/leftypol/ - why socialist states modernize so quickly

Name
Subject
Message	Max message length: 8192
Files	Drag files to upload or click here to select them Max file size: 80.00 MB Max files: 5
More
E-mail
Password	(used to delete files and postings)
Misc

Anonymous 03/26/2021 (Fri) 20:33:56 No. 1331055

>>1331032 >Bitching about muh authoriarianism Cope, rightoid.

Anonymous 03/26/2021 (Fri) 23:39:38 No. 1331081

>>1331032 >tldr because authoritarian dictatorships can force people to work and thus gdp grows faster If by "authoritarian" you mean a rationally planned economy that doesn't run according to market anarchy and has to deal with a minority of exploiters that speculate on the prices of goods and horde social surplus out of circulation for reinvestment, then yes. The reason why planned economies generally perform better is because rather than leaving production up simply to what can be profited off of, you can instead plan production in a manner, and as a result, you are no longer held back by business cycles, rents, dividends, stock buybacks, intellectual properties, advertising, or any of the other deficiencies inherent to a market economy.

Anonymous 03/27/2021 (Sat) 01:34:10 No. 1331096

It is because capitalists are not true believers in industrialization, if they were then we wouldn't have the rust belt. While the USA ignores or destroys its means of production to make short term gains, the Soviet focusing on building industry.

Anonymous 03/27/2021 (Sat) 02:22:20 No. 1331101

In terms of complexity it's pretty easy for a command economy to handle "build road, build factory, goto 10 until you have an economy"

Anonymous 03/27/2021 (Sat) 07:07:36 No. 1331121

>>1331032 >this doesnt address howver technological innovation whom requires individual thinking from the norm in order to come up with tools that improve mans ability to control the environment around him this is like an alien's idea of how humans work

Anonymous 03/27/2021 (Sat) 18:11:20 No. 1331164

Anonymous 03/29/2021 (Mon) 06:29:28 No. 1331454

>>1331032 It was because China and the USSR used state resources to implement massive industrialization & welfare programs, not because they were authoritarian but because they devoted national power to industrialization + stuff like raising literacy levels where the regimes which reigned before them really didn't care about that shit as much (although Tsar Nicholas did a little bit) and tended to accrue wealth and not really pursue that much reform. For contrast see Kampuchea, which (with US support for a time!) decided to just move a bunch of people out to farms and divert away from modernization. There are lots of better analyses on this than I could give, though.

Anonymous 03/29/2021 (Mon) 11:42:07 No. 1331467

Anonymous 04/05/2021 (Mon) 00:24:44 No. 1332439

>>1331032 russia, famous economic superpower. they definitely arent relevant solely bc of the nuke stockpile leftover from the USSR or anything

Anonymous 04/05/2021 (Mon) 03:02:24 No. 1332445

>>1332439 nukes aren't real

Anonymous 04/05/2021 (Mon) 06:07:48 No. 1332452

>>1331096 I think it was Veblen who predicted, in the early 1900's how the US eventually was going to deindustrialize and financialize its economy.

Anonymous 04/05/2021 (Mon) 17:45:17 No. 1332482

>>1331467 Starting with 1961 is odd and intellectually dishonest. No one denies that there was stagnation in the 1970s in the Leninist Eastern Bloc economies, but those same Leninist economies also grew life expectancy considerably in their earlier years.

Anonymous 04/05/2021 (Mon) 20:13:53 No. 1332493

>>1332482 no, beginning 2 years after the world's largest war is intellectually dishonest. charting life expectancy from the fall of communism to 2019 it would make since to show the same amount of years in reverse

Anonymous 04/08/2021 (Thu) 10:38:10 No. 1332902

>>1332482 That graph doesn't improve the situation very much. That's really shit. That hurts me just looking at it.

Anonymous 04/08/2021 (Thu) 11:04:49 No. 1332905

>>1331081 it's the same difference. it's just that liberals have made "dictatorship" and "authoritarianism" the worst two words outside of "nazi". that's why liberals end up destroying nations which use dictatorships to run things even if they're successful like Libya. you can be cynical and say that this is a cover but i think that the elites honestly buy into their own crap sometimes. "democracy" however corrupt, satanic or undemocratic is the standard of goodness in the entire western hemisphere today. so basically, stop overcompensating. >>1332445 correct.

Anonymous 04/08/2021 (Thu) 14:50:43 No. 1332918

>>1332482 Porky BTFO'd

Anonymous 04/08/2021 (Thu) 17:08:02 No. 1332933

>>1332918 >Porky BTFO'd Yes