Right vs Left economics

[Abu_Adnan]

I was feeling curious about how people here see socialism and capitalism and I've seen that many have strong opinions, mostly against the socialist side.
So, lemme ask you guys, what's your opinions on socialism and capitalism. Which do you like and why? I'd say I lean towards the socialist side.

 

[Testo 21]

Good Communist is dead one

 

[anon2]

Where is the option for Fascism?

 

[Represented]

Both are dead-end in their current form. Islamic financial theory is more logical and compatible with human nature

 

[Thebluesomali]

Look at countries that have capitalism then look at socialist/communist countries. Even the Nordic ones the socialists love have capitalist economies. At the end of the day the numbers don't lie free market economy > controlled economy. The data proves how mentally stunted socialists are when it comes to money.

 

[Abu_Adnan]

Where is the option for Fascism?

Fascism isn't a mode of production, rather its a political system. Fascist economics are actually quite pro capitalist, as an example the word privatization was coined to describe the economic policies of Nazi Germany which were characterized by the sale of national assets to private business, union busting and tax breaks for the wealthy.

 

[anon2]

Fascism isn't a mode of production, rather its a political system. Fascist economics are actually quite pro capitalist, as an example the word privatization was coined to describe the economic policies of Nazi Germany which were characterized by the sale of national assets to private business, union busting and tax breaks for the wealthy.

Fascism is a mix of both Capitalism and Socialism though. It incorporates ideas from both while still being centralized. I personally think Islamofascism is perfect for an ethno-centric society like Somalis. All other systems won't work for the Somali race.

Can't speak for other races and cultures though.

 

[ZUBAYR+_]

Pretty clearly neither. They disagree on the means but the outlook is all the same, unlike Islam which has its own political, economic and social frame.

 

[Abu_Adnan]

Fascism is a mix of both Capitalism and Socialism though. It incorporates ideas from both while still being centralized. I personally think Islamofascism is perfect for an etho-centric society like Somalis. All other systems won't work for the Somali race.

Can't speak for other races and cultures though.

But you can't mix capitalism and socialism as they are opposites. Capitalism entails the private ownership of the means of production, like factories, farms, etc whereas socialism entails worker ownership of the means of production, whether that be though a cooperative firms or state owned assets. Fascism doesn't have an economic philosophy, it revolves around ultra nationalism and reactionary politics. That is why capital owners haven't really been opposed to fascist politics, they aren't negatively impacted by it rather they stand to win with it since fascism is against class solidarity and internationalism.

 

[bidenkulaha]

Controlled capitalism

 

[Abu_Adnan]

An Islamic economy is the best sadly it doesn't exist anywhere any more. It's balanced and doesn't go into the extremes of capitalism or communism.

But out of the two I would rather society be leaning more towards capitalism then communism. Socialism is more inherently anti Islam in It's foundation if we go by Karl Mary's works.

I keep hearing about Islamic economics but every description of it that I've seen just sounds like capitalism with some regulations. Even when I supported that idea I never heard any description of it that significantly differs from capitalism. Furthermore, if what we mean by Islamic economics is the economic system present in the medieval Islamic then we wouldn't be able to implement it in the current industrial and globalized world in which we live. It was a preindustrial economy based primarily on feudalism (iqta system) and artisanal production. How would you imagine an Islamic economic system for the modern world?

 

[Indeed]

Controlled capitalism

Is the Labour Party U.K. right now currently pro capitalist innit? Labour Party was founded on the basis of working class people, and the trade unions, to implement socialist policies.

Many got angry recently when keir starmer didn’t back the strikes.

 

[bidenkulaha]

Both are dead-end in their current form. Islamic financial theory is more logical and compatible with human nature

Islamic finance is closer to welfare capitalism Outside of the riba ofc. Islam shariah categorically rejects communism however given it’s defence of private property.

