Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
What are the actual downsides to socialism?
And don't say corruption. We have that in capitalism as well.
Also don't say parasites too lazy to work taking advantage of the system. We have that in capitalism also. They own mega yachts instead of a shopping cart.
It's hard to distil into three words, so it fails to win elections.
People hear socialism and immediately think Stalin, that's one problem. Another problem is thinking having a capitalistic system and socialist services are somehow necesarily mutually exclusive.
Capitalism works fine in some area's. Socialism is needed where it won't. Healthcare is a case in point. Everybody needs it when they need it, so there's really no reason to leave that shit to any "market" and therefore chance. Investments in public transport, taking care of the livability at the bottom end of the economic ladder are other examples.
Capitalism is dogshit when you have deal with things you just can't or morally shouldn't attach an ROI to.
Basic neccesities (healthcare, including mental healthcare, nutrition, electricity, clothing, heating, water, communication, housing, transport, etc.) should be covered by default.
Then, less basic neccesities (like entertainment, fashion, safe drugs) could be profited from.
I'm assuming you want to abolish money and free markets altogether, because otherwise we're just talking about capitalism with social safety nets a la most of Europe.
So: Depends. Are we making working voluntary, or are we forcing everyone into jobs they may or may not like?
If it's the former, then there's no reason to work jobs that don't seem interesting or fulfilling. Good luck keeping the garbage service running.
If it's the latter, then well, economically everything's great, but the downside is that people will be forced to do jobs they don't like.
If you DON'T want to abolish money and free markets altogether, then there's still going to be private property, so then that's the downside. It's the exact same one we already have from capitalism. Just less of it, because more capital is redistributed via taxation.
Non-ironically: the fact that it's not liked by groups of people capable of sabotaging it. For example, is the USA at fault for the embargo on Cuba and all the hardships it goes through? Yes. Is it still a problem for people living in Cuba? Also yes.
Unfortunately, some things may not be your fault, but they are your problem. And as long as there will be entities who don't like you and are able to make your life worse (so basically forever as long as there exist powerful non socialist nations), that's a problem you have to deal with.
And I don't say this as a critique of socialism itself, yet it's still a downside of it. Unfortunately, being liked by the bullies is an advantage and not being liked by the bullies is a downside, since they will bully you. And at the level of nations, there isn't a bigger authority you can go to. It's just school kids with bullies but there is no supervisor teacher. You could make the bullies unable to bully you by either becoming stronger then them or banding together with others who are against the bullies. But just like in a street fight, playing dirty is an advantage, so the bullies are at an advantage.
Again, this is not the fault of socialism, but it is one of its problems.
Well the downside is they would lose a tiny insignificant amount of profit as they would no longer be allowed to abuse their workforce quite so much. If they actually sat down and did the maths they would work out that it isn't really worth fighting against it. But a lot of Republicans don't like it on principle.
That's why they always come up with hand wavy arguments about the need to incentivise work. You can always see them a mile off because they're the type that keep yelling about how minimum wage should not be a livable wage, because it discourages people to advance.
One name: Stalin!
He's dead.
Jim.
And why do so many people not know what it is?
I suspect, in largest part, because:
Rule 239: Never be afraid to mislabel a product.
Every single thing that people criticize socialism or socialist countries for is literally just a description of capitalism.
"Yeah but not in a woke way. So, it's totally different!"
The problem will always be rules for thee not for me.
They'd have sparkling socialism while we have dirt individualism.
The sad thing about this is it shows how much of politics we acctualy agree on.
I used to hang out with a few rednecks. Good people, but absolutely indoctrinated. Union workers who didn't know the history of unions.
We got drunk around a bonfire one night and I started talking about solidarity, unions, workers rights, labor value, personal / private / public property, etc, etc.
By 3am, we were talking about seizing the means of production. If we'd had a few cases of s'mores schnapps, we could've changed history
Fundamental mistake, not good people, indoctrinated bad people.
And I'm sure, within one week, they were right back where they were.
It's like that all around people mostly agree on things or at least want to work together. The problem is our "Leaders" don't want any part of that.
I hung out with the warehouse guys at my job and one of them talked about how good his wife's nurses union was. I agreed with him, and made a joke about the warehouse guys unionizing.
A few of them got really upset, and couldn't explain why they were upset. They just kept saying "We didn't understand". Like brother, right now - there's nothing stopping the company from firing you... I think you don't understand.
Isn't there a leap from "workers should own their workplace" to "the people should own the workforce"? Like the difference from Steam's business model, and full blown USSR communism?
People always love to equate socialism and communism as if one is the natural consequence of the other. They're on opposite ends of the 2D political spectrum. Communism is right-wing social policy, left-wing economic policy.
Basically if the Republicans actually learnt how to run an economy.
Although it would be better than the current crop of idiots it wouldn't be the most desirable outcome.
There is no political idea that cannot be shown from positive side so that anyone would agree.
I don't believe this : show nazism so that anyone would agree !
Most left-leaning ideologies can, but not all ideologies.
I almost got a Trump voter to agree with socialism by pointing out that the concrete plant he and his father worked at, which supported a whole town, could be shut down by someone halfway around the world to save a buck. I asked him “shouldn’t you have a say in that?”