• WldFyre@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    You ignored nearly all of my comment and just repeated your logical fallacies.

    it is possible to use a scientific approach to figure out what works and what doesn’t.

    Refer back to how this is meaningless. Every country in existence “works” and changing what you mean by “works” means it’s not scientific (which it shouldn’t be).

    I haven’t even brought up the low hanging fruit of how since the USSR failed and the USA still exists, then “scientifically” socialism doesn’t work if you use that logic.

    And something working doesn’t mean it is scientifically correct or true, because that’s conflating poor philosophy with poor moralizing. It also doesn’t “prove” that it is the only thing that works, or that it’s the best thing we could have, or that anything couldn’t be better, or another way wouldn’t be just as good, or…

    Which is why enforcing conformity and punishing deviation because socialism is “scientific” is fucking stupid, because you can’t prove or even know any of the above.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      It’s a soft science, like psychology. You can take a scientific approach even if empiricism is more difficult.

      The USSRs failure proves that their own approach was wrong. We can learn from it, because socialists learn from the material results of policy. That’s scientific.