 

[Odious Delirium]

8I keep hearing about Islamic economics but every description of it that I've seen just sounds like capitalism with some regulations. Even when I supported that idea I never heard any description of it that significantly differs from capitalism. Furthermore, if what we mean by Islamic economics is the economic system present in the medieval Islamic then we wouldn't be able to implement it in the current industrial and globalized world in which we live. It was a preindustrial economy based primarily on feudalism (iqta system) and artisanal production. How would you imagine an Islamic economic system for the modern world?

Read or watch mufti taqi uthmani's work on contemporary islamic banking and Islamic finances he is revolutionary when it comes to what a modern day Islamic economy would look like.

Most of the world financial problems is because of interest being compounded and eventually blowing up in everyone's faces.

 

[bidenkulaha]

Is the Labour Party U.K. right now currently pro capitalist innit? Labour Party was founded on the basis of working class people, and the trade unions, to implement socialist policies.

Many got angry recently when keir starmer didn’t back the strikes.

I believe the Labour Party is and should be a pro-capital party, however it should aim to distribute wealth and opportunity as evenly as possible.

As a potential government Keir cannot back strikes. As PM he would have to negotiate on behalf of the taxpayer with those strikers. He’s not just the PM of union workers but of everyone. He argues for better working conditions/pay and trade union rights which as a Labour leader is a must though.

 

[TheManWhoIsAlive]

Capitalism for me because I'm not an idiot. Learn the skills needed to make bank and then work. I'm trying to get another promotion by 2023 and then I'll be making 6 figures.

I don't hate the idea of socialism on an ideal level, but it gives too much trust to the government.

Capitalism without regulation is just as bad because monopolies and corporatism will take over as well.

So my true answer is something in between. Capitalism with government regulation to prevent the removal of competition and corruption.

 

[Abu_Adnan]

Read or watch mufti taqi uthmani's work on contemporary islamic banking and Islamic finances he is revolutionary when it comes to what a modern day Islamic economy would look like.

Most of the world financial problems is because of interest being compounded and eventually blowing up in everyone's faces.

Capitalism doesn't require interest. Yes, interest is terrible and needs to be abolished but just stopping there doesn't address the exploitation inherent to capitalism. The theft of surplus labor value, the reserve army of labor/unemployment, homelessness etc. It seems to me that when people say Islamic economics they mean capitalism without interest.

 

[Odious Delirium]

8I keep hearing about Islamic economics but every description of it that I've seen just sounds like capitalism with some regulations. Even when I supported that idea I never heard any description of it that significantly differs from capitalism. Furthermore, if what we mean by Islamic economics is the economic system present in the medieval Islamic then we wouldn't be able to implement it in the current industrial and globalized world in which we live. It was a preindustrial economy based primarily on feudalism (iqta system) and artisanal production. How would you imagine an Islamic economic system for the modern world?

Read or watch mufti taqi uthmani's work on contemporary islamic banking and Islamic finances he is revolutionary when it comes to what a modern day Islamic economy would look like.

And like I said in my previous comment Islamic economy would lean more towards capitalism then communism since people are allowed to make as much money as they want. They just can't become monopolies and there are rules to prevent it and power the government has to come and step in the way of that. On the socialism side exists welfare systems, free healthcare and education etc

Capitalism doesn't require interest. Yes, interest is terrible and needs to be abolished but just stopping there doesn't address the exploitation inherent to capitalism. The theft of surplus labor value, the reserve army of labor/unemployment, homelessness etc. It seems to me that when people say Islamic economics they mean capitalism without interest.

Well no interest wasn't my only point it's just one of the main problems.

Have you read a fiqh book on trade and how it should be conducted? All the rules to make things fair are stated clearly I simply can't sit hear and explain it all which is why I recommended mufti taqi uthmanis works if you want to see how it all should be done. He's international and countries call him because there looking for alternatives to there failed economic plans.



And like I said before a welfare system would address homelessness which existed since the time of umar as Khalifa.

First we have to get our finances through the door before talking about homelessness. All these issues are part and parcel of systems we need our system in place and we will address them as they come.

