The success of capitalism in those places is it’s ability to crush socialist movements before they have a chance to work and offload production on their peasant class.
Socialism has never worked because capital has never allowed it. or more correctly socialism has never been allowed to continue working.
it’s why America is still so butthurt over Cuba.
Literally. The only reason Cuba hasn’t worked as well as it could is because the US has done as much as it possibly can to quash it because Cuba’s success doesn’t align with the propaganda the US is pushing. Can’t have the poors finding out that socialism could work…
Fidel pisses me off so much. He achieved amazing things in the name of prosperity for all the people, then went and killed or imprisoned political opponents and LGBT.
However the continued sanctions against Cuba are blatantly in place to make sure socialism doesn’t “work”.
Socialism has never worked because dictators and authoritarians take control. It has weak protections against authoritarians, or authoritarians use socialism as a carrot to entice the masses and never delivering on their promise. Same with communism.
See infant mortality rates
Are you attributing reduced infant mortality rate to capitalism? Because then you can look at the same graph for Cuba and also attribute their reduced infant mortality rate to socialism
Considering the level of sabotage the US has implemented on Cuba, I don’t know if you could fully attribute that to socialism.
It’s low…
So it’s the improvement you can make when you’re actively in an economic war with a superpower as a minor regional power.
Socialism^2
Show me please
Dead on. Cuba’s stunted economy can at least point to the US trade embargo. What explains the history and current state of Honduras, Guatemala or El Salvador?
So communism can only work when it can trade with a free market economy?
Have you even been to Cuba and talked to the people there? The government buildings are immaculate (better than any other country I’ve been to) while the people live in poverty.
Ideology doesn’t exempt anyone from the fact that the powerful will live large while the powerless will live in poverty. Same in communism as it is with capitalism.
With US history of interfering in Latin America countries I’m sure there’s a link to the CIA, USAID, and the state of those countries economies and governments.
Egg-zackly.
Oh are we pretending Fidel Castro was a good guy now? Ffs, you have no idea how offensive that is to cubans
Cuban or Gusano?
Removed by mod
What metrics are you basing this off? GDP? Quality of life? Vibes?
He’s basing it off of “trust me bro”
Especially considering that for the average person in 2024, the cost of living in the US for one person per month was 3x as much the cost of living in China. Approx. $1,700 per month vs. Approx. $550 per month.
GDP as a metric never makes sense because why would you base your country’s success off production unless you really don’t give a shit about how the people in your country live? Sure ths US has a high GDP, but what’s the involuntary part-time rate? How many people are under the line of poverty?
How much does having a baby cost?
Removed by mod
Ah. Yes. very convincing.
“Communism” in this case means a centrally planned, command economy, administered by a Marxist-Leninist state. Essentially, the system that existed in the Soviet Union until it collapsed in 1991.
I don’t think very many people are advocating for that exact system. Even the few countries that are still run by a communist party don’t have that exact system anymore, China and Vietnam being the most obvious examples. They have hybrid, or mixed economies, that I think could best be described as “state directed market economies.”
I don’t know how you, personally, would rank that economic system, but it’s hard to argue against its success. Hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of poverty under a state directed, mixed, market economy.
Removed by mod
The alternative being to trust that a private corporation has your best interest in mind? At least the government can get voted out.
Removed by mod
Thus the inclusion of checks and balances to temper corruption.
I don’t trust the government
Perhaps not, but a state is involved in every market economy on the planet, that I’m aware of. There is no stateless, laissez-faire, completely free market economy anywhere in the world, again, to my knowledge. If you know of one, please enlighten me. Frankly, I don’t see how a market economy can exist without a state, to enforce private property rights, issue and maintain a currency, provide public infrastructure, and prevent the establishment of large monopolies.
Unregulated markets tend toward monopoly. We saw that in the 19th century, during the gilded age when a few robber barrons took near total control of several, entire key industries, like steel production and the railroads. The gilded age was also a time of massive inequality and major economic crises. The state had to step in and break up the monopolies, and enact laws to prevent new monopolies from forming.
