Originally Posted by
Endus
As in "not similar in any way at all". If you can't tell the difference between Venezuela's approach and other socialist proposals, that's on your lack of understanding, nothing more.
Nobody who knows the first thing about socialist theory is using Venezuela as proof of anything. It's only brought up by propagandists or those who don't know enough to realize they're parroting propaganda.
Venezuela's issues largely boil down to;
1> A capitalist economy relying almost entirely on a single volatile resource (oil) that eventually collapsed, and
2> An authoritarian neo-fascist revolution movement led by Chavez seizing power in the aftermath.
Nothing about a liberal market socialism bears any resemblance to what Chavez has built, and if you understood what we were talking about and were willing to engage honestly, you'd know that.
What, repeating nonsense propaganda claims repeatedly and having to put up with people dunking on them every time?
Then stop pushing nonsense.
You have no evidence of said "laziness". What evidence exists flies in that claim's face. You're making that up out of nothing.
If you can't back up a premise like that, the entire argument you predicate on it falls apart.
I'll note you're also implicitly arguing that you have to make people suffer, because if you're not hurting them, they won't work. That's just misanthropy.
The capital in question is not "the commons", so you're using the term incorrectly, then.
You're not "seeing the problem from the other end". You're imagining a fantasy land that does not reflect human nature in any way whatsoever, and which you cannot actually justify with evidence. And then you feign unhappiness that we won't just accept your fantasies as a reasonable argument.