POLITICAL THEORY - Karl Marx

Now days most economy are mixed, free-market and some government intervention. I though classic capitalism was cruel for average Joe, until i come across objectivims.
 

Psychologist

Changemaker
Ain't you madhibaan tho. What clan nigga?
We actually range about 1 million people, there is my sub that lives both in Eth and Puntland. its the biggest madhibaan sub clan, they range about 200-300k people. than there is other Maxamad that live with the hawiye, we are lost conncet with them but they still live there with the hawiye, than there is the maxamad that lives in PL, SL, And ETH. there is the maxad barre that lives in SL, PL and ETH too, we even live with the afars in some places and some Oromos. only problem is we are widespread and that makes us minority but if we lived together we wouldn't be minority. if only they can unite in one place would solve all their problems.

One day i will try to do so, if it works out guul if not, f*ck it.
 
Last edited:
Communism requires everybody to be a good person, that is simply not the case in reality.

Every government that has ever tried to implement Communism have been tyrannical and autocratic, exactly like the bourgeoise they were railing against as revolutionaries.
Can't fight human nature. Every nigga will say this time its different until they amass the power and watch the greed change them.
 
Communism requires everybody to be a good person, that is simply not the case in reality.

Every government that has ever tried to implement Communism have been tyrannical and autocratic, exactly like the bourgeoise they were railing against as revolutionaries.

I think Socialism is possible and can be configured to retain rights and civil liberties; socialism is also economically coherent; I don't think that a moneyless, Stateless and classes society is at all possible or even desirable -- which is precisely what Communism is suppose to be.
 
Last edited:

Periplus

It is what it is
VIP
I think Socialism is possible and can be configured to retain rights and civil liberties; socialism is also economically coherent; I don't think that a moneyless, Stateless and classes society is at all possible or even desirable -- which is precisely what Communism is suppose to be.

I am a big fan of social democracy. Democratic principles with a societal-minded economy.

It strikes the right middle balance.
 
I am a big fan of social democracy. Democratic principles with a societal-minded economy.

It strikes the right middle balance.

What sectors of the economy would you retain in State hands? What are your thoughts on co-operatives?

Social democracies seem to be heavily dependent on the dynamics of unequal exchange and would undoubtedly experience dramatic drops in performance and quality of life for their citizens if the global South wasn't supplying them with cheap materials to the tune of trillions of dollars annually.

Unequal exchange allows the West (social democracies included) to maintain their competitive edge as well as their ecological integrity. At least $5 trillion dollars are transferred annually from the global South to the global North -- and that figure was from 2008.
 
This is how I would configure my Nation's economy:

People ( at the county level) would own and control the land -- especially farmland and livestock. Local communities should even control flour mills, food processing, groceries-supermarkets, forestry, online marketplaces and fisheries.

State Governments should control utilities, educational and tertiary institutions, public transportation, non-profit insurance, construction companies and textiles.

The Federal Government should control all the Nation's natural resources and minerals, mining, airlines, petrochemicals, banks, pharmaceutical industry, medical research institutes, telecommunications, industrial manufacturing, car companies, electronics and even IT.

These companies would be statutory -> created by an Act of Parliament and would be governed independently by qualified personnel.

These statutory companies would not be directly operated by the Government, however, they would have to abide by a State Charter and be subject to Government oversight and accountability.
 

reer

VIP
I am a big fan of social democracy. Democratic principles with a societal-minded economy.

It strikes the right middle balance.
somalia should never be a welfare state. we cant handle welfare. imagine if scandanavia was ethnically somali governments would probably go bankrupt due to ceyr abuse. :deadrose:
we dont have the natural resources to maintain a welfare state like saudi arabia uae scandanavia etc. and the best and most fertile lands that arent damaged every 5 years by drought (nogob region jigjiga bale region negele including guji zone-liban zone frontiers) are outside the borders. :francis:
This is how I would configure my Nation's economy:

People ( at the county level) would own and control the land -- especially farmland and livestock. Local communities should even control flour mills, food processing, groceries-supermarkets, forestry, online marketplaces and fisheries.

State Governments should control utilities, educational and tertiary institutions, public transportation, non-profit insurance, construction companies and textiles.

The Federal Government should control all the Nation's natural resources and minerals, mining, airlines, petrochemicals, banks, pharmaceutical industry, medical research institutes, telecommunications, industrial manufacturing, car companies, electronics and even IT.

These companies would be statutory -> created by an Act of Parliament and would be governed independently by qualified personnel.

