Why was Arab Socialism so much more successful at economic improvement

>>2220960
But Nasser and Saddam wrecked their respective economies, which before them was already fast growing and industrializing.

>>2220986
That's actually not true

>Iraq: couldn't win a war against Iran, a country under sanctions that cleared minefields via teenagers charging into them (this is unsurprising since the Baath party was founded by the Nazis and we all know how good the Nazis are at war)

>Egypt: continually increasing poverty that eventually resulted in a popular overthrow of the government

>Syria: continually increasing poverty combined with climate change (massive crop failures resulted in farmers fleeing to urban areas) and harsh crackdowns resulted in a popular uprising against the government (again, government is run by Baathists, but this time they're being aided by incompetent Russian troops who mainly just bomb residential areas and hospitals/get shot down by Turkey)

>>2221032
Egypt went hardcore capitalist and privatisation since the late 70s you fucking dumb faggot, that's what caused the revolution, Egypt hasn't been Arab Socialist for decades.

Ba'ath party was founded by a French educated ex-communist and was modelled after French nationalist values like equality, liberty, fraternity

Also Iraq pretty much had destroyed Iran thoroughly by 1988 forcing Iran to accept ceasefire conditions it had refused since the beginning, after capturing pretty much all of iran's armoured force and wiping out the Iranian forces in Fao in the tawakalna campaign. Khomeini even said the ceasefire was like poison for him and he died pretty soon afterwards by how much of a shock the defeat was to him.

>>2220960

Oil

Having natural resources do all the work for you

Eastern Europe had been wrecked by WW2 and was brutally oprressed by the sovjets, while Latin America was a quagmire of Sovjet and US-funded guerilla wars, hostile takeovers, coups and assassinations.

Oil kept the peace as the West was not interested in too much mayhem in the Middle-East.
Egypt is a bit different in that it has the Suez canal, which is a very very strategic trading hub for oil tankers (and a good source of revenue for the Egyptian state)

>>2221127
Venezuela had oil and they still went to shit after nationalisation

Iraq's oil nationalisation in 1975 resulted in British sanctions

Oil is an abundant resource that can bring in capital to fund socialist programs like free education, healthcare, and public works. These semi-successful socialist examples rely on an abundance of capital (or high-demand natural resources to be sold) in order to implement them. Lots of Eastern European or Latin American examples of socialism did not have that initial funding, and had no way to perpetuate those social programs, so they failed quicker.

>>2221487
See: >>2221143

>>2221032
The protests in Egypt and Syria were fuelled by income inequality from the liberalisation of the economy you utter retard.

File: checkem.png (542KB, 640x490px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 640x490px

Eastern Euro Gommunism was constantly being hammered by Western sanctions and subversion and eventually collapsed because of it. Arab Socialism has only more recently become the target of the West and promptly collapsed immediately afterward.

>>2221717
>1717
>The year is 2017
Communism now comrade

>>2220960
It seems that socialism is good at taking people from destitute poverty to lower middle income. These policies do tend to stall out due to the inherent inefficency. So therefore poor nations stand to gain more from socialism than developed nations. Also for Iraq oil helped alot, despite sanctions.

>>2221717
Why didn't those commies impose a sanction on the West to strike back?

>>2221860
They did.

File: 1451346002062.png (93KB, 500x422px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x422px

>>2221732
>1717
You mean 1917?

>public things are socialism
I had you guys on a pretty good trend of understanding economics. These days though, its hard to find too many who actually read economics books and not just the fucking wikipedia articles, pussies.

File: Arabs cant into war.jpg (45KB, 331x361px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 331x361px

>>2221076

>forcing Iran to accept ceasefire conditions it had refused since the beginning

You mean a white peace, as opposed to annexing Khuzestan like Saddam wanted to do in the beginning?

Also "destroyed" is a strong word to use considering that 3/4 of the war took place in Iraqi territory.

>Khomeini even said the ceasefire was like poison for him

Because he was delusional enough to believe that the Revolutionary Guards could win all the way to Jerusalem.

In the real world, however, Iran was in no shape to project power considering the total arms embargo and sanctions against them, as well as the massive amounts of foreign support the Iraqis were getting from pretty much every major power in the world.

>he died pretty soon afterwards by how much of a shock the defeat was to him

Pretty sure it had more to do with him being 87 years old at that point.

>>2220960
Latin america didn't really have socialism.

>>2222246
>state-run public programs funded by state-owned refineries for the welfare of the society
>not socialist
If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, etc

Because they were nationalists first

>>2220960
Are you serious?
Ever looked at the middle East today?
Ever thought about why those Arab socialist countries with 200 million inhabitants constantly get their asses teared apart by 8 million Jews?
The list could go on