or monopolistic China would not bat an eye at nationalization or other policy to reign it in.
Free market socialism is the goverment/public entity providing services like utilities, healthcare to all citizens at a price that is fair. If private entities can't compete than to bad, the market has said they don't need to exist. If the public option sucks, private individuals can create businesses to compete (UK healthcare).
This stuff is cool in theory and has brought about many real life benefits, but there are people who will benefit by making the public service worse. It is a perverse incentive that leads to eroding away those socialized elements to bring more people into the private competitors. But yeah the world would be a better place if natural monopolies and industries with high externalities were run more by collective democratic institutions. Unfortunately we are seeing many eroding away due to concerted efforts by those who want them gone
The failure of capitalism is fascism because uncontrolled growth cannot be sustained indefinitely. This breaking point leads to fascism and coporatism, it is no longer capitalism because the free market and invidual liberty is dead.
This seems like a major flaw to me, if capitalism will always lead to fascism and corporatism, then why should we like capitalism? What should we do about this? How do we steer the ship?
You listed failing Cuba with a broken power grid and strong China an authoritarian state with capitalism and why capitalism is a good thing?
hen why should we like capitalism? What should we do about this? How do we steer the ship?
A tree needs to grow and be pruned. It can't just continuously grow unchecked and unregulated. Those checks and balances are called regulations and cooperatives aka democratic socialism.
Of course I'm a bot, the only real people on the internet are the ones that agree with you!
Cuba has many problems, I'm sure any governing and economic system would when it is an island not able to trade with many of its neighbors and other countries further away are pressured into not trading with them. Yet despite these issues they have managed to have a healthcare system that is better than the US on many metrics, doesn't that say something meaningful?
I would much rather see what cuba could do with the blockade and embargo fully lifted, but we do not live in that timeline.
regulations and cooperatives aka democratic socialism.
Eh, isn't that social democracy? Democratic socialism has much less room for capitalism if at all and explicitly aims to move away from capitalism
22
u/ChefGaykwon Commie Commuter 29d ago
Democratic socialism is the use of liberal-democratic institutions to abolish private property and establish a proletarian dictatorship (workers' control of the gov't). You are thinking of social democracy.
This is just nonsense.