Billions are suffering so a few could live in luxury and exploit the People

Do "the people" have lots of individual power in North Korea?

Are all free to leave if they choose?

Or is "travelling" and "choosing where we wish to live" just too much like what's allowed in the United States and other non-communist nations.

But before anybody gets too complacent, I borrow and somewhat modify the words of someone quite clever, in order to wonder:

Will socialism eventually turn out to be just communism sold by the drink?

I think those who look will find that Marx did not differentiate between socialism and communism in his writings. Both were used to describe the favored post-capitalist society. In the 19th century, the terms were often used without distinction. And do we remember what the initials U.S.S.R stood for?

Before a government can become all-powerful and all-controlling, it must first become more powerful, and more controlling.

That doesn't always seem to be grasped.

Some might respond with something like "ooooh, communism doesn't want an all-powerful government." Well, I'd love to see an actual example of a communist nation in history WITHOUT a very powerful, centralized government where some don't seem to be much more comfortable than others.

Remember, in the Soviet Union, not everybody shared an apartment with other families. Some even had a nice dacha. And some, but hardly all, were permitted to travel abroad.

I tend to wonder when some with a connection to government power claim to want everybody to have equal outcomes (not merely equal treatment under law), yet are surprisingly "more equal" if you start noticing their own housing and net worth.

I tend to wonder what wonderful, positive, helpful things (if anything) the person has actually achieved, before getting some government power? Or even AFTER getting such power. It might be helpful to consider that, from time to time.

But many don't seem to know or care. Fashion is a powerful stream that carries many along.

@the-porpoise said:

@PhiRosePoet said:

@the-porpoise
Interesting. Are you in there with him?

Let's say I am?

I feel that the urgency should prevail over the duke.
You wouldn't wish to cause yourself any undue discomfort.

Robin hood

It's not as simple as that. There was no starting point for Human civilisation, thus we have a mish-mash of warring tribes still going at it. For 10,000 years people have been getting raided & ruled by people, who just want to provide for their own people. It's a barbaric cycle that can never end.

The monetary system, Big pharma or even 'evil regimes' are not the problem...the problem is Humans are doomed to fail by design. Humanity is progressing at different rates so there can be no concensus on how we should live.....Either we have only one leader on Earth, or no leaders: of which neither situation sounds a good idea

The Cat is out the bag, so our only hope is the that all Countries pool resources and join as one and sing kumbaya before handing over control to an AI trained on the work of Jacque Fresco :)

He who dies with the most toys wins
Lol,ya still dead

Ya rich bastard

Death is the Great Equalizer ...

Damn the drive for great riches
Isn't a mark of success
But rather a mark
Of personal inadequacy
On the human level
And a rather sad comment
Upon self evaluation
Dependent
Upon accumulation

Lol,sounds like something a poor guy would say
But you know
I've never chased that greenback rainbow
And my friends value me
For who I am
And not for what I have

I'd rather be loved
Than envied...

#16

@Noflaps #3
are you not aware how a great part of wealth is gotten by criminal exploitation..

not by >'working hard and doing sth useful'

drugs, modern slavery, unfair trade, fraud, ... murder, organized criminal economy around these

i dare say it's more than >'admittedly, not all easy to accomplish', ... but it might downright require to scrupulessly walk over the dead to play a part in the game of profit as there will be lethal fight for your acquired wealth. scrupuless criminals will come and steal from you and eliminate you if you're not "cooperative" .. that is reality in great parts of the world economy also - not the american dream. rockefeller is long dead and no one needs matches 20 a penny these days

otherwise said: the care, that you need to put into securing what you have, raises exponentially until it masdively affects you, your life, your values as a human - you might then ave to avoid people or disguise to walk town or land freely, and you might end up in isolation on a yacht with alltime the same faces around you and life becoming uniform, boring, nothing new ... out of the suspicion that "they" are "after you" trying to force you to sign a treaty ... with brute violence.

"over there" ... where?

North Korea isn't "far right." To say the least.

There are very few places that are, and ----- for those that arguably might be termed "to the right" -- their conservatism is more a religious fundamentalism, not a love for capitalism and small government.

Notice that the Left does NOT tend to produce small, limited government.

You like more vast government bureaucracy? More large, centralized government? Well, that's not "to the right."

That's not even "to the center."

No matter how much fact you show them,Some people will insist supporting the injustice.Its mostly a pride thing.They dont want to accept they have been fooled all their lifes.Stupid people are obsessed with their pride.

Wdym billions? It's like half of the world population lol

"are you not aware how a great part of wealth is gotten by criminal exploitation.."

writes @DuMussDieUhrDruecken to me,

apparently mistaking me for a tender young man devoid of education and experience, ready to be taught by somebody worldly.

The notion that most wealth is created by "criminal exploitation" seems to be a comfortable worldview for some. The notion that wealth is mostly ill-gotten gains seems to be a very popular, even fashionable notion.

Some seem to tell themselves, "I coulda bin a contender! But I'm just too, too, you know, virtuous!"

And sure, SOME wealth IS created by criminal activity. Like the importation and sale of illegal drugs and child trafficking -- things American president Trump has been trying hard, and pretty successfully, to stop in his own country (DESPITE unremitting criticism and complaint by some assertedly "virtuous" folks on the Left, who don't always seem to understand the logistics of such matters too well).

But most wealth is hardly criminally produced or otherwise "exploitive." At least not in the West -- not in the United States or Europe or in most other advanced countries, some of which are not in the West, of course.

And if you think people are widely "exploited" by the successful capitalists -- you might want to check out some of the salaries being paid by the large corporations. If that's "exploitation" a large fraction of the world might be happy to be so "exploited."

Or, if you want to do a different experiment, you might hire a skilled plumber, electrician or HVAC tech. You might be rather impressed by their billing rates nowadays. I don't think many of those folks are forced to miss too many meals.

No, I don't think most wealthy Western or otherwise advanced industrialists or merchants or athletes or entertainers are criminals or "exploitive" in any negative sense. They do know how to exploit opportunity -- but they aren't evil demons constantly and knowingly breaking law for profit.

That view of the rich -- as a class -- is mostly fantasy and sometimes, I suspect, rather self-serving fantasy. Some people seemingly would like to self-justify seizing and otherwise plundering rather than earning.

Sure, you can find some significant present or historical exceptions to the notion that wealth is not usually ill-gotten. But not too easily and routinely. And much less easily and routinely today than, say, 250 years ago. We aren't living in 1800.

But I doubt I'll convince anybody who wants and has long been taught to feel differently. To such folks, I'd suggest: please don't assume that those who don't agree with you must therefore be inexperienced, untutored rubes. Because you'd often be wrong. Entertainingly wrong.