I would say that the societies that have succeeded in history and end up being admired have allowed the most freedoms and encourage meritocracy and have created high trust and competent institutions because of that .....we have seen that eroded over the last few decades.

Communism and its various forms never succeeded in creating a society that masses wanted to live under.

I think the principle reason for that lies at the heart of the left's problem....it's refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of normal human nature. When people are compelled to all believe the same things you essentially create a society that lies.

Instead of wishing to work with it there is a never ending striving to 'correct' it. To force people to be 'good', whatever that is....instead of creating inducements via meritocracy it enforces the myth of equality onto people.....it talks about better societies but ends up downgrading them and creating the fear to disagree.

Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Feb 2023 10.30pm)

socialism and effects go hand in hand with all labour parties.
Everywhere around the world it is proven. The policies happen after the event to suit this.
Let’s do the £4 billion to the nhs last year. Where did that get used.
As for the economy the whole world is in a down turn in some way shape or form.

I think supporters of genuine, all-out socialism are few and far between and that's why a lot of the narrative around this topic is just silly - we've already had Thatcher and Mao covered in the first 10 posts on the topic which says it all.

We've always functioned best as a capitalist society with some socialist ideas and policies interwoven within that - my argument (and I believe a lot of the left) is that we have let capitalism run a little too wild over the course of the current government and that is why we have seen such economic inequality take root to the extent it has.

To want our society to move further to the left and shift that scale towards some more state interventions and socialist ideas does not mean you want to live in a socialist state or that you're jealous of successful people or any of that other lazy nonsense.

As a broader point, I think the 'human nature' stuff is not as straightforward as you present it, and whilst it's important to recognise and accept those sort of innate attributes, it does not mean you have to succumb to them or base all decisions around the worst case scenario - what is the point in trying to build society if not to at least try to overcome our base desires and instincts. It's a little watery, but to me, that should at least be the ambition.

There are many, many ways human nature has 'changed' over the centuries and so the idea that it is a fixed constant I find difficult to accept.

Do you have an example?

I think this point is one of the key aspects that the left, and indeed many on the right, get wrong and the damage and human misery it has caused is incalculable.

Edited by Stirlingsays (02 Feb 2023 11.37am)

We've always functioned best as a capitalist society with some socialist ideas and policies interwoven within that - my argument (and I believe a lot of the left) is that we have let capitalism run a little too wild over the course of the current government and that is why we have seen such economic inequality take root to the extent it has.
Danns - I agree with your post generally but I think that the Capitalism thing has been going wrong for a lot longer than the term of this current government.
The divide between rich and poor has grown through successive governments - including Blair in particular - and no one wants to stop it.
That being the case Capitalism will thrive even better than before