NationStates Jolt Archive

Think about it. Globalisation = Socialism/Communism. With corporations and organizations expanding into nations with cheaper labour costs, they're giving these people a better life. Look at some of the Chinese or Indian workers. They're better off then they were before foreign companies came along and exploited their work.

Sure, the working conditions may not be as good as those of some developed western nations or Japan, Australia, S. Korea, or New Zealand, but without these jobs they (the workers) would probably be without a home or starving to death or both. I realize these companies are taking advantage of the relaxed labour laws, it's capitalism, but by doing so they've improved the lives of many. It looks like western consumer dollars are helping those of less fortune. I'm not a political scientist, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a case Socialism through Capitalism.

Think about it. Globalisation = Socialism/Communism. With corporations and organizations expanding into nations with cheaper labour costs, they're giving these people a better life. Look at some of the Chinese or Indian workers. They're better off then they were before foreign companies came along and exploited them work.

Sure, the working conditions may not be as good as those of some developed western nations or Japan, Australia, S. Korea, or New Zealand, but without these jobs they (the workers) would probably be without a home or starving to death or both. I realize these companies are taking advantage of the relaxed labour laws, it's capitalism, but by doing so they've improved the lives of many. It looks like western consumer dollars are helping those of less fortune. I'm not a political scientist, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a case Socialism through Capitalism.
You just equated Communism with a better life, which isn't neccesarily true.

I'm not a political scientist, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a case Socialism through Capitalism. Well, I am a political scientist, and I wouldn't dare to correct you, but how is it 'socialism through capitalism' exactly?

If that is the whole of your argument, then get thee into chains, for American slaves in the early C19th were better off than American slaves in the C18th. When I shoot your friend in the face, I will only shoot you in the knee, and you'll thank me for how great that was.

Your argument is pretty darn sickening, and I hope you're either a) not serious, or b) about to change your mind.

You just equated Communism with a better life, which isn't neccesarily true.

Oh, heh, I didn't intend to do that. I know it's not true, for most of Russia seems to be doing better now than it did when it was the USSR (I heard that on the BBC).


Well, I am a political scientist, and I wouldn't dare to correct you, but how is it 'socialism through capitalism' exactly?

I mean the lives of less-fortunate (compared to those of more developed nations) are being mostly improved by the dollars of those who are doing better in life. It's one society (unintentionally) bringing another society closer to it's level. In socialism, isn't the equality the main goal?

Giving people a better life is a trait that is unique to Socialism and Communism?

Oh, heh, I didn't intend to do that. I know it's not true, for most of Russia seems to be doing better now than it did when it was the USSR (I heard that on the BBC).




I mean the lives of less-fortunate (compared to those of more developed nations) are being mostly improved by the dollars of those who are doing better in life. It's one society (unintentionally) bringing another society closer to it's level. In socialism, isn't the equality the main goal?
Its more about method, not outcome. Globalisation is a capitalistic method, not a socialist one.

your a-crazy

You are saying that a succesful capitalist nation is socialist? no, its just a succsesful capitalist nation.
It is possible for a capitalist nation to nearly eliminate class boundries.

i dont think you know what socialism is

this is economic improvement through capitalism.

I didn't mean socialism/communism results in a better life, I just meant there seems to be unintended socialist results from this capitalistic tendancy. The poor workers of the under-developed countries are slowly being raised to a level (as in quality of life) equal to that of those in developed nations. I know they aren't doing as well of as the middle and upper classes of, say, America, but they are doing better than they were before.
I have been lead to believe equality is a trait of socialism. To me it seems like globalisation is bringing about a certain, albeit unintended, degree of socialism.

Wisen up. Get your ideas straight.

Hmmm... so if the people of country X in sweatshops assembling motherboards or sneakers make better money than the people in mudhuts assembling... ...well, mud, it somehow makes it socialist? I'm lost.

