What was the most successful socialist society and why?

western europe

because they found balance

There's yet to be a successful socialist society.

>>1436231
this

OBVIOUSLY, THE THIRD REICH.

WHY? BECAUSE NATIONAL SOCIALISM RADICALLY TRANSFORMED GERMANY IN ALL ASPECTS, FOR THE BETTER, FROM CULTURE TO CIVIC INSTITUTIONS; FROM FINANCE TO AGRICULTURE; FROM EDUCATION TO SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, ETCETERA.

Mauritius tbqh

>>1436231
Fuck off

Either Cuba or North Korea

>ugly fucking factories and smoke

Strangely enough a good description of the socialist world.

t. East Euro

>>1436267
The Nazis merely used everything left by the Prussians (Academia, Orderliness, Law, Research) to build shit by getting in debt

well there is Yugoslavia, before things really really went to shit due to X and Y reasons unrelated to socialism, they had a special role in politics and a good standard of living

The countries that are socialist can only afford to do it because the United States funds NATO. They don't have to invest much into the military. Also they tax the shit out of people.

They have lower GDP than our poorest state, which I believe is Georgia.

Socialism is bad. Some social programs within a capitalistic society to help people improve their lives and become independent.

It's never ever good to have to depend on the government because that gives them to much control over you

>>1436299

THAT STATEMENT IS IGNORANT AND ABSURD.

>>1436312
Your entire existence is absurd you retarded tripfaggot. Literally can't have a single thread without you Chris Chan tier autists chiming in.

Kerala.

>>1436231
Western Europe isn't socialist.

>>1436308
Clearly it didn't work for very long.

>>1436312
No.

If you're a Prussia fanboy you can make a case for yourself though.

>>1436287
North Korea and Cuba aren't really comparable

>>1436287
So most successful = survives the longest?

>>1436339
No. Survives the longest and successful. Not barely surviving.

>>1436326
1945-80 isn't bad

>>1436344
Well North Korea is barely surviving, they had one of the most recent famines in Eurasia and their level of development is 3rd world tier.

>>1436205
>If you work it, you should control it.

Why?

>>1436308
>having to borrow money to sustain your "worker-owned industries" because they were economically inviable and then collapsing in a massive hyperinflationary economic crisis when you can't do it anymore is "unrelated to socialism"

File: 12733489_568815899960847_2294962800127498890_n.jpg (26KB, 470x394px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 470x394px

But really Nazi Germany was probably the most successful. They were powerful. They were thriving until Churchill started a war.

Poland was stolen from them in ww1. Germans were being persecuted by polish. Austria wanted to be part of Germany.

File: 1468936442935.jpg (79KB, 807x540px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 807x540px

>>1436364
Clearly it wasn't successful. Socialism/ communism can't compete with capitalism.

things that are socialist in modern society
>weekend
>minimum wage
>safety nets
>public transport
>fire fighters
>police
>health care (most countries)
>education(some countries)
>military
>taxes

>>1436393
Ok Bernie fan. It's within a capitalistic society. Semantics. More isn't always better.

File: BUILD ROAD.jpg (4KB, 300x57px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 300x57px

>>1436393
>it's another "statism is socialism you can't convince me otherwise" episode

>>1436420
>It's within a capitalistic society.
that's the thing

you need both to succeed, you can't have a good police if it isn't 'planned' in terms of organization same goes for military, but not for other things

it's just tools you apply for different things, to achieve the outcomes you need

>>1436393
Government-owned public utilties ≠ socialism
Worker's rights ≠ socialism

Socialism is the social ownership of the means of production, either through worker's self management or state ownership. Things that are socialist in modern society: National oil companies, consumer cooperatives, communal lands in Third World countries.

>>1436393
>everything that isn't 100% ancap muh free market bixnood mofugga is socialism

>>1436459
>National oil companies

no

>>1436477
It's social ownership of the means of production, bro. It's certainly have a better claim at being "socialist" than fire fighters.

>>1436459

How is state ownership social ownership?

>>1436339
If it collapses in a couple of decades, you can't call it succesful

>>1436205
Probably the Soviet Union.

>>1436495
No, a national oil company is clearly government ownership of the means of production.

File: O_petroleo__nosso.jpg (81KB, 640x512px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 640x512px

>>1436496
Because when something it's public-owned, it can be understood as belonging to everyone in a given society.

It doesn't matter if you believe it or not, that's how it's presented by most government. That's why nationalization of oil resources in Third World countries is always presented as "the people" taking control over it's resources.

>>1436528
Not him, but that's obviously propaganda.

