Sultana Corbyn party...

[briantrumpet]

Going swimmingly, I think you'll agree.

 

[briantrumpet]

Listened to a speach by Ms Sultana yesterday and not impressive. Just a load of left wing sound bites with no real vision. She doesn't come across as very capable, not so much in her "policies" but in terms of reasoning and impacts (ie easy to say "we must x, y and z" but you also need to say why x, y and z are important and how it will improve things. She just comes across as very imature.

It would be naive stuff even at school debate level - an incoherent list of left-wing reactionary memes.

 

[Beebo]

Is there any model of a successful, truly socialist government in a democratic country? Big business and media will just not allow it.

You need the absolute iron will of Lenin, Stalin or Mao to keep the show on the road and your enemies dead.

 

[Pblakeney]

Is there any model of a successful, truly socialist government in a democratic country? Big business and media will just not allow it.

You need the absolute iron will of Lenin, Stalin or Mao to keep the show on the road and your enemies dead.

The Scandi countries?

 

[bobzmyunkle]

truly socialist government in a democratic country

The Scandi countries?

I think we need clarification on 'truly socialist', but I think you'll find broad consensus on those being free market economies.

 

[Pblakeney]

I think we need clarification on 'truly socialist', but I think you'll find broad consensus on those being free market economies.

They are free market economies in socialist countries. What this country tries/pretends (labour/conservative) to be.
The ideal mix in my opinion.

 

[Rusty Nails]

The Scandi countries?

The economies of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are based on free markets and private ownership and they depend on the free market to generate the funds that make their extensive social welfare system possible. They are Democratic Socialist states and only meet a very watered down version of socialism.

 

[briantrumpet]

The economies of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are based on free markets and private ownership and they depend on the free market to generate the funds that make their extensive social welfare system possible. They are Democratic Socialist states and only meet a very watered down version of socialism.

...with Norway's largesse being helped by massive oil wealth.

 

[Pblakeney]

...with Norway's largesse being helped by massive oil wealth.

Which the UK could have replicated if it hadn't pissed it against the wall/given it away to companies.

 

[Pblakeney]

The economies of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are based on free markets and private ownership and they depend on the free market to generate the funds that make their extensive social welfare system possible. They are Democratic Socialist states and only meet a very watered down version of socialism.

I'm confused. They have an extensive social system but only have a watered down version of socialism?
Socialist doesn't have to be communist.

 

[Rusty Nails]

I'm confused. They have an extensive social system but only have a watered down version of socialism?
Socialist doesn't have to be communist.

Define Socialism.

In my old-fashioned way Socialism is an economic and political system where the community or government owns or regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange, aiming for more equal wealth distribution. It is based on the idea that public or collective ownership of resources leads to a fairer society and that essential services should be for the public good, not just private profit. This does not describe the Scandi countries who, I believe, are Democratic Socialist. Socialism is not big on the Democracy lark.

 

[Pblakeney]

Define Socialism.

In my old-fashioned way Socialism is an economic and political system where the community or government owns or regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange, aiming for more equal wealth distribution. It is based on the idea that public or collective ownership of resources leads to a fairer society and that essential services should be for the public good, not just private profit. This does not describe the Scandi countries who, I believe, are Democratic Socialist. Socialism is not big on the Democracy lark.

Your definition is further to the left than mine. All for control of resources and essential services.
I don't agree that socialism is not compatible with democracy, and you say the same.

the Scandi countries who, I believe, are Democratic Socialist

 

[briantrumpet]

Your definition is further to the left than mine. All for control of resources and essential services.
I don't agree that socialism is not compatible with democracy, and you say the same.

Just reading a bit of background on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

In Scandinavian countries as well as others, people often use "social democracy" and "democratic socialism" interchangeably to describe leftist movements aiming for gradual, democratic reform.

The phrase "democratic socialism" has been used in multiple senses, including a broad sense that refers to all forms of socialism which reject autocracy and the Marxist-Leninist state[10] or more narrowly refer to the anti-capitalist wing of social democracy (or reformist socialism), seeking to move beyond the welfare state toward social ownership.[11] In the broadest sense, democratic socialism includes forms of social democracy, libertarian socialism,[12] reformist socialism,[5] revolutionary socialism,[13] market socialism,[14] ethical socialism,[15] liberal socialism,[16] humanist Marxism,[17] state socialism,[18] utopian socialism,[19] and left-wing populism.[20]

 

[Rusty Nails]

Your definition is further to the left than mine. All for control of resources and essential services.
I don't agree that socialism is not compatible with democracy, and you say the same.

Not quite sure I am saying the same. Because of the free market economy and capitalism the Scandi countries do not meet the requirement for state ownership of the means of production/distribution/exchange that is true Socialism.

I admit we are splitting hairs and it is similar to the rather nerdy UK arguments about far left, centre left and all points in between.

IMO we have a lot to learn from the Scandi countries.

 

[Pblakeney]

Not quite sure I am saying the same. Because of the free market economy and capitalism the Scandi countries do not meet the requirement for state ownership of the means of production/distribution/exchange that is true Socialism.

I admit we are splitting hairs and it is similar to the rather nerdy UK arguments about far left, centre left and all points in between.

IMO we have a lot to learn from the Scandi countries.

I think we roughly agree and are splitting hairs. The government owning 67% of the oil industry (as an example) goes a long way to funding socialist policies. That boat has sailed for us so we have to find the next boat, ideally.
Realistically it won't happen because since Thatcher "there is no such thing as society" and people are too preoccupied with me, me, me.