Why can't the Capitalists totally win the Socialists?

Question

I know it's quite an ironic question to somebody, but I need to find an answer 4 this. Many capitalist leaders say that the Socialism is a dangerous threat to the freedom world, and they say that the Reds were nearly destroyed after the 1991 crisis. But now, we Socialists are still here, and the South America is nearly in the left-wing's hand. What I want to ask is, while some right-wing guys always say that we are weak and easy to be destroyed, why can't they destroy us? Ha, if anyone answer that question correctly, he(she) is my friend!

Answer 1

Perhaps you have not noticed, or perhaps you just simply accept it blindly, but socialism will ultimately require state control of resources. This is done with heavy handed laws and sometimes force.

While you might "still be here," your "here" is much less productive than it would be if your socilist government did not inhibit your spirit.

Answer 2

Socialism won't be destroyed easily because it has a appealing message.

Now, consider this:
1. I think it's funny when people from Vietnam (like you) or China call themselfes capitalist when actually they're capitalist countries with one difference: there is a party called "Comunist" in power. How come China is a communist country if the universities are payed, private property is an obvious reality, the government does not pay retirement for the elderly and much more other things... And I don't know what's the case of Vietnam but China is obviously NOT a socialist country. If China is a socialist country, then Europe and Latin America are too.

2. Leftist from Europe have moved dramaticly to the right. There is almost no difference between left and right in Europe regarding economy in Europe.

3. Some so-called socialist presidents appearing in South America, but it's too early too say if they will stay in power, and with the exception of Chávez seems like none of them will dare to put an end on private propertie. The maximun they'll do is nationalize companies in "strategic" sectors like energy and telecomunication.

Answer 3

you are able to say capitalism failed decrease than George W Bush. you notice you additionally could make the argument that each and each economic and social equipment fails over the years. i'm no longer protecting socialism yet i'm merely mentioning that capitalism has failed many circumstances in historic previous. Socialism has additionally failed multiple circumstances. Feudalism failed additionally if we could get into that. economic and social structures evolve over the years... capitalism and socialism (and the certainly fusion of the two that we actually stay decrease than gets replaced too). No offense yet as quickly as I see those questions right here (and there are multiple them) asking if who "wins" between capitalism and communism or socialism i will't help yet think of you people seem at economies like their soccer communities or religions. money is fluid... in case you think of that we can anchor to a minimum of one equipment and blind your self to alter then the destiny will weigh down you.

Answer 4

Capitalists in Europe seem to be working quite well within “socialist” government structures. Many European companies are making lots of money while the citizens are assured of a variety of social safety nets.

When European right-wingers are elected, they don’t make dramatic changes in the social welfare programs so the two concepts seem to be existing pretty well together.

Answer 5

Socialism is superficially attractive to anyone who thinks that he is somehow being ripped off by the system. But it is based on a flawed premise: that the amount of labor in a product defines its value. But that is not correct: suppose that you are on your way home, and remember that there isn't any bread in the house. It is only a block out of your way to the grocery store, so you go there. select a loaf of your favorite brand, pay the storekeeper the labeled price, and go on home. Has value been created? Obviously, it has: you wanted the bread more than the money -- it is more valuable to you. But the storekeeper wanted your money more than the bread -- it is more valuable to him. Hence, value has been created for each of you. This is one example of the general rule: trade, between willing traders, creates value. Of course, this applies to employment also. Marx supposed that an employer derives more value from his employee's work than he pays out in wages, and this is true. But the employee derives more value from his wages than he places on his work -- were it not so, he would not work -- and this is where Marx went wrong. (The ironic feature of this is that Marx was aware of this; he referred to a paper on the subject in a footnote in Das Kapital.) Marx's blunder is by far the most expensive mistake that anyone has ever made in the entire history of the human race -- the cost has run to trillions of dollars, and tens of millions of lives. But the world is gradually recognizing the error of Marx's ways; communism totally collapsed in the old USSR, and has been replaced by fascism in China, because a communist state cannot create value as effectively as a capitialist one. There are still a few crackpots about who haven't figured this out, such as Fidel Castro, who has reduced Cuba from the most prosperous country in the Caribbean to the poorest. Eventually, they will all be gone.

Answer 6

I is often easy, with rhetoric to convince people that others have more only because they did something unfair. It is human nature to not like people who have more than you and dems and socialists have become expert at playing the class warfare card.

Answer 7

Oh, I'm certain that you'll last for a long time. But it's also a matter of time before you have an uprising because people with drive and ambition aren't allowed to get anywhere in your system. It might be hard for you socialists to understand, but believe it or not, there are many of us who prefer to work for ourselves and not for the benefit of others.

If you enjoy living under a socialist regime, more power to you. :)

Answer 8

A totally true capitalistic "democracy" is hard to keep up....The greed will keep the diehard moneychangers from changing the system to one of mutual gain and benefit of as many in the community...It's their own greed that empowers the socialists! (Hellooooo)?

Answer 9

The conservative model of the past fifty years won't cut it in a global economy . You can't let the "free-market' cure all humanities ills. First there was slavery then fuedelism then capitalism. The future belongs to socialism. America's biggest competitor is China, and their model is business and government go hand-and-hand. Trickle-down economics is outdated.

Answer 10

Because we don't just destroy people for no reason like you socialists do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

Do you know what the word "genocide" means?