>>1436539
No, that's how it's literally perceived by people with a tradition of government-owned companies. It's why privatization is so opposed, it's interpreted as selling the wealth of the "people".

>but it's propaganda that makes them see it this way

During the privatization drive from the 80s to the 00s, all propaganda was pro-privatization. Didn't stop people from seeing government-owned companies as owned by them.

>>1436559
I'm saying it's propaganda, because it being owned "by the people", is not what happens.

The reality is that the bureaucratic elite owns it, and decides where the money goes.

File: machu-picchu-5.jpg (62KB, 600x391px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x391px

The Incan empire was a socialist state.

It had a big state who owned the means of production.

The distribution of land and property was as follow:

One part is used for the religious cult.

One part is for the Inca.

The rest is for the population, of this part nobody it's the owner, the land and resources are distributed by the Inca (who plays the role of the state).

The inca guaranteed bread and security, in the reconstruction of Cuzco for example, they first built the houses and then they give them to the citizens (centralized planning).

They had a goverment officials and bureaucracy, that took care of all of the aspects of the citizens life and of the public space.

>Source:
Alvaro Garcia Linera, Hacia el gran Ayllu universal.

>>1436589
The same happens in every single other instance of "worker's self management". Robert Michels discovered that 100 years ago and still no one managed to disprove it.

>>1436641
>Alvaro Garcia Linera

That guy is kind of based. Now, I'm anti-communist, but I have to admit that the socialist government in Bolivia is a lot less retarded than the ones in Venezuela, Argentina and even Brazil. And a lot of that is because of this guy.

>>1436641
You can't be socialist with a hereditary ruling class, sweetie

>>1436528
Shit so I actually OWN all the American nukes?

>>1436205

Nazi Germany

>>1436829
It wasn't that hereditary.

It's complicated but the Inca itself wasn't a blood relative in most of the cases, he just wasn't elected.

There was a ruling class I'll give you that, but it was more of a socialist monarchy.

Linera goes into great deep about the community system, Ayllu is a term for community it represents the sum of the habitants including wildlife, and it was the ultimate goal of pre-colombian societies in the Andes, as long as the Ayllu is ok, we are all ok.

The Incas translated this into a complex net of bureocracy and trade, when every tribe that became part of the empire was under the protection of the empire, and regulated by empire laws, this included domestic laws, there was no property laws besides everything belong to everyone, but misuse was punished.

One important example was marriage, you could have as many wifes as you were able to maintain, if you wanted the extra work that was your and hers problem.

There was also a great deal of mixing and migration, in a cementery in Chile they found different graves from different cultures, from the same period of time, this reflected the way the Incas organized society.

Unlike the Aztecs the Incas were well regarded in the anexed territories and ruled by road building instead of war and terror.

>>1436641
>Priest class
>Socialist
Wew

File: Not Safe For Kulaks.png (21KB, 2000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 2000x1000px

>>1436205
The USSR obviously.

But we can do better.

>>1436326
Economically it was working just fine.

Nationalist shitters just ruined everything yet again for muh heritage.

>>1436205
Cuba.
Shit. okay, stop laughing and hear me out for a second: They get a lot of flak and maaaaybe are somewhat of a meme, but at least they are still going on.
Hell, Cuba is older than some of you. When it comes to socialist states, you don't pick a good one, you pick the least worse one. The least worse just happens to be Cuba, that's what.

>>1436921
HAHA OH WOW

>take ginormous loans from dem evil western capitalists
>run your entire economy on said loans accumulating gargantuan debt
>the west doesn't ask them to repay because they're one of the few socialist countries opposed to the USSR
>suddenly USSR collapses
>"Yeah Mr. Yugoslav, about those loans ..."
>*country collapses*

>>1436913
Why not?

This is Pre-Marx socialism, it's about distribution of property and labour, not about atheism or spirituality.

Goverment jobs were really hard and demanding, and it didn't give you many privileges besides what everybody else had.

The state was about maintaining infrastructure.

The priest class dealed with they're own problems and it was more dedicated to public events.

There's even this hard to believe legend that claims that one Inca was forced to ban written lenguague to prevent social conflicts, this will be like eliminating the internet cause it has made more harm than good.

>>1436829
D
P
R
K

>>1436985
Yugoslavia broke because of ethnic tensions, not the economy

>>1437037
Shit economy tends to fuel ethnic tensions. See: Austria-Hungary, Weimar Germany, Russia, etc.

>>1436367
>Germans gives ultimatum to Poland for territory and reparations and Poland refuses
>It's Churchills fault
???