You just equated Communism with a better life, which isn't neccesarily true.
socialism, but your right. this guy must have been brainwashed or something

I didn't mean socialism/communism results in a better life, I just meant there seems to be unintended socialist results from this capitalistic tendancy. The poor workers of the under-developed countries are slowly being raised to a level (as in quality of life) equal to that of those in developed nations. I know they aren't doing as well of as the middle and upper classes of, say, America, but they are doing better than they were before.
I have been lead to believe equality is a trait of socialism. To me it seems like globalisation is bringing about a certain, albeit unintended, degree of socialism.
You're still equating better outcomes with socialism. You seem to believe that only socialism can help the poor, which isn't true.

I didn't mean socialism/communism results in a better life, I just meant there seems to be unintended socialist results from this capitalistic tendancy. The poor workers of the under-developed countries are slowly being raised to a level (as in quality of life) equal to that of those in developed nations. I know they aren't doing as well of as the middle and upper classes of, say, America, but they are doing better than they were before.
I have been lead to believe equality is a trait of socialism. To me it seems like globalisation is bringing about a certain, albeit unintended, degree of socialism.
im guessing you've never read anything on capitalism. try John Adams.

I don't see how it is even remotely socialist.

It's all demand and supply my friend. We rich people demand cheap goods, Those workers in INdia and China supply cheap goods. Everybodies happy.

"If that is the whole of your argument, then get thee into chains, for American slaves in the early C19th were better off than American slaves in the C18th. When I shoot your friend in the face, I will only shoot you in the knee, and you'll thank me for how great that was.

Your argument is pretty darn sickening, and I hope you're either a) not serious, or b) about to change your mind. "


well as a black man i find that offencsive . very so to be honest . it seems that u have to harken back to a darker time in american history when u dont have any good argument ageast the good the US is doing in the world today . Casr in point u assume people are slaves that means three things .

one if they choose to stop working they got killed . most thired world nations this is not the case . china it could be said in some cases but that isnt the doing of any US goverment action or any US bussness . it would be the chinaese themselves ordering the firing squad .



two that the surrfering of these people is the cause of the US witch is not the truth being the US had little to do with much outside the norther part of the western hemephere until after the second world war . and were the US did get involed the placers either imporved or were crap holes long before we ever showed up .

If anything it is giving more power to corporations. It is leading to the dissolving of governments and the rise to more powerful corporations.

3 . u have to think that somehow the capltilist system is wrong ! if u think that the only other thing to belive in in commnism . were as US lead globalism is voulntary . people are not forced to work in the sytem or buy products within it witch means they choose to be part of it . .... unless u can show me a time were US mairnes stood outside a McD in Thailand and forced peopel to eat big macs at gun point .

and u would rather have a sytem like comminism that would enslave people in a non voultary system to the state and limit there choices in scary ways forcing them into state health care forcing high taxes forcing state houseing forceing state education .. and that list can go on and on and on . ??

tell me what happens in a soicalst nation when someone ...sat chooses to live outside the state systems ?


lets say i call up the fed gov and say ."thanks ! but no thanks i dont trust burocrats with my money and i would rather save my money on my own from no on i'm going to save my money on my own . so i'm not going to pay payrol taxes . " what happens to me ? my door gets kicked i get put in a patty wagon and driven to the nearest prison .?? why ??? because ? i wouldnt partake in a state ran system !

now lets say i call up McDs and say . "your burgers are ok .. but for health reasons i'm not going to eat there anymore ... yes yes u have salads now but if i come in i will be to tempted by that evil temptress the big mac " ?? what happeneds to me ? i get a store managers begging me to come back and maybe the offer of a discount . =-)


u see captalism is the only free system . socalism is never free cause it demands that humans be herded like cattle for its own systems to work .

If anything it is giving more power to corporations. It is leading to the dissolving of governments and the rise to more powerful corporations

ok ? what gov has been disolved ? and what woudl u rather see ? a stalinist state ? no offence but ist kinda like the pot calling the kettle black when i see a guy with the name red commie worrying about nations being disolved and freedom being taken away lol be like hearing hitler talk about the dangers of anti semptism lol

The United Socialist States of Chinooke would like to say a few words. We strive ourselves on being democratic socialists, thus we feel the need to clear things up.

