• realitista@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Kerala: As you mention, not a country. Also didn’t really seize the means of production. But when I think of Communism working well, it’s at a local level like this rather than at the level of a country. There are communes and kibbutzes that lasted decades. Generally a tough life but at a small level you can have a government controlling everything without hopefully making as many huge mistakes. Worst case you can more easily just leave if they do (hopefully they let you).

    Chile: Also didn’t fully seize the means of production, it’s more or less a perfect example of a government that’s run by a socialist majority for a small amout of time and which enacts socialist measures during that time, but never reaching full communism. This is the kind of thing I would hold up as the ideal case. Socialism for long enough to strengthen the situation of the people, but not long enough to wreck the economy and grow into full blown authoritarianism.

    • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Thanks for the detailed responses.

      Sounds like, to me, that you have a bigger issue with government than Socialism or Communism themselves. Are you much of an anarchist?

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        No, I’m more of a social democrat. I’m a believer that the best we’ve come up with is to have a government who’s job is to fill in the holes (economic externalities) of capitalism, while curbing it’s worst instincts (monopolies, tragedy of the commons issues like global warming).

        Indeed this is the system the most successful and happy countries use. Go too far to the capitalist side or too far to the socialist side and things deteriorate quickly, as history shows over and over.

        Right now, especially in the USA, we are experiencing what happens when things go too far to the capitalist side.

        Unfortunately it seems that this combined with misinformation leads to fascism which will destroy even capitalism and likely leave us only with war and authoritarianism. Which is what you get at both extremes of the political spectrum.

        When it comes to personal liberties, I am more of a libertarian though. I am against the war on drugs or most wars, proxy or otherwise, unless they are in defense. The non aggression principle in libertarianism is something that appeals to me.

        How about you? Full blown socialist I’m guessing?

        • Semjaza@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          More Anarchist, I think that we should try to disengage from states and their power structures and treat people with respect and autonomy. Try to bring thee principles into daily life and interactions and live as much of a better alternative as I can.

          Devolution of powers is a fine first step to work towards if engaging electorily, but that’s a long way from the be all and end all of political ideology.

          • realitista@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I’m definitely on board on the small scale. Unfortunately when faced with issues like health care, education, global warming, and curbing the excesses of capitalism, only a government can solve those issues. At least it’s the only mechanism we’ve found so far.

            But yes, government should always be the tool of last resort for things that can be done no other way.