Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

I will post a pro marxist argument but i dont support marxism because of the bias it faces from international media. They are fighting a losing battel against capitalism.If you look up the best governed state of india, youll find a state called kerala.My state is governed by democratically elected communist party,(electd 2017). They are probabaly going to lose the election next year, due to serious allegation against one of the ministers. After independence, india was ruled by Indian national congress for a long while, except for the state of kerala. Here we saw majority of marxist governments. Now its considered the best state in india(two subsequent floods, two subsequent pandemic, ie Nipha virus and covid, and still the state is far better economically. also the current state health ministery got recognized by UN for managing the pandemics). The only challenge to democracy came in 1960s when the Central government tried to ban the communist party (who won the election in the state level). The major opposition is the congress party. Corporate have a large influenze everywhere and it becomes easy for them to exploit the immense population of india for cheap labour if the government dosent have representation form Labour unions. Also here, the marxist government is a face against the religious politics.

Expand full comment
Alexander Gieg's avatar

Well, regarding the first three points, yes if they commit serious crimes. And, depending on how one looks at it, that might be seen as a Libertarian policy too, if we were to actually take the concept of personal responsibility seriously and removed corporate liability limitations. In this way, executives and shareholders would be considered personally responsible for everything the companies they manage and own caused, and therefore have a huge incentive to thread very carefully so as to never do anything in a rush that might have the slightest chance of killing anyone lest they were personally considered responsible in both civil and penal court. I'm a strong proponent of personal responsibility, so if this is what Sanders proposed in the US, such a position would indeed appeal to me.

About rent control, many countries do indeed have national laws governing that. Here in Brazil, for example, the agreed upon initial rent cannot increase in the following years beyond the inflation rate, and rent contracts have a minimum 3 year duration, automatically renewable. A landlord can regain their property if the tenant stops paying, or if they themselves want to use the property or sell it off, but if it remains available for rent, the current tenant has priority, with the rent increase limitation in place for as long as they keep renting. And in case the landlord wants to sell the property, the current tenant has priority in purchasing it as long as they accept paying the price the landlord is asking for the property, so that the landlord cannot pretend to sell it to expel the tenant then "change their mind" or whatever. This system works pretty well and there's no shortage of properties for rent, in fact, in many places there's an overabundance of properties for rent, and buying property for the purposes of rent continues being seen as one of the most profitable and safe long term investments. So, if Sanders defended something similar, I think it'd be pretty fine and unproblematic.

About nuclear power, that's a point I disagree with him, strongly. But is it something different from what other politicians in the USA do? As far as I know, at leat, no candidate from any US party defends truly expanding nuclear power, much less new technologies in the field. Has this changed?

Expand full comment
26 more comments...

No posts