# What conditions allow socialism to be effective? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 18, 2011, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681 "2011-12-18T22:30:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/61 "2011-12-20T14:14:59Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Not really. They certainly aren’t as important as they used to be, and they’ve evolved quite a bit in the past few decades (communal child raising, for instance, is dead), but they still have a place in Israeli society. Some three quarters of Israel’s agricultural output is produced through various communal models; “agribusiness” does not exist here past the local level. Hold on, I think that’s pulling a fast one there. The Kibbutz may be communal internally (to some extent), but produces for a commercial market in a national community. That’s not much different than a corporation, in the end. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/62 "2011-12-20T14:41:24Z")
Oh, absolutely. A kibbutz is basically a company town, with each resident an equal shareholder. They were never intended to form a model for country-wide communism. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/63 "2011-12-20T15:30:12Z")
BTW, I apologize for not making clear that I was talking about American collectives, which is what I’m familair with. Barring two exceptions to my knowledge, they all fell apart quite rapidly - most within a few years. I have heard of a company in California today which is collectively run, with no managers whatsoever AFAIK. Does faiirly well and is reasonably large for a single-shop enterprise. If you want a raise you just have to convince people of it, and everyone just pitches in and does whatever’s needed. > [@Alessan](#): > > Oh, absolutely. A kibbutz is basically a company town, with each resident an equal shareholder. They were never intended to form a model for country-wide communism. And hey, I’m perfectly in favor of it. My point is simply that this isn’t even anti-capital.\* \*And without trying to be obnoxious, I hate the term “Capitalism,” which combines inaccuracy with incompleteness. Free Markets are far more than big-capital enterprises. I find “Socialism” to be a reasonably accurate descriptive term, though it’s often better to use a more specific one. > [@Brainglutton](#): > > I dunno about “astoundingly brutal,” just better at war than their neighbors, that’s how empires happen. The Inca gods, at any rate, had little hunger for human sacrifice. There weren’t any. The Inca expanded quickly to their maximum extent and then stopped. Nobody could attack them, and there was no government we know of in the area to do anything to them. They were almost completely isolated from the world, one of the reasons that as far as we know, they had effectively no technological progress. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/64 "2011-12-20T16:31:46Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > There weren’t any. The Inca expanded quickly to their maximum extent and then stopped. Nobody could attack them, and there was no government we know of in the area to do anything to them. They were almost completely isolated from the world, one of the reasons that as far as we know, they had effectively no technological progress. 😕 The Inca did not expand primarily by colonization of unsettled territory. They extended their empire over several neighboring nations with different language and cultures – some of whom had been civilized far **longer** – and who were able to put up some military resistance. [Chimor,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimor) for instance. As to “stopped,” when the Spanish arrived the Inca were, AFAIK, still continuing with their policy of unlimited gradual expansion (mainly by diplomatic missions to tribes and nations on the borders – they were able to persuade many tribes to join the Empire without conquest, just by showing off the economic benefits). As for technological progress, I don’t think their empire lasted long enough to judge its potential there. But, China was a pretty damned high civilization, despite limiting itself to one or two new inventions per dynasty. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/65 "2011-12-20T16:40:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > They extended their empire over several neighboring nations with different language and cultures – some of whom had been civilized far **longer** – and who were able to put up some military resistance. I suppose that depends on how you define _civilized_. > [@](#): > > [Chimor,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimor) for instance. As to “stopped,” when the Spanish arrived the Inca were, AFAIK, still continuing with their policy of unlimited gradual expansion (mainly by diplomatic missions to tribes and nations on the borders – they were able to persuade many tribes to join the Empire without conquest, just by showing off the economic benefits). Indeed, but they failed to get beyond the mountains as I understand it, and thus were pretty limited, and their expansion was almost dead in the water and limited to much smaller gains. The tribes off the hills were too different to assimilate and uninterested in the first place. Granted, the records are so sparse that we may simply be interpreting things differently. There’s a factor of ten difference in the more reasonable population estimates alone. > [@](#): > > As for technological progress, I don’t think their empire lasted long enough to judge its potential there. But, China was a pretty damned high civilization, despite limiting itself to one or two new inventions per dynasty. Uh… no comment, but I think you underestimate the Chinese. Their problem was in implementing new discoveries, not inventing them. