@wildgrass said"socialism is a system in which government controls production"
Joe, socialism is a system in which government controls production. The philosophy has entire books written about government funding of businesses and selective control of what products, what corporations, what ideas should receive support. These are the precise policies that you have advocated for on this forum. You're not a capitalist just because you say so.
Republica ...[text shortened]... is among the primary, & at the same time not least difficult cares of the public authority.[/quote]
No, it isn't.
Learn some political science before spreading untrue myths.
@metal-brain saidI can’t believe I’m going to say this: correct!
"socialism is a system in which government controls production"
No, it isn't.
Wow. I’m so shocked you’ve actually muttered something true, I don’t know what to say…
@wildgrass saidThe basis of socialism is that the people control production and distribution.
Joe, socialism is a system in which government controls production. The philosophy has entire books written about government funding of businesses and selective control of what products, what corporations, what ideas should receive support. These are the precise policies that you have advocated for on this forum. You're not a capitalist just because you say so.
Republica ...[text shortened]... is among the primary, & at the same time not least difficult cares of the public authority.[/quote]
The government has to be seen as a representative executive, which must answer to the people.
When government controls production, they’re basically taking over the role of business, and then it’s more precise to call it state capitalism.
@shavixmir saidI am a socialist.
I can’t believe I’m going to say this: correct!
Wow. I’m so shocked you’ve actually muttered something true, I don’t know what to say…
You shouldn't be surprised I know something about it.
@wildgrass saidWhy don’t you tell us about Venezuela so we can have a reference point. So that we can deal with facts.
Joe, socialism is a system in which government controls production. The philosophy has entire books written about government funding of businesses and selective control of what products, what corporations, what ideas should receive support. These are the precise policies that you have advocated for on this forum. You're not a capitalist just because you say so.
Republica ...[text shortened]... is among the primary, & at the same time not least difficult cares of the public authority.[/quote]
@averagejoe1 saidFirst you both need to agree on the definition of socialism.
Why don’t you tell us about Venezuela so we can have a reference point. So that we can deal with facts.
You will find the definitions are not always the same from dictionary to dictionary.
Some are just outright wrong. Find a good source.
1 edit
@metal-brain saidI'm glad Wildgrass will convince us all, in light of the Venezuela situation, that we should press on with AOC, Bernie, et al.
First you both need to agree on the definition of socialism.
You will find the definitions are not always the same from dictionary to dictionary.
Some are just outright wrong. Find a good source.
Of course, to set proper parameters, we are dealing with the definition of Socialism as set by our dear leader, Bernie. We cannot have Wildgrass throw out his def, cause it is different than that of the ones who will make the final decision to go Socialism.
Just leveling the playing field.
@metal-brain saidI have a GREAT idea, to keep us level on this Socialism topic, which will be here for a long time/.
"socialism is a system in which government controls production"
No, it isn't.
Learn some political science before spreading untrue myths.
Metal Brain, Shav and others have defiintions of Socialism. Could be that they are ALL right. MY definition is how Bernie defines it, because that is the street that we are headed down.
I hope that that makes sense. Will be more interesting to stick to the issues of the day in the USA. That sweet ole Zahalnzi may jump in with 'Well, in Romania , we do this and that". Or the crazies who think we need to be like those little venues like Denmark. It would be such a waste of time.
To keep a poster on the right track, if he ventures off on Cuba rules or something, call him on it with a code word for "We are just doing the Bernie version". How bout say we are only discussing Bernieism for purposes of brevity and simplicity....and realism !
@averagejoe1 saidHere is an excerpt from the link below:
I'm glad Wildgrass will convince us all, in light of the Venezuela situation, that we should press on with AOC, Bernie, et al.
Of course, to set proper parameters, we are dealing with the definition of Socialism as set by our dear leader, Bernie. We cannot have Wildgrass throw out his def, cause it is different than that of the ones who will make the final decision to go Socialism.
Just leveling the playing field.
"Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production."
https://www.mvorganizing.org/what-are-the-means-of-production-according-to-marx/#What_does_owning_the_means_of_production_mean
Some people misinterpret public ownership to mean government ownership. I don't think that is what he meant, but some dictionaries do make that leap in judgement for some reason. Either way, I don't think Venezuela meets the criteria of socialism. Social policies that help the poor do not make a country socialist. If it did FDR would be considered a socialist and he is not, but people called him one anyway.
