sepheronx wrote:You know, economic totalitarianism isn't that bad of an Idea. Total planned economy on the medium/large scale while small enterprises be 100% private. Why I say this is that one relies entirely on an individual or set of individuals who may or may not set up production for something that is desperately needed. I am not talking of handbags, Tshirts and what not, but I am talking about high tech and heavy industrial production. And even then, textiles for basic needs may not be such a bad idea either. I don't suggest that all enterprises be total control of government, but that the government should have a company in each major sector to set a "standard" and all other companies who want to compete can be private. But in the end, you do not become entirely dependent on the others and will always have a facility that produces. Doesn't have to be high quality high end stuff, but something like basic T-shirts, jeans/dress pants, basic shoes, etc. Because look what happened after soviet union? Majority of textiles were even imported and small companies that remained were barely producing or were producing for a very small segment of the market while rest is simply imported. Now, people are scrambling to set up a new textile plant in Russia or contracting out their foreign made goods to local producers just to get cheaper goods into the local market and meet the new, growing demand (well, technically the new demand in Russia due to drastic reduced spending, is in discount stores.
共産 (public fund) and 資本 (private capital) is two side of an economy and they have dialectical, mutual relationship. 共産 is used to increase 資本 of each people, and 資本 of the people is donated (by taxes or etc etc) to establish a 共産.
Marx and Lenin did not planned to eradicate all 資本 in socialism, neither did they want to establish a huge goverment. Socialism means 共産 is used to serve the society.
Imperialist goverments like the current White House or the former British empire use the 共産 to invade other countries, create an army and wage wars everywhere, and only the 資本 of the rich fat cats increase like most of the common people become poorer and poorer. On the contrary, in socialism, 共産 and 資本 is carefully used to establish powerful domestic enterprises, increase productivity, develop technology, educate people and establish a sustainable high actual living standard, and all citizens are benefited from that.
共産 and 資本 each has its own pros and cons. 共産 has the ability to mobilize huge amount of capital and manpowers for enormous programme. Like building an army, like nuclear developments, space programs, industrialization, scientific researches... 資本 is used for medium and small-scale enterprise, in service or light industry sectors, has excellent flexibility and creativity potential.
Economic totalitarianism, nationalization is to increase 共産. Privatization, market economy is to increase 資本. Now the issues here is which one should be use in which places and which time ?
============
The Soviet Union started to decline after Stalin died in 1953. After the death of Stalin, the WW2 military generals topple Stalin-backed industrialists and established a military dictatorship based on an alliance between military generals and corrupted politicians. The military regime tried to retain the "communism in war time" although the war was long gone, in order to protect the priveleges of military leaders. Stalinists toppled Khrushchyov in 1964, but the goverment fell into the hand of Brezhnev, another militaryman, and Soviet military dictatorship was becoming even worse under Brezhnev... until 1991 when the USSR could sustain no more and collapse.
Russia experienced a dark period of chaos in 199x when 5th columnist and pro-West fanboys rampaged everywhere in the society. But then Putin went in in 2000, promote Stalinist-style technocrats regime (without Stalin style of tyranny, of course) and we have Russia today.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
higurashihougi
and BMW, Mercedes, Samsung Galazy S6 and SpaceShipTwo.
