I’ll start by saying that I would say “Yyyyeah, and one of the first cellphones and also the very first 0G telephone service (Altai) was made in the Soviet Union under socialism, go figure”. What would you say?
I explain that isn’t really what socialism is about and actually engage. Most people don’t actually know what socialism is in practice and especially in the US their ideas are from actual propaganda they had in schools. Even self described socialists in the US often fall into the “socialism is when the government does things” trap and most people believe the lie they were told in school that socialism is necessarily the complete abolition of private property and money without questioning how that would even work in practice. I would say fewer than 10-20% of the US population even has a functional knowledge of what socialism even is in practice despite having extremely strong opinions about it.
Things like the quote in the OP are “thought terminating cliches” that serve to stop thought and dialogue before alternate ideas actually get discussed rather then form the basis of actual ideas themselves. For this one in particular I ask if they have ever actually read what Karl Marx believed and if they know that even Marx agreed with the premise that capitalism breeds innovation and economic growth, at least at the start. That this is true is not a problem for socialism intrinsically. You’re never going to change someone’s worldview or undo a lifetime of propaganda in one conversation, but you can crack the door a little and maybe spark some doubt or get someone curious enough to read on their own.
“Sure” or just nod. They didn’t even ask a question, so no need to say anything.
I don’t think I’d bother engaging, if they’re speaking in simplistic gotchas they probably got from the internet I have better things to do with my time, such as my wife
“You expect me to not participate in this society and just die instead? Cards are currently stacked against us and I’m playing my hand the best I can!”
“I won’t engage in bad faith debate with a dumbass”
“Learn the difference between socialism and communism is before you say things like that.”
“Socialism involves people owning the means of production (whether in a market economy or a planned one). Communism involves exactly that as well, but in a classless stateless moneyless society. No class war, no state, no money, no problem.”
Socialism is a form of government where the equality of people comes first.
The entire US anti-socialist kneejerk is because Marx said that socialism as a stepping stone to communism is the only non-violent way to get there
Socialist democracy allows for capitalism, as long as the government protects its people from the capitalist tendancy to turn into an oligarchy.
Socialist democracy allows for capitalism, as long as the government protects its people from the capitalist tendancy to turn into an oligarchy.
Are you talking about market socialism?
Sorta, depending on your exact definition.
More of a Lassalle flavour of socialism than Marx, at the very least.
Pragmatically, state-less communism is a utopia reliant on all members following its principles. A state is required to defend against greed, both from the outside as from within.
Wwhether you call it market socialism or social democracy, the concept of a state limits capitalism to serve its people first, while also granting as much freedom possible by “allowing” capitalism, seems to be the closest one can get to Marxism while still defending against tyranny.
Society is a living thing and must be able to both change and defend itself. Socialist states are prone to tyranny from within, where as pure communist utopia has little to no defense from foreign entities. A democratic government in service of the people is the best way I’m aware of to achieve the core socialist principles.
Nope.
I’ve seen that kind of behavior in exactly two places, Lemmy and Reddit. Not one time in real life have I been asked such a question, and I am pretty fucking outspoken about my opinions.
Ask them why they drive on public roads.
If they speak in simplistic gotchas you might as well respond with another.
It’s hard to compete in road construction with the guys building on stolen land paying for labor with stolen money.
Tell them they’re using one of the oldest logical fallacies, and Ancient philosophers would be embarrassed by them.
“Despite my personal beliefs, I still live in a capitalist society, and have to get along somehow.”
“I may be a socialist, but I live under capitalism, and I’ve gotten used to that.”
"It’s called socialism. I need a society to do it. You like baseball? Why aren’t you playing it right now?
Ok…but, in line with my username, I’m going to stay true to form! I shall take your reaction, which makes sense and proves a point, and I shall instead only use a small out of context portion of it as MY reply. The following series of discussion would in no way make sense, BUT don’t worry. I’ll just gas light the other person by insisting it makes total sense! And then someone will reply “Username relevant”.
“You support socialism, yet you use products of capitalism”
“YOU SHOULD PLAY BASEBALL!”
the most authentic critiques of a system tend to come from within it.
I would just point out that you still need to buy things under socialism, and prob communism at that. Shops still exist in Communist countries.
The main difference is the level of choice one gets, and that it’s likely not sold just for the sake of it, but because people actually need it.
I mean that is true, you still have to buy stuff under socialism and communism - I think that under market socialism, prices will have to be controlled. This is where a planned market economy comes in.
