|
For starters, almost all cases of socialism in a third-world country have experienced astounding economic production.
So, who would have thought so? The conservative nightmare of "redistributing the wealth" has jack to do with Churchill's claim that it only "shares the misery", but all the contrary, and economic equality and collectivist tendencies DO raise the standard of living in much more efficient ways than capitalism does.
The Soviet Union is actually the greatest example of this, I won't even say "just ignore Russia." Russia was the retarded cousin of the European family, with a predominantly agricultural population that were still serfs. SERFS!
In less than half a century, they became the second power of the world, and the first nation to go to space.
If you were to argue about the human rights issues in the Soviet Union, then I'll just point out the bigger human rights violations all around the free market world. I am NOT justifying Stalinism, but it's pretty stupid to complain about certain human rights violations when we make even bigger ones and don't give a fuck about them. Besides, more humane socialist parties, such as the Sandinistas, have had an even bigger degree of progress in even more little time, so it wouldn't even be true that the Soviet Union HAD to be that brutal to reach that level of production. Socialism just works, plain and simple.
|