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/66 "2011-12-20T17:26:08Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > I suppose that depends on how you define _civilized_. Well, whatever definition the Incas can meet, Chimor meets. > [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Indeed, but they failed to get beyond the mountains as I understand it, and thus were pretty limited, and their expansion was almost dead in the water and limited to much smaller gains. The tribes off the hills were too different to assimilate and uninterested in the first place. Granted, the records are so sparse that we may simply be interpreting things differently. There’s a factor of ten difference in the more reasonable population estimates alone. They are sparse – all these civilizations/cultures being non-literate. For an interesting literary portrait of life in Tiwantinsuyu, see [_The Scarlet Fringe_](http://www.amazon.com/Inca-Scarlet-Suzanne-Alles-Blom/dp/0312874340) by Susan Alles Blom. (An AH novel, actually – the POD is that Atahualpa does not rebel against Huascar, thus the Spanish do not face an Empire weakened by civil war.) ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/67 "2011-12-20T17:29:48Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Well, whatever definition the Incas can meet, Chimor meets. My evil point exactly. I might take a look at the book, though I don’t read much fiction anymore. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/68 "2011-12-20T17:42:01Z")
[Civilization:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization) > [@](#): > > The level of advancement of a civilization is often measured by its progress in agriculture, long-distance trade, occupational specialization, a special governing class and urbanism. Aside from these core elements, a civilization is often marked by any combination of a number of secondary elements, including a developed transportation system, writing, standardized measurement, currency, contractual and (tort-based) legal systems, characteristic art and architecture, mathematics, enhanced scientific understanding, metallurgy, political structures, and an astronomical understanding. Tiwantinsuyu certainly qualifies on the core elements and several of the secondary elements. We don’t know what it might have become; it was a young empire when it was destroyed. A young and **rising** one, I’m fairly sure. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/69 "2011-12-20T17:43:24Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > My evil point exactly. > > I might take a look at the book, though I don’t read much fiction anymore. Also check out the chapter on Machu Picchu in de Camp’s [_Ancient Ruins and Archaeology._](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Ruins_and_Archaeology) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/70 "2011-12-20T20:49:04Z")
> [@Buchanan](#): > > I agree that ethnic homogeneity is a critical ingredient for success in any form of socialism or highly-taxed environment. Why would **that** be? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/71 "2011-12-20T20:57:06Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Why would **that** be? Trust. Much as I dislike it, I have to acknowledge that it’s there. While I don’t hold **Buchanan** ’s apparent pessimism that it can’t be got around with time, you have to see that it exists. It’s what’s behind “welfare queens in Cadillacs” and “young bucks buying T-bone steaks with their food stamps” and “illegals coming to soak up welfare”. Yes, those are right-wing memes and lies designed to discredit social welfare programs, but they wouldn’t take hold so easily without the xenophobia. It’s disgusting, but it exists, and it’s a major impediment to a higher level of social support in the US. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/72 "2011-12-20T21:08:10Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > Trust. Much as I dislike it, I have to acknowledge that it’s there. While I don’t hold **Buchanan** ’s apparent pessimism that it can’t be got around with time . . . Deeper than pessimism. Going by his posting history so far, **Buchanan** seems to think it’s not just a matter of cultural prejudice/mistrust, but that different racial groups actually have different levels of hereditary mental ability; so that socialism or “any highly-taxed environment” in a multiracial society would involve the superior races subsidizing the inferior, that woudn’t **be** a myth. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/73 "2011-12-20T21:43:16Z")
