With that note out of the way, let me explain my question.
We technically don't need welfare anymore, we MIGHT have UBI, (which could be used to for services like Skillshare), and even if we don't we have plenty of information on how to repairs and how to cook. The main purpose of welfare is to numb the worker from doing an actual revolution to overthrow the capitalists. If we do overthrow the capitalists, would we no longer welfare or the welfare state? I ask because in order to achieve full communism, we have to make less dependent on the state (and the capitalists).
Would there be a welfare state under pure socialism?
Eli Thompson
Other urls found in this thread:
Elijah Cook
There would not be a state at all.
Cameron Cooper
The only way "socialism" can work is to eliminate money. No matter what kind of government system humans have tried, there are always the parasitic few who rise to the top. In human-run socialism, some socialists are more equal than others. In the Star Trek timeline, Earth is one one of the planets that does not use currency of any kind. It is a post-scarcity economy. They get to this point after a nuclear WWIII, which sobers the population after a third of it is wiped out.
Without money, the individual would actually have to work, to produce something useful, or to perform essential services. No freeloading parasite class could exist. No more speculating on the value of commodities, gambling on futures, etc.
Connor Parker
You would not need a welfare state under communism.
Welfare state is a capitalist construct.
Neolibs forgot that it's not handed out by the state out of the goodness of their heart. It's a "please do not revolt against us" fee which they are willing to pay less and less for.
Ethan Hill
>Profit FALC
Xavier Young
So masses of workers starve to death or executed every time a machine's invented that can do their jobs? Also what happens when people want more than vital services and how do you define them as such?
Carson Kelly
Ideally it would not be necessary, and any welfare would only serve to close living standard gaps that can't be dealt with in other ways.
I can't even tell you how hard I cringe whenever I see leftists unironically cite fucking Star Trek to make a political point.
Mason Perry
How is that any kind of reply to the text that you quoted? None of it follows at all.
Leo Jenkins
Brayden Smith
Nope. We’re gonna cut off all the parasites and quickly eliminate the surplus populations under the beginning stages of socialism, re-implementing a struggle for existence which ensures the survival of the fittest. Socialism has nothing to do with handouts such as healthcare, the “right to a home”, education or the inherent value of life. As long as the state controls the means of production all is right in the world