Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

marxists.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 124 posts

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#31

Post by Sankozi »

zokier wrote: post #8
cloutchaser wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a social safety net so that the unemployed can live somewhere and eat, under this definition do they count as unemployed? And a second point, in my home country the government introduced rules where to have government benefits you have to work a little, painting your community, cutting grass in public places etc. People on the left were outraged. How dare you give work to people on a government mandate, a…

If you need to work to get money, it is no more benefit, it is employment. And with employment should come all the benefits of employment, meaning vacation days, insurances, proper wage (>minimum wage), etc.

"you have to work a little"

It can easily be benefit for example if you work 1/8 time for 1/2 of pay.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#32

Post by fellowniusmonk »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #28
fellowniusmonk wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Democracies never end up in dictatorships? How much historical data do we have on that? I'm pretty sure at least brazil was democratic and then was ruled by military dictatorship (juntas) for a long time. 1940s Germany as well right? I just realized I've never seen the breakdown on that for any length of time, lets say going back to the first republics? I don't know, it seems like a lot of European countries with a p…

If you redefine socialism as "what most Western Europe countries do" you can have some real paradoxical views.

I didn't.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#33

Post by thodin »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #25
refurb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_(social_offense) In the Soviet Union, which declared itself a workers' state, every adult able-bodied person was expected to work until official retirement. Thus unemployment was officially and theoretically eliminated. Those who refused to work, study or serve in another way risked being criminally charged with social parasitism

In other words, rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites) and they received the same treatment that the US gives to it’s unemployed and homeless, except the US maintains an economic system that guarantees an unemployed and homeless population. If you think you’re making the USSR appear less reasonable than the US, maybe think again.

It was difficult to be rentier in USSR because it was officially forbidden to "own" even 2 apartments at the same time.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#34

Post by onenukecourse »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #17
mantas wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a shame Marxism/communism/socialism ends up a tyrannical dictatorship every time :D

If you really think that’s a useful description of Gorbeschev, where are you getting your history from? Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? How did Pinochet fall?

Gorby appears to be the sole exception. Might have something to do with having close family killed in the famines, and tortured in the Gulags. Every European other regime fell under pressure from the streets.

Cuba is a tyranny. They've soften up to get European investment and tourists, but they're brutal in their indoctrination, imprisonment of dissidents, etc. They're also an important (and beloved) backstop preventing American domination in L. America.

Pinochet didn't fall, he basically handed over power peacefully. His (surprisingly liberal) constitution of 1980 established him as head of the armed forces (which he was until he died) and promised free elections. He allowed for a fair and free elections in '88 that he lost and whose result he respected paving the way for the 1990 presidential elections. Again he lost and respected the result.

He's also a murderer who slaughtered thousands of innocents, but that's peanuts compared what the commies have wrought.

Everything I wrote is a gross oversimplification. Volumes have been written for each of the three topics you glibly referenced.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#36

Post by helloworld11 »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #17
mantas wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a shame Marxism/communism/socialism ends up a tyrannical dictatorship every time :D

If you really think that’s a useful description of Gorbeschev, where are you getting your history from? Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? How did Pinochet fall?

Cuba is indeed a tyrannical dictatorship and has been for decades. A one-party state that regularly arrested dissidents and those who simply didn't fit its ideal narratives even if they had committed no normally defined criminal offense. I can't at all imagine how you could define the decades under castro and his brother as anything close to democratic. By definition that would require political plurality, freedom of association and freedom of expression, all of which were and still are very visibly lacking in Cuban society.

To say all of the above, by the way, is in no way to defend the also barbaric practices of the Pinochet regime. Pinochet however at least left power after a forceful referendum and peaceful transition to democracy. The ruling elite of Cuba never did and in no way ever even let things reach the point of an honest referendum.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#37

Post by yazantapuz »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #25
refurb wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitism_(social_offense) In the Soviet Union, which declared itself a workers' state, every adult able-bodied person was expected to work until official retirement. Thus unemployment was officially and theoretically eliminated. Those who refused to work, study or serve in another way risked being criminally charged with social parasitism

In other words, rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites) and they received the same treatment that the US gives to it’s unemployed and homeless, except the US maintains an economic system that guarantees an unemployed and homeless population. If you think you’re making the USSR appear less reasonable than the US, maybe think again.

> rent-seekers in the USSR were called what they are (parasites)

So, if I plan to live from rents that i earn from my past work i am a parasite?

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#38

Post by onenukecourse »

marcodiego wrote: post #6

It is a shame Marxsim/communism/socialism is so much associated with tyranny and dictatorships.

Before the staunchly communist Freda Utley left for the USSR in the 30s, Bertrand Russel, her godfather, cautioned her not to delude herself that any flaws in the society were because of poor implementation by the Russias. Whatever she saw there was socialism he said.

Russel, of course, was aligned with the left his entire life.

Since then socialism (per Marx defined as the nationalization of all but private effects) has been independently tried to the same ruinous effect. Every socialist regime is unique, because they all try to explain and fix why the others failed; uniquely brutal reaching it's zenith with Pol Pot.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#39

Post by yazantapuz »

ARandumGuy wrote: post #14
cloutchaser wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have a social safety net so that the unemployed can live somewhere and eat, under this definition do they count as unemployed? And a second point, in my home country the government introduced rules where to have government benefits you have to work a little, painting your community, cutting grass in public places etc. People on the left were outraged. How dare you give work to people on a government mandate, a…

First off, Stalin is not the be all end all of socialist thought. In fact a lot (most?) people who call themselves socialist these days don't even like Stalin. Even if he was well liked, one can support someone's broader ideas without supporting every single individual position. It's not a contradiction to say "I like [person]'s ideas, except [specific idea], which is dumb." Secondly, tying unemployment benefits to c…

> Work should not be a requirement to live a comfortable life.

_Someone else_ will we working to give you a comfortable life.

Re: Marxism vs. Liberalism: An Interview Between J.V. Stalin and H.G. Wells (1934)

#40

Post by Jensson »

nopenopenopeno wrote: post #17
mantas wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a shame Marxism/communism/socialism ends up a tyrannical dictatorship every time :D

If you really think that’s a useful description of Gorbeschev, where are you getting your history from? Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”? How did Pinochet fall?

> Is Cuba a “tyrannical dictatorship”?

Yes, looks like it works just like any other communist state. Communism needs to be maintained through tyranny, people wouldn't vote for it if they could which is why communist states must constantly supress dissent and never allow people to vote for other parties. When people can vote they quickly vote out communism in favor of more liberal parties, communism is very short lived in free societies as when people try it they quickly learn to hate it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/13/world/americas/cuba-judge...

Post reply on HN