A couple of things have amused me in this thread: - those who equate socialism with communism, and bring the former USSR and Cuba into the discussion. - those who come up with an 80% tax rate for folks in Denmark, and when confronted by factual information to the contrary, seem to disappear into the aether. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/74 "2011-12-21T00:28:42Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > A couple of things have amused me in this thread: > > - those who equate socialism with communism, and bring the former USSR and Cuba into the discussion. > > - those who come up with an 80% tax rate for folks in Denmark, and when confronted by factual information to the contrary, seem to disappear into the aether. I’m glad you are amused. In what way were/are the systems in the former USSR/Cuba not a form of socialism? Perhaps you could step down from your ivory tower and tell us what your definition of socialism is and why it is the one and only correct one? ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/75 "2011-12-21T01:28:07Z")
I should have said, “those who equate ONLY communism (like USSR and Cuba) with socialism”, as seems to be the case with some folk, since those are the only countries they bring up. Of course I would agree that the systems in the former USSR/Cuba are a form of socialism. I’m glad you think I’m in an ivory tower. That means you think I smart, rite? ---
**Author:** ![WillFarnaby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/willfarnaby/32/514_2.png) [@WillFarnaby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WillFarnaby)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/76 "2011-12-21T02:24:41Z")
When has capitalism without a little socialism “toppled into ruin”? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/77 "2011-12-21T02:40:40Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > I should have said, “those who equate ONLY communism (like USSR and Cuba) with socialism”, as seems to be the case with some folk.. Who? > [@](#): > > I’m glad you think I’m in an ivory tower. That means you think I smart, rite? Korekt. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/78 "2011-12-21T03:31:18Z")
I don’t know if there is an end product for the progressive movement, but I couldn’t call it “socialism” with a straight face, it requires the tolerant bemusement of nostalgia. “Socialism” is Norman Thomas, Bertrand Russel, H.G. Wells and the Fabian Society. It belongs to a time when you could argue about the proletariat because there really was such a thing. A true Marxist doesn’t really believe in freedom of choice, not so much that he might forbid it, but that he believes it doesn’t actually exist, that history is an inexorable and utterly predictable force. the illusion of choice doesn’t enter into it. Progressives believe very firmly in choice, without it, we don’t have much of a chance. And we believe that a better persons is more likely to make better choice, to be a valuable citizen, if protected from the pointless miseries and suffering of poverty, ignorance and want. Perhaps they cannot be solved, perhaps the exercise is futile. But why not find out? Perhaps perfection will always elude us, tough titty, we can still do a damn sight better than we have. Its taking a lot longer than we thought, and we could use your help, if you’ve nothing better to do. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/79 "2011-12-21T05:36:13Z")
An interesting thought. How does that tell us what conditions allow socialism to be effective? Or am I in the wrong thread? ---
**Author:** ![Norse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a9adbd/32.png) [@Norse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Norse)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2011, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681/80 "2011-12-21T14:15:19Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > True, but I’ve heard (this is secondhand, and often personal, reports) that the same new diversity has put much pressure on the state, and led to a slow decline of the very programs under discussion. I definitely don’t claim to be familiar enough with the Nordic countries to know for myself. As a resident and citizen of one of those countries, I’d just like to mention that according to my (firsthand) experience, that is pretty far from reality. Especially the claim that an increase in ethnic diversity in itself rather than an increase in non-productive/unemployed members of society _regardless of ethnicity_ should cause a decline in social services. As has been mentioned upthread, the Scandiavian countries sport a 30-something % income tax (as calculated from your total income) for the average citizen and a 10-25% sales tax. Plus some special taxes on stuff like fuel, tobacco and alcohol. For that we get (almost) free health coverage, unemployment coverage and social security sufficient to keep almost everyone off living on the street. To me, that looks like a decent argument for social democracy or whatever you want to call that particular flavor of socialism (or capitalism). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-conditions-allow-socialism-to-be-effective/606681.md?page=5)