People misuse the word socialism all the time, even people that call themselves socialist. For example, Bernie Sanders is not really a socialist. He is a progressive democrat like FDR. Neither had a problem with free market economics. Supporting social programs does not make a person socialist, but most people think that. They think that because the capitalist establishment wants to confuse people so they don't know what socialism really is. If people figure out what it really is they will want it. Most people are employees, not employers. Socialism is in the interest of the majority of people.
The only reason they think they don't want it is because they have no idea what it is.
@shavixmir saidI understand there's nuance and differences of opinion about the "base" or whatever. I was just going by the standard dictionary definition of 'socialism' for simplicity's sake.
The basis of socialism is that the people control production and distribution.
The government has to be seen as a representative executive, which must answer to the people.
When government controls production, they’re basically taking over the role of business, and then it’s more precise to call it state capitalism.
a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
@averagejoe1 saidI don't know about Venezuela. I do know that some of the statements you've made on these forums are socialist in effect.
Why don’t you tell us about Venezuela so we can have a reference point. So that we can deal with facts.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidWOW. To start with, I am for socialism ONLY which benefits poor people, slanthead. I've often said, let us support the 40M poor. (it will be more of course with the open borders, they are all poor. Gotta support them too)
Joe, socialism is a system in which government controls production. The philosophy has entire books written about government funding of businesses and selective control of what products, what corporations, what ideas should receive support. These are the precise policies that you have advocated for on this forum. You're not a capitalist just because you say so.
Republica ...[text shortened]... is among the primary, & at the same time not least difficult cares of the public authority.[/quote]
You think subsidies and grants are nonsense. You need to look up the impact of these programs. I had to myself, that is not my field. Made sense to me, having more and cheaper products and services. A few may get rich off of it, and you libs will glom onto hate for the rich, as you glom onto Trump 24/7, and just beat it into the ground. Life aint perfect.
Yes, govt does 'support rich (people, corps, etc)" who create products, services,, and jobs. No discussion there as far as I am concerned. Let them buy their yachts. (Sorry, Suzianne)
'A citizen should receive the support they require'. (Marx underpinnings)
Receive it from whom???? Not the govt, as you imply with Madison. Note, He says the word 'care'. The govt every day, ostensibly, anyway, strives to make America better because it cares for its citizens, and cares to the extent that said 'caring' is primary concern......., caring is not giving citizens money and jobs. Caring is creating a society where someone can employ or be employed, or be independent. Y
THAT is what Madison Is saying.
As to subsidies and grants being socialism, hell, it may be, if the beneficiaries thereof are not required to pay it back. Me, I think that they should pay it back. So, I agree with you on that one.
@wildgrass saidThat definition is incorrect. That same online dictionary had a different definition a few months ago.
I understand there's nuance and differences of opinion about the "base" or whatever. I was just going by the standard dictionary definition of 'socialism' for simplicity's sake.a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
https://www.mvorganizing.org/what-are-the-means-of-production-according-to-marx/#What_does_owning_the_means_of_production_mean
From the link above:
"Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production."
@metal-brain saidDictionaries make that leap because the concept of "social control" varies depending on which flavor of economic or political theory you are dealing with. Its simpler and more inclusive of diverse schools of thought to equate "social control" with government ownership and administration.
Here is an excerpt from the link below:
"Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production."
https://www.mvorganizing.org/what-are-the-means-of-production-according-to-marx/#What_does_owning_the_means_of_production_mean
Some people misinterpret public ownership ...[text shortened]... f people.
The only reason they think they don't want it is because they have no idea what it is.
@metal-brain saidLet us (you guys, anyway) come up with a Bernieism 'forum' definition , or I won't know what you are talking about. Please understand that a guy like me has a hard time absorbing the principals of socialism, and it is REALLy bad if each of you defines it differently.
That definition is incorrect. That same online dictionary had a different definition a few months ago.
https://www.mvorganizing.org/what-are-the-means-of-production-according-to-marx/#What_does_owning_the_means_of_production_mean
From the link above:
"Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership) of the means of production."