These statutory companies would not be directly operated by the Government, however, they would have to abide by a State Charter and be subject to Government oversight and accountability.
peole underestimate the devastating effects of uncontrolled capitalism on the powers of a government. too many governments now have to tip toe around thr top 1% rich elite. you are right major industries should be nationalized or atleast 30% owned by the government.
 
peole underestimate the devastating effects of uncontrolled capitalism on the powers of a government. too many governments now have to tip toe around thr top 1% rich elite. you are right major industries should be nationalized or atleast 30% owned by the government.

Exactly!

We shouldn't even allow the existence of financial markets or the existence of enterprises that are not co-operatives. Mondragón is the best example of a co-operative.

I believe that an advanced society requires some form of centralised governance and that this is the only way robotics, artificial intelligence and automation could be harnessed to remove all the monotonous, difficult and socially denigrating jobs.


The prominent and resource-intensive sectors of the economy should all be publicly owned. We need something akin to OGAS to run a planned economy in the sectors that the various levels of Government should preside over.


Authoritarianism could be prevented from arising by incorporating some of the proposals put forward by Gar Alperovitz.

Local communities could be given more powers and responsibilities in order to prevent the concentration of power in the center. A separation of powers is also essential.
 
Last edited:
Things that are essential to a functionning country like building roads, funding public schools, giving a salary to the police or firefighters etc...

What about banks, airlines, mining companies and telecommunications? With the exception of mining companies... the rest of these industries were in State hands in Australia prior to the ill conceived privatisation push in the 90s and early 2000s.
 
Last edited:
There is an alternative to State Socialism that isn't casino Capitalism... and I already mentioned it earlier -> co-operatives; they are enterprises that are worker owned and managed.

Co-operatives are more efficient at a rate of 6-14%; pay their workers more; have lower failure rate at half that of conventional enterprises; and have better working conditions.


Co-operatives don't have to funnel profits out of the company and into the hands of investors, shareholders and the board of directors, so they're not subject to the same pressures and so do not have to respond with the same measures.

Workers in co-operatives have better, smarter solutions at their disposal....solutions that are not entirely contingent on profit. Workers in co-operatives do not vote themselves out of a job, so outsourcing is not a present threat as it has been for the Western world.

Co-operatives can also incorporate automation without it resulting in lay-offs and can thus be more productive and efficient.


Mondragón is the largest and most successful co-operative in the world; the pay ratio between the lowest and highest paid member is 1:9; contrast this with the 1:321 pay ratio of the CEO to average wage earner in the top 350 companies in the United States.

I'm of the opinion that every enterprise in my Country (even State owned enterprises) should be a co-operative and that they should regulated by State Charters.
 

Periplus

It is what it is
VIP
What sectors of the economy would you retain in State hands? What are your thoughts on co-operatives?

Social democracies seem to be heavily dependent on the dynamics of unequal exchange and would undoubtedly experience dramatic drops in performance and quality of life for their citizens if the global South wasn't supplying them with cheap materials to the tune of trillions of dollars annually.

Unequal exchange allows the West (social democracies included) to maintain their competitive edge as well as their ecological integrity. At least $5 trillion dollars are transferred annually from the global South to the global North -- and that figure was from 2008.

By social democracy, I refer to anything more socialised than the American economy but less socialised than the communist nations.

In that, I would prefer any public goods provided by the state, including stuff like health care and broadband infrastructure, similar to the NBN we have here in Aus.

While you are most likely right about the problems with social democracy in the West, as they rely on unequal exchange whilst preaching morality in ecology etc. Social democracy can work in many countries in Africa.

For example, in the context of Somalia, it is a country with a lot of raw materials as well as good potential for agriculture and maritime industry. They have necessary abilities to produce cheap materials and also profit of their raw material wealth. That money, imo, would be best placed into sovereign wealth funds and social programmes such as public housing, health care and infrastructure. Obviously, this is an almost implausible scenario but the one that fits my point.
 

reer

VIP
For example, in the context of Somalia, it is a country with a lot of raw materials as well as good potential for agriculture and maritime industry. They have necessary abilities to produce cheap materials and also profit of their raw material wealth. That money, imo, would be best placed into sovereign wealth funds and social programmes such as public housing, health care and infrastructure. Obviously, this is an almost implausible scenario but the one that fits my point.
thats a rampant misconception. the somali republic borders does not have the natural resources or human resources to maintain a 1st world country status let alone a social/welfare state unless its concentrated in a few cities. the best lands are outside the borders.
 

Trending

Top