• lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    The ones that didn’t give up & dismantle themselves, because they couldn’t deliver on their promises[1] or beat the west even on their own terms & measures of success[2]?

    Other communist states still exist: Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea. China is a strong contender. However, it achieved its economic edge by liberalizing its state capitalist economy. Its economic inequality is worse than that of liberal democracies in Europe, Canada, East Asia, Australia: check out the detailed view of this world map of gini coefficients. Its civil & political rights are difficult to understate & its recent campaign to repress its LGBT+ population is only the latest episode. Nonetheless, it’s credibly a “more successful iteration of socialism”.

    Beyond communist states, social democracies in the West are “successful iteration[s] of socialism” with lower economic inequality.


    1. The Soviet constitution of 1977 made a number of promises it couldn’t realize.

      • labor, free from exploitation, as the source of growth
      • continuous improvement of their living standards (art. 39)
      • steady growth of the productive forces (art. 40).

      It never fulfilled its founding promise of a communist society. ↩︎

    2. Forced labor camps/Gulags are the opposite of labor free from exploitation.

      When the wall fell, East Germany was significantly poorer than West Germany: GDP per capita less than half with lagging living standards. Other economies that started poorer than East Germany beat it or caught up to West Germany.

      Chronic shortages increasingly led people to the second economy with its blat (favors) network. They were unable to sustain economic growth to increase living standards.

      The Soviet experience of socialist ownership and the concomitant centrally planned character of the economy showed the difficulties of realizing economic growth in order to ensure an increasing standard of living. Growth in the Soviet Union had been high in the nineteen thirties and early fifties, but had been deteriorating ever since.

      Eventually, the last Soviet leaders, conceding failure by their own standards (economic, social, & cultural rights) & western standards (civil & political rights), dismantled the system from within: Western governments had exceeded their communist state by all standards.

      The end of the Cold War has changed the focus of the debate on human rights. The West, with its focus on civil and political rights, no longer opposed the Soviet states, with their emphasis on economic, social and cultural rights. The demise of the communist systems gave rise to a certain extent of triumphalism in the West, which had proven to be not only superior in political and civil rights, but also in economic and social rights. The economies of the western countries produced much more income and the material welfare of their populations was much higher than that of those living in Eastern Europe.

      ↩︎
    • dogbert@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Social democracy is not socialism. How many times do we have to teach you this lesson old man. Having characteristic of socialism does not make something socialist otherwise capitalism would be socialist. If the workers dont own the means of production, it is not socialism.