Reported by:
- BernieSanders : HE DONT MISS
A complete list of communist, socialist, and left anarchist societies that have been or are successful
- 142
- 67
Top Poster of the Day:
YALLAHblessYoTraplord
Current Registered Users: 25,835
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Live commit: eda15db
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
A good attempt, but the list should probably still be shorter.
!anticommunists
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I think in terms of sucessful socialists countries, Democratic Socialist countries with some blend of capitalism work pretty well and the US is pretty much last in quite a few lists when compared to just about every other developed nation.
I think they compared economic mobility and the US ranked #27, it's last in Health Care out of any other developed country in the world, there are a lot of issues with the US and some blend of socialism combined with capitalism isn't an irrational perspective considering the Nordic countries are functioning relatively well.
In regards to quality of life, Sweden, Norway and Canada are ranked #1, #2, #3 respectively. US is ranked below Poland, the shithole of the EU at #23.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
A lot of those countries have the luxury of those systems because America subsidizes them. If all those countries had to pay for a standing military, a patrolling navy, medical technology development, and chemical manufacturing they wouldn't be able to afford those programs.
!burgers
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't think they spend that much on those things to destabilize their whole economy. The amount that they're subsidized probably doesn't even make a debt.
One of the reasons why they are probably functioning so well, is they don't elect clowns as politicians who just throw money at whatever and ignore it without any oversight of where the funding goes.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm sorry, you were saying?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
You're speaking to a registered r-slur
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I am actually intellectually disabled, but I feel like the smartest person on this site because I'm on a site full of barely functioning r-slurs.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm saying we have real life examples that a balance between socialism mixed in with free market capatialism work pretty well.
Free Market capitalism is only proven to work under very set conditions such as with a low population during a major social change.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Balance literally just introduces bad things into capitalism.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
In what sense do you feel that the U.S. has "free market capitalism" in a way that distinguishes it from Norway? The U.S. has broad government intervention in a market economy, this is essentially the same model as most countries, especially after the fall of Communism.
This kind of online discussion makes no sense unless you just take "capitalist" to mean "American" and "socialist" to mean "European."
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I mean China too, it's just in the completely opposite way of any same human being wants socialism to work.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It has an economy based on free market capitalism, but I think most Democratic Socialist, when speaking about Democratic Socialism in the US at least, are referring to the Nordic model.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're thinking of a social democracy, or capitalist welfare state. That's what the Nordic model is.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Maybe I was confused, I don't know about economics.
That was what I meant.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
All the Scandinavian countries are more business friendly than the US and have a high wealth inequality. They are not socialist.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Oh no, it's r-slurred.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
shut up yt
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Canada dropped way down this year if I remember correctly. Housing out of control with millions of stinky students coming from a smelly country for "school"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Per what definition of success?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
How many public schools they built
And if they turned their subsetence farms into industrial labour that the west benefits from as much as them
Look at the only nice thing on the wiki for somalias commie stint in the 80s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_Democratic_Republic#Supreme_Revolutionary_Council
After that it basically destroyed the country and they only just started recovering
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Is that really wikipedia? Their commie jannies really believ that if you ignore outcomes, commie-nism will work.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
still extant
did not commit mass murder against their own citizens
standard of living somewhere above appalling
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
"Still extant" shouldn't really matter. !historychads, if that's a requirement, the Roman Empire, Abbasid Caliphate, and Qing Dynasty were all unsuccessful despite their enormity and longevity.
Personally, I'd say anything over 240 years indisputably meets the "length" criteria for success. That's long enough to guarantee that by the time the nation collapsed and/or was conquered, not only was there no one alive from before it's founding, there was no one alive that had ever met someone that was alive before it's founding. You could argue the cut off should be shorter than that, but I don't see how it could be longer.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Eh, that seems fair. Okay, name a commie nation that lasted longer than 240 years.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Well that's impossible, given that Marx was only born 206 years ago and The Communist Manifesto was published 176 years ago. But the Soviets couldn't make it a single century, and I sincerely doubt the Socialist Republic of Vietnam or People's Republic of China will manage two. They haven't even managed one yet, but they probably will.
More importantly, they're both socialist in name only, and have been for a while now. "Socialism with Chinese characteristics" and all that.
The most successful "socialist nation" is probably one of those weird, isolated tribes in the Amazon rainforest or Andaman and Nicobar Islands. It's likely that some of them have conceptions of private property and communal ownership/governance that would technically make them "socialist" by modern standards. But I don't think you could really call any of them "successful" by the metrics we'd typically use to define such a thing.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Tldr?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Communism and socialism as ideologies haven't existed for that long (only 235 years if you want be generous), so being still around is sufficient.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'd actually say 177 or 176 years, since the Communist League was founded in 1847 and The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848. I know the Jacobins were using the term earlier than that, but what communism actually is was pretty nebulous until then.
I was just making a point that "still extant" is a strange phrase to use when discussing the "success" (or lack thereof) of a nation.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Fair lol.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin better watch their backs. The rank and file have it out for 'em.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
China
China
China
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
China failed the second test and is also just barely commie.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No they didn't. And yes they are
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The Great Leap Forward killed like 30 million people. Deng himself said “to get rich is glorious”. Do the workers own the means of production in Chinese factories?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
1. Wasn't mass murder
(not even going 
to quibble about the numbers 
because it doesn't matter 
to you)
2. Communism
isn't anti-wealth
3. Yes via the CPC and the ACFTU
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I amend my claim to “avoided mass deaths due to gross bureaucratic negligence”.
No they don't.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Cuba
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Mine
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Gambler ethno-state when?
In the Goomblocrocy, the luckiest person (latest powerball winner) gets to rule. Their cabinet is made up of lesser winners.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Honestly might work better than what we're doing
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Of course it will. It was designed by a genius (me)
There's no way this could go tits up
!slots 100 !blackjack 100
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!slots 200
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!slots 300
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!slots 600
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!slots 600
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Someone find one reason this wouldn't work
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
the websters definition
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Good luck finding anyone else that'll accept that definition
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context