In a capitalist town if one "provider" (business) screws me over somehow, then I can always go to another "provider" (business).
If the communist party in a nation (like China) were to screw me over wrongly (all humans are imperfect) then how would I remedy that?
Is there a "forgiveness" program from the Communist party?
Whereas capitalism has 'safeguards' in place (so-called competition), it seems that Communism does not.
If the main 'provider' (The Communist Party) goes around screwing anybody over there's no way for the proletariat to get its necessities from anybody else (like somebody who won't screw them over).
Why are you equating a 'provider' with the communist party lol How are those two comparable in the slightest? At a stretch you could try and compare the function fulfilled by the communist party to the function fulfilled by liberal political party, or by a liberal democratic state, but comparing relations between an individual and a political party to the relations between an individual and a commercial enterprise is like comparing the concept of language with a rock.
Adrian Gonzalez
Vote for different policies, contact your local media outlet/provider, etc. I don't see why investigative journalism would stop existing under communism/socialism.
PS: All the evidence proves that this doesn't work - most people think they should buy local, yet the cheapest products from abroad outsell local ones, most people want to lower their carbon emissions, but they will still buy a new car, et cetera. Market forces don't work.
Joseph Anderson
thanks for responses, goys
if it is a one party dictatorship this is much more difficult and not a practical solution for the proletariat, i'd say (desu)…i generally view all nations and political entities as a "one party dictatorship"
Nathan Ortiz
I don't think it acts as efficiently as is often idealized when the comparison is made between capitalism "in theory" and socialism "in practice". For instance, most of what is purchased by people (necessities, food, etc.) is purchased at giant corporate warehouse/retail locations such as Walmart, Target, Office Depot, Home Depot, Best Buy, regional supermarket chains, etc. You could throw in Amazon for that as well, though you don't visit a location.
These businesses provide, on the consumer level, access to as wide an amount of products at as low of a price point as possible. That is their primary service. Their ACTUAL customer service is often widely considered horrendous. Pictures and videos of sort of inane or ridiculous scenes at Walmart have been the butt of low-hanging media and internet jokes for years. What you really want from places like these is the ability to simply have in stock what you need at an affordable price (which is why one of the most modern innovations on the corporate retail giant formula has been in-store price-matching of products sold on the internet). Otherwise you really don't care about service because generally speaking, there really is no other option. Your best option for getting most goods nearby your house is going to be one of the giants. For home stuff you're going to either be able to go to Home Depot or Lowe's. Do most people choose one or the other for their service? I don't think so, they normally choose one or the other for availability of a product, prices and location.
But on the consumer level there are some services that people shop around for, the most prominent of which is restaurants. Restaurants are really built on quality of food and quality of service, though again I'd actually suggest most people's choice is weighted towards quality of food. People will endure insanely long waits, absent minded waiters in over-crowded dinner rushes, the inability to get their check within 30 minutes etc. if the food is considered good. In some ways it is expected of the best local restaurants that they are going to have a shoddy dining experience because the staff is going to be spread thin. Admittedly, good food in itself could be considered a part of the service, since it is usually unique to different businesses and the primary product being sold. In that, I'd agree that there could be a problem with some kind of job security prioritized over the actual product of the job itself, which is where I think pay-scale, sales and restructuring the way payments and orders are processed can be taken into account. This is all speculative bullshit, but I think payments and orders should be processed through a centralized, networked system that is independent of the actual business unit so that a third party can view transactions and, having direct knowledge of different kinds of costs across a whole range of industries (this data can be open to the public as well) can identify what business units are being efficient and which units aren't. There can be an independent planning body at some level, maybe multiple bodies that work in concert, which is compelled by law to apportion payment according to objective performance in optimizing on labor time. This planning body would also otherwise set prices of capital or directly allocate it to prioritize certain kinds of production, and it may have some branch or connection to other bodies that assist laborers in finding work by setting pay to achieve the same goals as setting prices on capital (non-coercive inducement of laborers to work in prioritized industries).