>>1437067
>Germans give Czechoslovakia ultimatum about Sudetenland
>Czechoslovaks oblige and give them Sudetenland
>apparently this isn't enough for Hitler who gobbles up entire Bohemia and Moravia

The same would happen in Poland.

Is Bolivia socialist?

File: image.jpg (63KB, 1050x613px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1050x613px

>>1436236
You must be an American.

File: evo-morales-reelección.jpg (151KB, 710x406px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 710x406px

>>1437124
Sep.

>>1436231
Their on their way to failing? They do not have balance

>>1436205
cuba of course.

>>1437157
Bruh

>>1436205
Does that mean the kid you pay five bucks to mow your lawn is entitled to your 250$ lawn mower?

File: 7pht2EpVKZl2qezXV7XEEzXul4q-u0fc_m1gOb8DJMY.jpg (40KB, 680x403px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 680x403px

>>1437176
I wish I had Stirner to mow my lawn.

>>1437210
The supposed division between personal and private property is the worst meme ever.

>>1436998
Not socialist in the slightest

>>1436459
>the commons are socialism
Marx tried this ruse too. The commons are feudalism.

>>1436205
The Empire of Russia was socialist and lasted app. 300 years. And it only collapsed due to pressure from another more successful socialist country, the Empire of Germany.

File: 2302146.jpg (47KB, 640x400px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 640x400px

This, it's existed for millions of years without problems.

>>1437238
Why is that?

>>1437238
No, it's pretty clear. Private is personal property that you loan to labourers to work on and have them compete with each other so that they overproduce and give you everything in excess of their sustenance.

If someone can work on your toothbrush and you can profit off them then that's private.

>>1437176
No because you're not selling the products of his labour. If you did he would be entitled to everything in excess of how much you would make if you had done it on your own, since he wouldn't involved himself in the production process if he couldn't do it better than you.

is this the new /his/ maymay?

I'd say the Paris Commune, Revolutionary Catalonia, Free Territory of Ukraine, Seychelles, Barkina Faso under Sankara, and Rojava are pretty good

>>1437569
>Paris Commune
>A bunch of edgelords take advantage of their nation losing a war to terrorize Paris for 2 months blowing up as many museums and historical sites as they can get themselves organized to do so and then get BTFO by normal people as soon as the French recover from getting BTFO by Prussia.

wow such revolutionary how romantic glorious people's power. Literally ISIS-tier apes.

>>1436463
I wish dipshits like you could stick to a propaganda talking point.

The second this thread is over you'll be going back to calling universal healthcare, free education, UBI socialism. We all know it. But you have to lie anyway.

>>1436267
National Socialism isn't what you think. Socialism, at a bare bones definition, is workers ownership of the means of production. The Nazis did not have this. They just had very generous workers rights, welfare, etc.

File: CzVdZ7n.jpg (24KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 625x626px

>>1436641

>The Incan empire was a socialist state.
>It had a big state who owned the means of production.

b8

>>1436324
>Western Europe isn't socialist.

>>1437641
This post is the strawman to end all strawmen.

>>1436367
kill yourself jesus christ

>>1439274
It literally isn't.

>>1437569
None of those lasted for more than a decade

>>1436528
This is retarded and there are plenty of state owned enterprises that use a capitalistic mindset, oil companies being some of those

>>1436267

You have no idea what socialism means.
Just because a country "transforms" doesn't mean it's socialist. The third reich was mostly capitalist in it's economy.

>>1436299
Ehh they clearly had a plan on how to pay off that debt lol

>>1439274
The means of production are privately held.

Bernie Sanders welfare state =/= socialism

>>1436324
>Kerala
Lol no. State capitalist with economy being held up by wage slavery abroad.

>>1436205

Most Western Democracies.

File: Spooky.png (319KB, 803x688px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 803x688px

>>1436205
>successful
>socialist

Wew, lad.

>>1436364
>A theory which was never proven nor substantiated with any reliable evidence

>>1436383
Yugoslavia had a high standard of living,plus those children look Mongolian

>>1437048
I've lived in Yugoslavia,the thing that broke the country apart was a total lack of national sense of unity.

>>1437067
>Poland has to agree to German extortion because I secretly fornicate on the pictures of Guderian

>>1436367
So was Yugoslavia,Her standards of living were comparable to the ones in Western Europe,her army was the fifth most powerful conventional army and she commanded global influence via the Non-aligned movement.

>>1436350
1945-1992

>>1436985
Your ability of deduction has no limits whatsoever,the country fell apart because of three main reasons:
1.She wasn't a puppet of neither the West or the East
2.She fielded a massive army and she could've offered a better alternative to all freshly liberated,post-soviet countries in eastern Europe
3.Her Non-Aligned movement was hindering the expansion of both blocs for far too long.

