• Communist
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There are no countries with socialist policies.

    Can you name a country that has workplace democracy? No? Then there isn’t a socialist country out there.

    Would I move to the social democracies of the world? I love norway and whatnot politically (as much as a communist can love the state of any country)… but I love having warm air and nature I can enjoy without a coat much more.

    • trailing9
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Doesn’t any country with cooperatives have workplace democracy?

      Norway is cheating because they have many natural resources to sell.

      • Communist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, they have a tiny, insignificant amount.

        An entire country has to have workplace democracy for the country to be socialist.

        This is kinda like saying “doesn’t any country with a slice of bread have food”

        • trailing9
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          What would change if every company would be democratic?

          • Moonguide
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            To begin with, there wouldn’t be an unspoken agreement between companies to keep wages as low as they can be because more than half of the companies in that market agree that the best they can do is starvation wages.

        • daddyjones@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You think a co-op only has a tiny amount of democracy? I think it’s the best form of workers owning the means of production - the definition of socialism.

          • joejoefashosho@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            I believe they meant that worker cooperatives are a small, almost insignificant part of the overall economy in every country that has them. Often co-ops end up serving a small niche market because they really can’t compete with the anti-competitive nature of capitalist big business.

          • Communist
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s not what I said, my point is that co-ops make up a tiny fraction of a percentage of the economy. If they made up all of it, that would be socialism.

    • AceQuorthon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is workplace democracy? Would love to finally hear some socialist philosophy from someone that isn’t a goddamn Hexbear user.

      • Communist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, they’re really indoctrinated by chinese propaganda, I can’t stand them, and I’m a damn communist.

        Workplace democracy can work a vast number of ways, and I can’t claim to have figured out what the best way of doing it is, and this is one of the most contentious areas in socialist theory, but I’ll give a relatively easy to understand example:

        A business running democratically, instead of having a CEO who decides everything, could have weekly meetings where everyone gets together and decides what is needed, pay structure, schedules, etc, building decisions through consensus, and then falling back to a vote if people disagree, they could also work like a modern democratic republic and have the workers elect people to various positions, and then maintain heirarchy, if the business is far too large for consensus building to work.

        The way a business works currently, under capitalism, is often with a CEO at the top, who controls a group of people directly below him, and so forth, this results in bad divergent incentives, due to the keys to power problem (if you’re not familiar, watch this: https://invidious.asir.dev/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs ). One such example is if i’m a walmart employee, do I give a fuck if walmart does well? No. As long as they don’t go out of business, i’ll be paid the same, who gives a fuck how well the business does if I’m not a partial owner and have no say?

        • Black AOC@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          “and I’m a communist–”

          “Today, the bourgeoisie and the opportunists within the labor movement concur in this doctoring of Marxism. They omit, obscure, or distort the revolutionary side of this theory, its revolutionary soul. They push to the foreground and extol what is or seems acceptable to the bourgeoisie. All the social-chauvinists are now “Marxists” (don’t laugh!).”

      • Communist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        In what way? I have yet to hear of a single socialist policy from cuba.

        Do note: socialism is worker ownership over the means of production.

        • unnecessarygoat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          afaik, in cuba the means of production isn’t directly controlled by the workers but is controlled by the government which acts as a middle man between the workers and the means of production

          • Communist
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            33
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s state capitalism, and has nothing to do with socialism.

            The workers control the means of production under socialism, not the government, this makes it in no way socialist by any commonly used definition of socialism by philosophers.

            • boyi@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              You seem to know what you are talking about. Can you ELI5 the difference between communism and sosialism, in the shortest possible words?

              • Communist
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                23
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Okay, first, to lay some groundwork, there have been many modes of production throughout history

                first, there was hunter/gatherer societies, then feudalism, then capitalism

                Then we have theories as to what could come next, according to the marxist viewpoint, the next thing will be socialism, and then after that, communism.

                So, communism is a post-socialist ideology, the only requirement for it to be socialism is that instead of a bourgeois class and a worker class, they will become unified (doesn’t matter how for the purposes of explaining this, but usually through violent revolution)

                So, a socialist place would have the workers self-manage, people who work in a place would also have democratic control over that place in some way.

                After that happens, for various reasons outside of the scope of an eli5, communism comes, communism is a post-socialist society in which the workers own the means of production (hence the socialist prerequisite), currency has been abolished, the state has been abolished (but not government, these are two distinct entities in socialist thought), and there are no class divisions whatsoever.

                Part of the problems with discussions about these topics is that communist philosophers of old used terms in very different ways than the colloquial ways we use them today. I can expand upon this if you have any followup questions!

                • boyi@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  In the spirit of knowledge, I’ve tried to understand them by reading some sources but I never could get around it. It’s like me, a non-physicist, trying to understand quantum theory and theory of relativity. Anyway, your explanation is good enough for me to be able to different between the two terms. Thanks.