The point of all of that being that prioritized businesses will receive subsidies simply to draw labor to them, and high performance businesses will receive additional, good pay increases and possibly rewards in kind (nice vacations, a first option for desirable housing, etc.) to encourage that kind of thing. The big problem here is avoiding political cronyism with the bureaucrats, but I think this is going to just be a matter of structural oversight and transparency. It may be useful to have an additional auditing body made up of a minority of bureaucrat professionals and laypeople (like jury duty) to check on the process. If somebody is committing some kind of fraud it could be a very significant offense. They'd immediately be removed from their position for investigation and if found to be committing fraud, sent to white collar gulag for 5 years or something. And to add to all of that of course, we are dealing with a labor voucher system that is also ideally fully traceable and transparent. So there are fewer means for bureaucrats to launder many payments to themselves to doll out higher pay scales to others. However, I've read before that the scale of corruption that existed in eastern bloc countries like the DDR was small enough that someone who engaged in black market activity had called it "more of a hobby", so it may be that expensive attempts to check possibility for corruption mostly isn't worth it. What is important is that the system works as intended 90% of the time to increase economic performance.
you're looking at this from a disenfranchised standpoint. say for example the party does something that fucks you over, you could go to your soviet and discuss this with other people who feel the same, and use this to tell the party that you've been fucked with and you won't have it. find other soviets and councils who have the same or similar issue(s) and the party will have no choice but to change.
Gavin Rivera
how terrible the workers have it in "franchise restaurants" or so i've experienced…
Isaiah Harris
Assuming they didn't screw you over by poisoning you to death or locking the fire escape.
Asher Hall
considering wait staff are paid below minimum wage in burgerland, as well as the shit they have to put up with I would say they have it kinda rough
Oliver Myers
you sound like an intelligent theorist
Austin Cruz
Concerning your last paragraph in this post, the subject of restaurants…
I'd say that goods just as much as restaurants have plenty of various options…here in amerikkka, it is not necessarily monopoly by mega-corporations just yet (perhaps covertly or secretly?) i.e… service still matters outside of the restaurant industry, but choosing the restaurant industry to exemplify this subject is a good way to exemplify it
i've seen good and bad…can't say it's really all bad here or there…not knowledgeable enough to make an intelligent distinction but i am personally a bit biased against mega-corporations and a bit biased against capitalism in general having been raised in a capitalist system which i believe persecute me and my family and such
i'd also say that "supply" is a much more complex and personal endeavor (proletariat v.s. statistics) than 'economics' or 'statistics' could dictate in regards to things like 'supply', availability, price, location, etc…
your insight on restaurants is very interesting…i am going to forward my posts to a friend of mine in the restaurant industry…i agree on your centralized payment system btw but don't know enough about it to go into detail about the specifics as you have here…
Outstanding fucking analysis OP. Since governments only exist under socialism only socialists can be criticized for the abusive excesses of states and therefore commies are fucking btfo.
Sure, you might have some assholes at your job if you life in a socialist society. Care to explain why exactly you think this means it would be a universal thing? You sure as hell didn't bother in your opening post.
Not sure why everyone here is taking this laughable OP so seriously. This guy didn't do anything to deserve having his intelligence respected.
Gabriel Russell
Asked a somewhat polite and honest question, genius to expect socialism to flourish if you refuse to explain it to anyone. SMH.
Well like in Maoism for instance you're only "receiving anything" from one party: Mao. You know what I'm saying?
Not that, it's universal but Mao says that his way is the only future for Communism in any sort of real or tangible government or political system.
Not only could you have *ssholes at your job, but here with a failing business or a corrupt business and such things we have a pillar of society (what should be a pillar of society, the business or institution) turning that society into utter sh*t.
For instance, I worked for a company who I believe may have tried to frame me. Do all companies do that to their own employees?
So, of course I do not have the ability to delve deep into philosophical repercussions and such things as Mao and all the other intelligent Socialists did (Trotsky, Marx, etc…) and say that "this is a reflection of human nature" or "this is a reflection of the universe" (like capitalist ideology does, lol)…. but I can say that it exists and at least troubles some souls somewhere so it is worth bringing up to the collective here on Zig Forums.
I am a big fan of GNU so I believe in the power of collective discourse and collective understanding. That's a big motive for my use of imageboards even if there are tons of shills and social engineering and stifling assassinations of innovation here on the free internet.