Obv the USSR, but in the grand scheme of things, it really wasn't that successful.

>>1437666

THE ONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW WHAT SOCIALISM IS IS YOU.

WORKER OWNERSHIP OF MEANS OF PRODUCTION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SOCIALISM, NOR IS THAT A REQUISITE FOR SOCIALISM.

>>1440589
>Just because a country "transforms" doesn't mean it's socialist.

AND?

>The third reich was mostly capitalist in it's economy.

1. A SOCIOPOLITCAL SYSTEM IS NOT PARTIALLY ANYTHING; IT IS SOMETHING TOTALLY, OR NOT AT ALL.

2. THE THIRD REICH WAS SOCIALISTIC, NOT CAPITALISTIC.

>>1436921
>>1437037
>>1442386

Yugoslavia had a shit economy. Trying to pin everything socialists did wrong on nationalists and capitalists is just pathetic.

http://predragrajsic.blogspot.fi/2014/03/the-economy-of-titos-yugoslavia.html explains pretty well how, no Yugoslavia didn't have a good economy.

File: yugoslavia.png (391KB, 738x1600px) Image search: [Google]

391KB, 738x1600px

>>1442492
I'll post some pics from the post

File: YU Trade Deficit.png (30KB, 498x639px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 498x639px

>>1442500

File: YU Debt 1961 - 1980.png (21KB, 541x601px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 541x601px

>>1442502

>>1437547
So if I could have done it better than him, but decided to have him do it instead because I have more important things to do, he owes me money.
Maybe I shouldn't have rejected socialism.

>>1442492
What Predrag"I'm emotionally invested in the topic because my grandfather was a Chetnik voivode who got killed by partisans" Rajsic is trying to convey is that countries whose reparation and modern-day economic development was heavily financed by the United States of America for several decades were "surprisingly" better off than a country whose entire housing fund and infrastructure were systematically destroyed in the last World War.Her economy has suffered from inflation in the early 80's,but it has never affected her ability to give her people high standards of living and to update her technology regularly and on time.

> Trying to pin everything socialists did wrong on nationalists and capitalists is just pathetic
I'm trying to blame everything on "nationalists and capitalists" because I've mentioned the main reasons why that country had to dissolved from the geopolitical map?We're mostly responsible for the dissolution of Yugoslavia,but you're sorely misled if you believe that countries like France,Germany,United Kingdom and the United States of America didn't have anything to do with it.


>>1442504
She had one of the smallest debts of all countries in her time,even though she wasn't a recipient of the Marshall plan.

>>1442653
The GDP per capita growth of Finland (in Euros in this chart) also beat that of Yugoslavia, despite having much less potential and no financial aid from anyone.

File: Finland.png (63KB, 741x556px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 741x556px

>>1442898
And the chart.

B U R K I N A F A S O
U
R
K
I
N
A

F
A
S
O

>>1442898
And yet,Finland didn't create and spearhead the Non-Aligned movement with which she could exert global influence ,she also didn't produce her own technology and she didn't dominate in the fields of chemistry,sports and literature.

Finland didn't have to contest with a completely destroyed infrastructure and housing fund and most importantly,all of her regions were equally developed because her landmass is more compact and because she was introduced to standardization much earlier than most federate republics of Yugoslavia.Bosnia and Herzegovina,Macedonia,Montenegro and a good chunk of Serbia were still thoroughly Ottomanized.

>>1437569
>Revolutionary Catalonia
>Literally people murdering each other in the streets
sure thing m8

>>1443544
>Finland didn't have to contest with a completely destroyed infrastructure
Actually, Finland wasn't exactly industrialized before World War 2. It had some industrial elements and industrial cities, but the majority of the population was still very much rural. Continental European style industrialization only started after the war, and Finland lost it's second most trade, population and industrial center.

I do see your point though, Yugoslavia was pretty impressive considering everything that happened.

>>1445185
Neither was Yugoslavia,Croatia and Slovenia have also only had some industrial elements and industrial cities.

>I do see your point though, Yugoslavia was pretty impressive considering everything that happened

My point is that people are more than willing to believe that she wasn't one of the most powerful countries in the second part of the 20th century just because her economy faced a steady decline in the 80's and the 90's.

>>1436324
The party in power in Portugal is "Partido Socialista". It's not the first time they've won.

>>1436205
Define "most successful."

The USSR became a global superpower with one of the largest global economies and the ability to practically destroy the world with the push of a button.

The People's Republic of China is currently the world's largest economy, has a huge nuclear arsenal, and has a massive military.
>inb4 they aren't my real, perfect socialists XDDD

china, because they're turning capitalist.

