See my post below, communism has always devolved into statist tyranny in every attempt so far. If a software development methodology had an equivalent track record to communism (adjusted appropriately for the subject matter) it would be far more reviled even than waterfall (if you could imagine such a thing) and nobody would ever seriously propose using it.
While the claim that national socialism has killed hundreds of millions is an exaggeration, the actual record isn't that impressive.
Most of the hell-holes on earth are a "people's republic".
Yes, socialism seems to work in Western Europe and Japan. However, that may be more a function of Western Europe and Japan than it is of socialism. It's unclear what wouldn't work in those places.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean? What does Western Europe have that makes it instantly capable of supporting any random-ass system? It's not like Europe's some magical land of milk and honey.
The fact that socialism works in Europe is because socialism is a potent economic system.
As an aside, we don't call it socialism here. We call it social market economy. Also, true socialist parties aren't nearly as big as social democrat parties, which are more moderate.
That's understandable. There're more shades to socialism than just the one that gets used again and again in America.
It's why this entire conversation is so ridiculous. Neither Paul nor the majority of the commenters here has a clue about what they're talking about. They're spouting talking points like there's a set-in-stone socialism that all would-be socialists have to follow. I'm not at all the pinko-commie sort, but it always tickles me when this particular weakness of HN comes out. For a bunch of people who work with complex systems daily, we suck at appreciating the complexities of economic systems and we adore Paul despite his habit of oversimplifying topics to the point of satire.
> What does Western Europe have that makes it instantly capable of supporting any random-ass system?
Europe doesn't have a history of large scale spontaneous massacres, see Rwanda and Darfur for examples. (Yes, the govts occasionally go on sprees, but that's different.) There's even a history of spontaneous organization and cooperation; that isn't universal.
> The fact that socialism works in Europe is because socialism is a potent economic system.
It's not potent enough to match the US' GDP per person, and the US is handicapped by enormous defense spending....
And, socialism hasn't been all that successful in improving the world's hell-holes.
That said, it's good to see the EU decide to have a foreign policy and start developing a military. It's past time for NATO, or at least for the US to take a much smaller role. Whether or not Russia/the USSR is/was a threat, Europe is wealthy enough to take care of itself.
You know, with that "potent economic system" and all.
> Facism and national socialism killed hundreds of millions
Exaggerate much?
Nazi Germany didn't kill a hundred million, let alone hundreds of millions and Franco's Spain, Chile, and the rest weren't a significant fraction of the German total.
