Is Socialism Inevitable? Is it Humanity's destiny?

PurpleReign

Take a minute to look out into the future, consider the direction Western & Eastern civilization is headed in (Middles Eastern doesn't count, they don't head in any direction but spin in a circle).

What does that future look like?

I consider myself a libertarian, but thinking about the future of society I don't see how we avoid some form of socialism whether it's full blown commie town or a hybrid socialist system. Automation, drones, and robotics are rapidly changing society and in just a few decades from now a huge chunk (some predict more than half) of the jobs in America and other developed countries will be taken by machines who can do it cheaper, faster and arguably more efficiently.

That leaves millions upon millions of next to useless mouths to feed.

The only conclusion I can come to right now, is that some form of a welfare state type of socialist system will be in place. I don't see how it works otherwise.

Unless of course we let millions stacked on top of millions starve to death to thin the herd. Learning computer programming and other STEM areas of study is already essential and will be an absolute requirement going forward. Being able to control a computer and bend it to your will is going to be up there with reading, writing, communicating, and other basic life skills one will need to be employable. Of course the youth need to stop killing themselves trying to take selfies in very stupid places. Maybe it's just Darwin doin his thing and we have to let nature run it's course.


What do you think? Does the human species have a future without some form of socialism?

doogsinparadise

Either way it'll be interesting. Or not, but I'll be dead by then so it's all academic. Futurists usually have fascist tendencies so I'm a little loathe to listen to them, but you're probably right about AI taking over most economic activity within the next century.

bananasnblondes

Shame on you for not titling this thread "What I'm hearing..." and ending with "tick...tick...tick"

HeretoBeatmyChest

Schumpeter predicted that the success of capitalism would lead to socialism. That has more to do with your question then technology which makes societies wealthier not poorer. Technology is deflationary but it also creates its own replacement jobs and industries in its own right.

PurpleJ

Pics of humanity's future:

2001400ex

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

PurpleJ

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

dhdawg

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

Women's rights are a good thing. People mixing women's rights with far left ideology is the problem

RaceBannon

Somebody still got to pay the bills

PurpleJ

dhdawg said:

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

Women's rights are a good thing. People mixing women's rights with far left ideology is the problem

The far left has them in their pocket, because of their ability to manipulate emotionally and politicize the woman's body. This was predicted in the 1920s and it's still true. I'm not saying they shouldn't vote, but it hasn't exactly been a good thing. We decide our elections based of social issues now.

2001400ex

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?

PurpleJ

2001400ex said:

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?

They have a 81% market share. HTH.

dhdawg

2001400ex said:

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?

Complaining about the Starbucks cup is dumb. But that is what they actually believe in and in the end it hurts them politically. The left convincing people there is a "war on women" is meant solely to get votes. That's the difference

2001400ex

dhdawg said:

2001400ex said:

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?

Complaining about the Starbucks cup is dumb. But that is what they actually believe in and in the end it hurts them politically. The left convincing people there is a "war on women" is meant solely to get votes. That's the difference

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on creating faux outrage solely to get votes.

dnc

2001400ex said:

PurpleJ said:

2001400ex said:

I think it's more that as countries become more wealthy, they try to reduce poverty. It's a natural progression of society. Similar to women's rights, as society becomes more educated, women gain more prominence.

Women's rights have done so much for this cuntry. A real sign of an educated, classy society where we can't say anything that offends anyone or go outside without bubble wrap.

You say that as if liberals have a monopoly on screaming about offending people. What do you think about the Starbucks cup?

One of my biggest frustrations with the Starbucks cup idiots is it's making the right more and more like the pussies on the left.















But why is this cuntry a fucking dreckfest????

PurpleThrobber

I'm down with socialism as long as all the gals look like Swedish chicks.

2001400ex

The Starbucks cup outrage is really only creating free pub for Starbucks. That's the irony.

PurpleReign

HeretoBeatmyChest said:

Schumpeter predicted that the success of capitalism would lead to socialism. That has more to do with your question then technology which makes societies wealthier not poorer. Technology is deflationary but it also creates its own replacement jobs and industries in its own right.

Yes some jobs will be created by new industries we haven't even thought of yet (why I mentioned needing education/skills in computer programming and STEM), but not enough to slow the flow of jobs leaving the system.

sarktastic

2001400ex said:

blah, blah, blah... I suck Hillary's cock... blah blah.

tldr;

2001400ex

sarktastic said:

2001400ex said:

blah, blah, blah... I suck Hillary's cock... blah blah.

tldr;

Nice contribution as always.

Kaepsknee

PurpleReign said:

Take a minute to look out into the future, consider the direction Western & Eastern civilization is headed in (Middles Eastern doesn't count, they don't head in any direction but spin in a circle).

What does that future look like?

I consider myself a libertarian, but thinking about the future of society I don't see how we avoid some form of socialism whether it's full blown commie town or a hybrid socialist system. Automation, drones, and robotics are rapidly changing society and in just a few decades from now a huge chunk (some predict more than half) of the jobs in America and other developed countries will be taken by machines who can do it cheaper, faster and arguably more efficiently.

That leaves millions upon millions of next to useless mouths to feed.

The only conclusion I can come to right now, is that some form of a welfare state type of socialist system will be in place. I don't see how it works otherwise.

Unless of course we let millions stacked on top of millions starve to death to thin the herd. Learning computer programming and other STEM areas of study is already essential and will be an absolute requirement going forward. Being able to control a computer and bend it to your will is going to be up there with reading, writing, communicating, and other basic life skills one will need to be employable. Of course the youth need to stop killing themselves trying to take selfies in very stupid places. Maybe it's just Darwin doin his thing and we have to let nature run it's course.


What do you think? Does the human species have a future without some form of socialism?

Not without martial law. Capitalism works. Unfortunately for the Country that is the best at it has had the rules changed. Everything has been tilted to benefit large corporations who have benefits from not only sending jobs out if country. But also not giving incentive to invest profits back into the USA. Be it in their own assets here or the Communities that they still reside in.

The power structure that is, has grown as top heavy as the Romans. Be it here or abroad. Terrorism will continue to gain traction in areas with little or no hope. Nukes are always a threat. Population is out of control. And like the resources that are needed to sustain this, Captitalism relies on growth and eventually it will be impossible to sustain. There will be a point where the have nots will overtake the haves.

But it won't be done by some equitable redistribution. It will be done by whatever it takes for a group of people who are equipped to take the resources.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

I'd like to think that civilization would evolve to not follow the path of what happens when a new entity seizes power. But unfortunately History both recent and ancient say otherwise.

Unless the Tech that you speak of can produce Jetson like meals from the Microwave for the masses, Tech will have little factor in deciding what happens when the shit really hits the fan. Other than a better way to kill people.