neverfail wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:12 pm
cassowary wrote: ↑Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:59 am
neverfail wrote: ↑Mon Jul 09, 2018 3:04 pm
cassowary wrote: ↑Mon Jul 09, 2018 7:45 am
Human nature is the real problem which renders Socialism impossible to achieve.
Human nature as defined by John Calvin?
History has proven me and Calvin correct. Look at Mao's communal farms. People ate the same amount of food regardless of what effort they put in. It was an attempt to apply Marx's dictum, "To each according to his needs; from each according to his ability."
This requires selfless altruism in human nature that is not there. That was why millions starved to death. Look at Venezuela. Socialism failed again. Admit it, Neverfail, human nature does not allow Socialism to succeed.
What you define as "human Nature" I regard as merely the sad and nasty consequence of power politics.
Not the same!
Dictatorship is the result of Socialism because you need massive coercion to force people to do something not in human nature.
I don't know what you mean by power politics. Does that mean dictatorship?
If so, the Israeli
Kibbutzim were not operating under a dictatorship. Israel is a democracy. The Socialist inspired Kibbutz also failed. Without a dictatorship to enforce Sociialism, the Kibbutzim had to abandon much of Socialism in order to survive.
Excerpt from link:
As Becker puts it, "nowhere is the failure of socialism clearer than in the radical transformation of the Israeli kibbutz." If a socialist experiment could ever succeed, it should have done so in this case. Most kibbutzim were founded by highly motivated volunteers strongly committed to socialist ideology. For many years, kibbutzim had great prestige in Israeli society, and many of the nation's early leaders were kibbutz members. After Israel became an independent state in 1948, the kibbutzim also benefited from extensive government subsidies. Unlike other socialist experiments, the failure of the kibbutzim cannot be ascribed to lack of ideological fervor, inadequate resources, or hostility from the surrounding "capitalist" society. Despite these advantages, kibbutzim failed to achieve a high level of economic productivity, and even failed to retain the loyalty of many of their own members. Over time, many kibbutz residents became frustrated with the perverse incentives created by socialism, and many also yearned for the individual freedom and privacy created by private property rights.
The children of the original kibbutzim left the kibbutz, especially the talented who felt that the bums were benefiting from their labor and skills. So they had to water down the Socialism and reward people according to their effort and abilities.
A change came to the kibbutz because the kibbutz did not have the power to compel people to do what they rather not do. This is not so with governments:
Of course there is one advantage that socialist governments enjoy that the kibbutzim did not. Unlike a kibbutz, a totalitarian socialist state can use its secret police to suppress dissent and force the people to work for the state whether they want to or not. This explains why Israel's kibbutzim have mostly abandoned socialism, while North Korea and Cuba have not. When given a choice (as in Eastern Europe after 1989), the people of socialist states have rejected socialism even more decisively than most Israeli kibbutzim eventually did.
Thus Socialism and dictatorship go hand in hand. The more Socialism you try to implement, the more compulsion you need, until you get a dictatorship. That's what happened to Venezuela.