1. Globalisation is a process of capitalism.

2. Socialism/Communism /=/ better off for the poor by default, although by the nature of the ideology, it implys better and equal standards for all people.

3. Russia has collapsed since the fall of the USSR. People are poorer and worse of than ever. Coruption is everywhere, with most things being run by the mafia. There are very strong idicators that Russia was better off under communism.

3a. Communism I think isn't a "safe" ideology, in so far as by the writings of Marx implys a violent uprising of the proloteriate to take power. The problem faced by Russia under communism, is that the ruling people were corupt and didn't follow the Marxist lines to give a fair and equal life to its people. Unfortunately by the nature of Communism, it puts a country into the position of being ruled with an iron fist, simply because people resist it because it requires the repression of thoughts in order to keep stability.

3b. Socialism allows much more flexability in the economy and social ideology. It allows people to have free thought and run some minor private interprises. It makes a bridge between hardline capitalism and hard line communism, and in effect almost takes the good aspects from both. It by nature has a stronger leaning towards communism, but it allows for other things to happen.

- Disclamer -

This is a very rough discussion of these ideas and should not be taken to the full extremity of the text. It was simply written to outline a few points.

- The End -

Late,

Think about it. Globalisation = Socialism/Communism. With corporations and organizations expanding into nations with cheaper labour costs, they're giving these people a better life. Look at some of the Chinese or Indian workers. They're better off then they were before foreign companies came along and exploited their work.What are you talking about? Globalization broadly defined, simply involves nations and their people interacting on a global scale instead of only with neighboring nations and/or within the country. It's not a philosophy like socialism or an economic system like communism...Sure, the working conditions may not be as good as those of some developed western nations or Japan, Australia, S. Korea, or New Zealand, but without these jobs they (the workers) would probably be without a home or starving to death or both. I realize these companies are taking advantage of the relaxed labour laws, it's capitalism, but by doing so they've improved the lives of many. It looks like western consumer dollars are helping those of less fortune. I'm not a political scientist, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a case Socialism through Capitalism.Your making assumptions, we do not know that unrestrained corporate environments are the best. Corporate presence screws with the economy, raises prices and having people working long hours for insufficient wages is hardly improving lives. (though it does theoretically help the nation)

Think about it. Globalisation = Socialism/Communism. With corporations and organizations expanding into nations with cheaper labour costs, they're giving these people a better life. Look at some of the Chinese or Indian workers. They're better off then they were before foreign companies came along and exploited their work.

Sure, the working conditions may not be as good as those of some developed western nations or Japan, Australia, S. Korea, or New Zealand, but without these jobs they (the workers) would probably be without a home or starving to death or both. I realize these companies are taking advantage of the relaxed labour laws, it's capitalism, but by doing so they've improved the lives of many. It looks like western consumer dollars are helping those of less fortune. I'm not a political scientist, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like a case Socialism through Capitalism.

Let me get this straight. With the expanding ability of nations to reach into each others pockets and affairs the conditions of these countries is getting better?

Iraq which had one of the strongest and fastest growing middle classes in the middle east is now a hotbed of rubble, anarchy, and terrorism because of American intervention.

Nicaragua, which has had a burgeoning demoncracy movement for years, has wallowed in military dicatorship because of American intervention.

Ditto Panama.

Ditto Guatamala.

It seems that Globalism = Facism.

invasion =/= globalization. globalization is economic, it has nothing to do with military. consult www.dictionary.com

Ah yes, those generous corporations are all pitching in to stop world poverty. Your "idea" is based on a faulty understanding of the terms "socialism," "communism," "capitalism," and "globalization," which is unfortunate, because your idea is aobut socialism, communism, capitalism and globalization. Too bad. You were really almost on to something.

We would definately need some kind of global marxism/socialism/communism for the majority of humans to survive in the future, but I don't think it will come as an automatic result of globalisation. Globalism today actually worsens the situation, in several areas of the world.