>>1437674
Ok let's draw a line somewhere.

Socialist it's not what Marxs said it is, he studied several pre-modern societies, and came to the conclussion that in some places societies could work without private property or original acumulation of capital (but he didn't studied Andean societies).

Th Incan empire unified a number of Andean communities that had no private property to begin with, under an state system that included a bureocracy and monarchist element.

All states with a number of characteristics could be named socialists, it's something that's been done by everybody, the main issue it's what do you consider to be not-socialist.

For the people under the empire life was full of liberties, unless you lived in Cuzco, nobody expected you to worship the Inca, you had freedom of cult and domestic independence, the only goverment officials, were the record keeper and the messengers, the empire demanded his part over what was distributed to all citizens and provided with roads and trade services.

It was fairly similar to the Roman empire, but without private property, wich it's the main point of capitalism.

This could be a consequence of the isolation and the fact that this societies never developed a currency.

To me currency makes capitalism, now I know that calling the Incas a socialist society it's an stretch, but how else would you call a society like that?

In this sense they were extremely succesful, unified a large territory developed science and technology, and had a fairly good run, until the arrival of the spanish.

They didn't needed to compete for the resources, or force a state religion to do so.

>>1445331
And do they have that "balance"? No, they're in dire straits since before 2008 with no possible improvement in the near future.

>>1436393
>he thinks a safety net equals to forced distribution of capital and goods

>>1436231
social democracy is different than socialism. it is better than, but it isnt socialism.

>>1436267
nazis used the "socialism" meme because it was popular with workers at the time. No major changes in economy.

>>1436299
That was not really the case. The german revolution did already carry many of the aspects that where to be the core of the national socialist movement. Prussians where fairly militaristic and thats why they got most of the blame.

File: image.png (153KB, 752x1668px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 752x1668px

Daily reminder

>>1436205
native americans :^)

HAHAHA

Anyone know any good resources for learning about the ideas, history, and criticism of Communism and/or Socialism? I imagine The Communist Manifesto is a good start, but then what? Books are preferable but documentaries are fine too.

>>1447974
Socialism by Ludwig von Mises

>>1448255
Wait, this was made by someone from the Austrian school, is this book supposed to be critical of socialism or just simply about socialism

>>1447340
that you are retarded?
Why is property a natural right?

>>1448384
I bet he thinks that owning clothes or even a thoothbrush is considered private property

>>1448384
This isn't just an issue of ideals but of of practicality. What would you say if a group of people came up to you and said they were starting a new club, that you had no choice but to join, and that in joining you had to give away all of your stuff upon joining. I imagine you'd tell them to fuck off.

File: image.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>1448384

>>1448362
It expains socialism and why it doesn't work

>>1448473
Oh, so just typical Austrian school shit

>>1448506
Wow what an excellent argument dude, you sure showed me! Socialism really is superior!

>>1448510
..... I wasn't making an argument

the real answer is the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture, which lasted for thousands of years

China has seen the greatest poverty reduction in the world in the shortest time span, between 1949 and 1959, Mao had almost cut the death rate in China by 3/4ths as well as doubled life expectancy.

Too bad after 1959 Mao went full retard, but even then, the GLF technically only lasted one year and had only a death rate of half of that of China before 1949.

I still would say China is the most successful "Socialist" country if we accept Leninism and state-capitalism as a form of "Socialism" (though in some ways, China is the most hyper-capitalist society on earth, it doesn't even have a public healthcare system anymore)

I personally think "Socialism" peaked well before it should have even been tried. I mean, ffs they tried central planning without fucking computers or even any decent form of communication, countries like Russia and China barely even had electricity. Socialism I think could work if enough money was poured into modelling and super computers for calculating it. If Insurance companies can predict your purchases and spending habits based on data mining from discount and flyby cards, I think it wouldn't be so hard to model an economy to meet everyones basic needs.

>>1442188
>invest in Human resources
>it pays good dividends
>"It doesn't count!"
fuck off BJP

>>1442450
>WORKER OWNERSHIP OF MEANS OF PRODUCTION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE SOCIALISM, NOR IS THAT A REQUISITE FOR SOCIALISM.
I know this is bait, but worker's self-management is literally barebones Socialism.

>>1447292
Said safety net wouldn't exist without forced distribution of capital and goods, you drooling mong.

>>1451455
Wanna know how I know you've never heard of the socialist calculation problem?

>>1451455
i wonder if there are enough marxists left in the party that they could ever retake control of china. bo xilai was making a lot of progress until he got kneecapped, although i have no idea how genuinely maoist he was