Guess you'd just complain to the local soviet and look for a remedy or reparations.
If it continues you got a real issue. If it's widespread you got a pretty good case for internal security to investigate.
Jeremiah James
Not only could you have *ssholes at your job, but here with a failing business or a corrupt business and such things we have a pillar of society (what should be a pillar of society, the business or institution) turning that society into utter sh*t."
In example, what if you have a store which opens up shop in a neighborhood and begins to serve as a location for people to come sell drugs or begins to serve as a location for the Central Intelligent Agency to set up a covert headquarters. This destroys the whole basis of any ideology trying to do anything in the society and turns the neighborhood into a bunch of horse sh*t.
If you have proof you report to KGB of course comrade. Counterrevolutionaries, saboteurs, class traitors and reactionaries must be rooted out.
Brody Scott
You call the cops on that business.
But I don't think you understand what your relationship will be like with economic actors in socialism. Society directly owns these institutions, and therefore you can openly discuss changing its practices. Go before the relevant council or deputy, or call try to call a referendum from the people that institution serves. With the abolition of private property, you can engage directly in trying to create the changes you want to see in society rather than hoping changes in your personal lifestyle choices will be enough to influence the inhuman and irrational movements of the market.
Brandon Barnes
Off-topic advice: Ask the waiter for a check immediately after ordering your food so you're not waiting 30 minutes for the check to arrive at the end of your meal, so you can leave faster. I do this and it works wonders.
Hudson Bell
or just dine and ditch
Mason Davis
I would do this but people I eat with seem to find sitting around for 2 hours to be part of the experience. I guess it's nice to chat sometimes but cmon, we could do that around the Xbox too.
Jace Collins
No lad, you don't. Because reactionaries have already gone there and the party knows are shit stirring even if there is corruption in their ranks and services are being abused. So you stroll down all fucking steamed that the bread has been tampered with for a black market ring and you get the living shit kicked out of you. Think of everyone calling each other a shill on here and amplify that in real world consequences where political violence and reactionaries mean treachery is dealt with very swiftly and the wrong people might be doling it out.
Luis Cook
Yeah because in a liberal democracy, when you complain about your local MP you get beat up by jackbooted thugs right?
Socialism doesn't mean abandoning the rule of law and strong institutions. There might be a chaotic revolutionary period but there is no serious socialist today who doesn't believe in powerful democratic institutions.
William Sanders
shills are absolutely the worst part about the internet….it is stifling innovation and it is a threat to the free market and a threat to trade
Luis Miller
you could get shill'd to death or cuck'd to death
Charles Wright
Not saying capitalist democracy is perfect obviously but the point is even when you're standing against very powerful people in imperfect representative democracies, you don't just get fucking killed. So why would you expect that to happen in socialism?
Kayden Torres
yeah you own those imaginary shills based on info funded by the koch brothers
John Miller
Noting that comment.
And wanted to say: You vote the directory out. Bacially. Instead of having to create another company, you vote the directory of the current company out. Which, creating another company, there's a reason people, even with the money of say a big youtuber, doesn't create apple but with cheaper prices. And if he does, but one day forfeits and becomes as bad as Apple, creating another 3rd company is hard.
This is actually, to me, one of the strongest, or THE strongest point about socialism: Let's change the direcrtory of companies, through political votes, where candidates just present themselves, instead of wallet votes, where to be a candidate you have to raise a full different company, and if you fail you're in trouble, debt, and etc.
The variants of this, idk. If they have local parliaments and vote regularly on issues brought up by the people, a central govt where you vote different branches separately (like a president of the food part, another one of the medicines and hospitals one, another one, or three different directories, for three different armies, etc). Idk how China and Russia worked.
The thing is, to me socialism is that, voting the directories of the companies, with political votes.
You would also have what other people have i think more or less said here, the party itself can change the guy out- The thing is, hopefully, there is some democratic representation there. …………………… About the authority of Mao, I was reading the great leap's wiki the other day, and Mao backed off after its troubles brought (came back later). But it wasn't a popular vote which outed him, so idk.