                  • Communist
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No problem, feel free to PM or message on matrix if you want any elaboration or have any questions!

                • Communist
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  32
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Google is extremely insufficient for this due to the insane level of propaganda on BOTH sides of the issue. The only way to get this information is to read theory from the actual philosophers, IMHO, and that’s asking a lot.

                  And that’s not even getting into the terminology you have to learn just to understand the philosophers.

                  For example: most people are under the impression that private property is things that normal people own… but that’s not even a little bit what marx means when he says abolish private property, you’ll note, that would be insane.

                  • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So what does he mean by “private property” if he’s not talking about the things normal people own?

    • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What does a “workplace democracy” mean?

      I’m envisioning that’s the janitor having a vote in where the brain surgeon makes the next cut.

      That’s a possible interpretation of “the people control the means of production”, but that’s just ridiculous.

      • NAXLAB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, that is a pretty ridiculous interpretation.

        Workplace democracy would most likely and most broadly refer to all employees of a company having a say in how the company is run. Either by voting on policies and changes, or by electing people to various executive/representative roles, much the same way that current Western democracies work.

        An example of the janitor voting on where the surgeon makes a cut makes about as much sense as us voting on where the president flies in his helicopter. At best, it doesn’t pass the make sense test, and at worst is a bad faith interpretation of what people mean when they say “workplace democracy”

        • Ashtear@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d settle for just having a labor representative in the C-suite at this point.

          • arthur@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            They will give you less than you ask, everytime. So better ask for much more.

      • Communist
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s quite simple, right now businesses are structured in a totalitarian manner, socialism seeks to overthrow that totalitarian regime within your workplace, there’s a number of ways to do this, nobody is suggesting the janitor should decide how a surgeon does his job, we just want to eliminate the useless position of CEO, and replace it with democratic systems managed by the people who work the jobs.

        An easy to understand version of this would be if every company was transformed into a worker co-op, but that of course is only one of many models for socialism.

        It is important to note that the government is not the worker, and therefore government control over the means of production DOES NOT COUNT.

      • apt_install_coffee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        hat’s a bad faith interpretation of “the people control the means of production”.

        I want you to consider the difference between the work needed to complete a task, and the work needed to manage a workplace: for one of those tasks, only the experts in that task can meaningfully contribute to the outcome, whereas for the other, everybody who is part of the workplace has meaningful input.

        I don’t know about your experience, but everywhere I’ve worked there have been people “on the ground” who get to see the inefficiencies in the logistics of their day to day jobs; in a good job a manager will listen and implement changes, but why should the workers be beholden to this middleman who doesn’t know how the job works?

        I’ve also had plenty of roles where management have been “telling me where to cut”.

      • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It means the janitor has a vote on how their duties are done

        • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          35
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So…what if they decide their duties are brain surgery?

          Like the nonsense a peer post to yours is spewing. From a person who’s handle is “communist”.

          They could have reasonable points, but if your philosophy suggests that brain surgeons can get told what to do by janitors, that’s a problem. I wouldn’t call that “totalitarian”. I would call that sane.

          Now, what do we do about brain surgeons and the cost of healthcare (which is and will always be phenomenal, no matter who is paying and how it is being paid for)?

          • Communist
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Are you being outrageous and arguing in bad faith on purpose?

            I genuinely can’t tell, in the event that you’re not, nobody has ever suggested that janitors should be allowed to do the duties of brain surgeons. Furthermore, even if a single absolutely insane janitor decided he should be allowed to do the duties of a brain surgeon… nobody else would agree with them, because we live in a society with vaguely reasonable humans… and that janitor would likely be democratically FIRED for suggesting something so outrageous, or put in a mental institution.

            Or are you worried about the janitor uprising in which janitors decide they can do all jobs known to man? Perhaps nothing can stop the janitor uprising, and we are all doomed.

            • Moonguide
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              At the very least, they’d keep the streets clean! I, for one, welcome our janitorial overlords.

          • arthur@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do you know any janitor that are willing to take the risk of killing someone and face the consequences of that? If so, I would recommend to keep your distance of that person.

          • apt_install_coffee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            What kind of idiot workplace would allow that? Perhaps if you don’t assume the people you talk to are literally brain-dead, you might understand what they’re saying.

          • Aabbcc@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            what if they decide their duties are brain surgery?

            In your world the only thing keeping janitors from doing brain surgery is the current corporate structure?

            Like the nonsense a peer post to yours is spewing

            Which parts are nonsense

            but if your philosophy suggests that brain surgeons can get told what to do by janitors,

            It can’t.

            Now, what do we do about brain surgeons and the cost of healthcare

            The government pays for it like in most wealthy nations

            • Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The first part reminds me of religious people who can’t fathom ethics existing outside of religion.

              “If there’s no hell what’s to stop people from doing bad things?”