←back to thread

207 points jimhi | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
germandiago ◴[] No.29829418[source]
This is the sad truth of places like Cuba or North Korea. Everything is forbidden to the point that eating is difficult. So people get corrupted and the guards, etc. just want their part.

None of those things should be illegal. It is really annoying to see how a leader class kills people of hunger and make everything illegal so that now everyone is a criminal for trying to survive.

replies(5): >>29829520 #>>29829874 #>>29830389 #>>29833323 #>>29847613 #
FredPret ◴[] No.29829520[source]
Communism is taxes and government regulation gone mad
replies(2): >>29829740 #>>29847666 #
thechao ◴[] No.29829740[source]
Communism is the ownership of the means of production by the workers. You're talking about about an out-of-control regulatory state; maybe one with an authoritarian bent?
replies(7): >>29829800 #>>29830263 #>>29830352 #>>29830371 #>>29834758 #>>29834882 #>>29847671 #
germandiago ◴[] No.29829800[source]
He is talking about the history of communism or socialism towards a communism system anywhere it has been applied.

That system you define there just exists in your head. It is not possible. It is like pretending the existence of unicorns. The real one every time ends up in an authoritarian regime.

replies(1): >>29830165 #
beepbooptheory ◴[] No.29830165[source]
I mean... if you can't believe in something that hasn't yet existed, how does anything come to be at all? Or do you deny that there is any theoretical thought behind communism at all? Is it just something people suddenly found themselves doing, and it failed and that was that?

How does someone dream of things that are better? How can you have faith in anything at all? Is not the love you feel towards your friends and family kind of like the unicorn you are describing? Do you even really feel love, if its just in your "head"?

replies(3): >>29830306 #>>29830329 #>>29830808 #
germandiago[dead post] ◴[] No.29830306[source]
jonway ◴[] No.29831092{3}[source]
I don't necessarily disagree with your comment overall but there are a lot of problems with your list and your methodology.

1: Why isn't france or china on the former or currently socialist list? There are many others.

2: Consider the volatility and violent turmoil, war, genocide, atrocities from those former and present countries from the timeperiod of german unification under bismarck (somewhat arbitrarily chosen date) to the present day.

3: There have been many non-communist and non-socialst nations which where bad and there are still such regimes in existence today.

Eliminating "communism" or "socialism" was not a cure for anything. Many of these countries share different traits which would have a much greater effect on their stability.

replies(3): >>29831774 #>>29832158 #>>29833164 #
germandiago ◴[] No.29833164{4}[source]
1. True, France could be considered to some extent socialist. But it was never a communist system AFAIK. 2. In all countries there have been genocides, starting with Germany, one of the biggest economies. There have been genocides in lots of places a lot of times. But the mindset plays an essential role about development IMHO (this is just opinion).

3. True. I do not think a non-socialist system makes countries automatically successful. But I think that a great degree of economic freedom favors much development. There can be other problems, though.

It is difficult to identify those traits, but I always remember something someone important to me taught me since I was young: first fix it, complain later. It is not about it is your fault or not (extend this to any enemy in any society). If you choose crying and not fixing, you will face a bad fate. If you choose fixing, you can complain or not, but if it is fixed, your fate has way more chances to be a good one.

replies(1): >>29858708 #
1. jonway ◴[] No.29858708{5}[source]
> 1. France could be considered to some extent socialist.

I join you in pointing out that there is not a rigidly adhered to performative standard of government classification. By that I mean for example, that while the USA is generally considered as the quintessential modern, successful democracy, it is not that, but a representative republic with deomcratic elections.

So sure, France hasn't been purely "communist" or "socialist", but the reality of the world is that there is much more going on than could be captured by a check box.

>3. It is difficult to identify those traits, but I always remember something someone important to me taught me since I was young: first fix it, complain later.

Well, we have Iran as just one example of those kind of outcomes. That course is only tolerable from one end of the bayonet. If you stab enough people if might fix every problem we have, but there will be nobody to complain later.

I guess it really is as you say: intervention just causes more intervention...