 

[Abu_Adnan]

Read or watch mufti taqi uthmani's work on contemporary islamic banking and Islamic finances he is revolutionary when it comes to what a modern day Islamic economy would look like.

And like I said in my previous comment Islamic economy would lean more towards capitalism then communism since people are allowed to make as much money as they want. They just can't become monopolies and there are rules to prevent it and power the government has to come and step in the way of that. On the socialism side exists welfare systems, free healthcare and education etc

Well no interest wasn't my only point it's just one of the main problems.

Have you read a fiqh book on trade and how it should be conducted? All the rules to make things fair are stated clearly I simply can't sit hear and explain it all which is why I recommended mufti taqi uthmanis works if you want to see how it all should be done. He's international and countries call him because there looking for alternatives to there failed economic plans.



And like I said before a welfare system would address homelessness which existed since the time of umar as Khalifa.

First we have to get our finances through the door before talking about homelessness. All these issues are part and parcel of systems we need our system in place and we will address them as they come.

This still doesn't address the main exploitation of the capitalist system, surplus labor value. When you work you are creating value through your labor. In a capitalist system the capital owner gives you a part of your labor value in the form of wages and keeps the rest, the surplus meaning that the worker isn't getting his full labor value, a piece of it is being stolen. The only way to get rid of that exploitation is total overhaul of the system. Why do we need a class of wealth hoarders when the workers are the ones who create all the wealth in the first place? The workers don't need the capitalists, the capitalists need the workers. Furthermore it doesn't bring up the reserve army of labor. As long as there is an unemployed population the capital owning class has leverage over the workers, they can just be fired and more desperate people willing to be paid less can replace them. I believe we should have a system that puts people over profit, one based on human need rather than human greed. Also, if Cuba could solve homelessness after a civil war and while under a severe blockade, we can too.

 

[umbrarchist]

When have you ever heard capitalists or socialists advocating mandatory accounting/finance in the schools?

Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations is in the public domain and can be downloaded from Project Gutenberg and searched. The printed book can cost you $15 and take a lot of effort to search. Has Smith's "Invisible Hand" been used as a propaganda tool for decades since most people would never read WoN?

Smith used the word 'invisible' six times but only once as "invisible hand". It is really curious that we hear about the 'invisible hand' so much. The capitalists slap us in the face with it if not strangling us.

Smith used the word 'education' EIGHTY(80) TIMES. We are not told about that. Search for "and account" and you will find multiple instances of "read, write, and account", not "read, write and arithmetic". Double entry accounting was more than 300 years old when Smith wrote Wealth of Nations, but 50% of Brits were illiterate and public schools did not exist in 1776.

The United States could have made accounting/finance mandatory in the schools since Sputnik. Wouldn't that have helped everyone better serve their own self interest? But we do not hear the people who propagandize us about the "invisible hand" advocating mandatory accounting because that might make their invisible rip-offs more difficult.

Adam Smith never used the word 'depreciation' in WoN. He mentioned paper money being depreciated one time. Marx wrote about 'depreciation' 35 times in Das Kapital, sometimes regarding the depreciation of machines and sometimes of money. Marx even mentioned Adam Smith 130 times though not much about education.

Consumers did not buy automobiles, air conditioners, televisions and microwave ovens before 1885.
Marx died in 1883.
What does reliability have to do with the depreciation of durable consumer goods? How many people know what bathtub curves have to do with evaluating complex technologies that did not exist in the times of Smith and Marx. How free is the market if the buyers cannot evaluate the products?

But it's OK! Our brilliant economists do not talk about the depreciation of under engineered consumer trash today. Every time you buy a replacement the purchase is added to GDP. What about NDP? Oh sorry, when do you ever hear an economist explain NDP? That's OK too, they only depreciate the Capital Goods and ignore the depreciation of consumer junk anyway.

Wealth of Nations has probably been in the public domain for a hundred years but cheap computing did not make it available in Project Gutenberg until 3/17/2001. Milton Friedman died in 2006. Was Friedman giving us the straight dope on economics or treating us like a bunch of dopes for decades?