Socialism in the west, capitalism in the east

Do you realize how many people there are? If you ever have a chance to go to india or brazil or africa you can see for yourself the huge number of people living in absolutely terrible conditions of war and poverty. But if you socialists want to provide each and every one of them with almost equal resources and lives, how much do you think will be left for you?

I'm sure you also realize the exploitation that these people are put through, and how thier explotiation is what makes your western lives enjoyable. I agree that is a sad state of affairs

Which is why I support socialism in developed, wealthy countries and the maintationing of the most ruthless capitalism in less develped countries. By doing this, we can ensure the lives of every single person in our countries is free from all kinds of sorrows and exploitation and enjoy a wonderful lifestyle and an egalitarian society.

When we reach post scarcity, we'll open up our borders and everything will be great

thoughts?

You're a bad person and deserve to fail at life.

You're basically asking for unclean environments that are the hot bed of viruses and all sorts of nastiness to go in their worst conditions, and in a connected world, reach you.

So, you're going to be fucked. Nice job.

maybe so, but what problems do you see with this idea?

For a number of reasons you just suggest that you'll be seen as the bougie you are to the rest of the world, and you'll invite not only the breeding ground for disease, but Capitalist dissent

it goes without saying border security will have to be extremely strong, and immigration will have to be completely stymied.

yeah the border control staff will surely make sure you're not smuggling any illegal diseases in your luggage! great idea einstein!

With the internet in existence, this is beyond futile. You can't quarantine a nation from infectious diseases at this point. Without it being strict enough to make your citizens furious, you risk contamination. You put in the risks you suggested to approval, you incite massive criticism.


Travel does not equal immigration.

Anyways, this is just a pipe dream

Now I know why they call you people white devils

Now I know why they call you people white devils

socialism in all countries is even more of a pipe dream. My proposal and possible and one can easily imagine it working. Hell, if neolibs turned into necons it could be achieved in a couple years. Burgerland has all the resources already to make this a reality

I'm not a racist. I don't support deportation of nonwhites. Also, some white countries will be part of the third world wasteland seeing that they are undeveloped

Not really. It's actually preferable.


You're at most suggesting with the platform you have, that porkies adopt you and eat you out eventually like they did in the past with most of neoliberal Europe which instituted some far left policy

Having a more educated world population is highly preferable going on to future. For a number of reasons.

of course it is preferable, it's preferable to me too. The question is how can you provide everyone with first world living standards when resources are scarce?

It isn't possible. Are you willing to take a hit on your lifestyle so that anh-mi in thialand who you will never meet can have her own house and dildo?

What kind of resources are we talking? With more and more people having an internet connection, it adds a new dimension to collectivism.

The idea of simplifying something complex, the internet, with something simple, borders, has always been a problem in socialist states, and capitalist ones as well.

I don't see this going anywhere in the greater scope of eliminating Capitalism by all means available.


Anh-Mi probably already does live in a house with a dildo .

As an added point, we have military projects in the 1.5 Trillion US Dollars range, and that's enough resources to provide investment for much of what's already available. Of course this is a bit generous since it's already spent, but I doubt something like the F-35 is the only trillion dollar military project going on in the future.

The fact that you take a reverse position on doesn't make it less retarded. The welfare state is dying in the West and soon we'll all be in the same boat as the third world. This argument might have held water in the 20th century, but here in 2016 you're unlikely to lose anything unless you're a rich porky.

Some resources are not scarce. There's enough food to go around. There's enough land for everyone to grow their own if we need. Everyone can have a house. Building wood or stone houses in India would not require tearing down Americans' houses. Medicines are mostly reproducible. Scarcity of medicines is due to patents. We can micro-generate electricity. Water is more of an issue, but there's ways to get it.

Actually it would not be hard - if the government allowed it - for everyone to squat a patch of land, build a home, grow their own food, and live in peace.

Scarcity is more of a mentality than a reality. Consumer goods are made artificially scarce so people compete for them. People are denied free access to land, homes, food, to make them compete to survive. This has reached crisis point because there aren't enough jobs. People aren't allowed to drop out but they aren't allowed to stay in - that's what's wrong with the slums in India and Brazil.

Easily solved by a basic income and/or right to land. There will still be "slums" but they'll be more like hippy camps.

Doesn't work.

Take HIV, for example. One after another, countries tried to lock down their borders, impose quarantines , etc, and it all failed. HIV jumped into the Philippines, the USSR, and is probably in North Korea.

You must be literally mentally disabled.

...

This thread really flew over the heads of most posters, sad.

This is policy described and practiced by many of your favorites, just in less obtuse soft words. Instead they describe it as a necessary phase rather than ruthless, even though that's exactly what it is.

Or we could go for an actual working system instead.

I know he is describing "socialism in europe and socialism with chinese charistaristics in asia" but that doesnt mean its not just as retarded as it is today.

But then how will we make someone else rich?