5 ms·

> Socialism for the Rich. Capitalism for the Rest. This is an unfortunate saying, that further perpetuates misunderstanding of what socialism is.

paulryanrogers 6y ago
What pray tell is socialism?
- Miner49er 6y ago
  The workers owning the means of production, it's not government handouts. "Socialism for the Rich" should be phrased as "Welfare for the Rich", IMO.
  - hoseja 6y ago
    Are you sure you're not mixing up socialism/Marxism/communism/...?
    - Miner49er 6y ago
      Pretty sure, yeah. The first line of Wikipedia's page on socialism: "Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and democratic control or workers' self-management of enterprises." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
      - lm28469 6y ago
        This is exactly what I'm talking about in my other comment. Look at the french definition on wiki for example: "The word socialism covers a very diverse set of currents of thought and political movements1, whose common point is to seek a fairer social and economic organization. The original goal of socialism is to achieve social equality, or at least a reduction of inequalities2 and, especially for the Marxist-inspired currents, to establish a classless society. More broadly, socialism can be defined as a political tendency, historically marked on the left, whose basic principle is the aspiration for a better world, based on harmonious social organization and the fight against injustice. Depending on the context, the word socialism or the adjective socialist can qualify an ideology, a political party, a political regime or a social organization."
  - killtimeatwork 6y ago
    > The workers owning the means of production This has lost a lot of its relevance since when it was originally coined in XIX century. I mean, what are the means of production in companies like CD Project Red? The laptops and workstations? Employees can easily afford them. Since we've moved beyond the factory-based model of capitalism, it's become clear that it's not the control of means of production that is the central issue.
    - Miner49er 6y ago
      I think it's still a useful term. To make a company socialist, all you have to do is distribute the companies shares to the workers, rather than shareholders. Now you have a co-op and the workers own the means of production, and can vote on the board of directors or set it up however, since they own it.
    - toti 6y ago
      > I mean, what are the means of production in companies like CD Project Red? The means to deploy knowledge. This ranges from a robust social safety net (healthcare, childcare, housing, food, etc) to as you say laptops and workstations. > Employees can easily afford them. For a very specific set of Employees, this is true. For others the outlay for even a derelict hand-me-down laptop is the difference between making this months rent and not. > Since we've moved beyond the factory-based model of capitalism The factory isn't making "widgets" anymore, but it's still there and it's making /something/. > it's become clear that it's not the control of means of production that is the central issue Owning the means has, is, and will be the central issue until we are post scarcity.
- abrezas 6y ago
  Wikipedia: "Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and democratic control or workers' self-management of enterprise". Which is not "...characterised by government giving handouts".
  - JoeAltmaier 6y ago
    But isn't that implied by 'social ownership'? That means, society owns production and thus decides who shares in it? That's where they get conflated, I think.
- wtf_is_up 6y ago
  Historically: A non-hierarchial concept where workers own the fruits of labor by pumping them through a hierarchy of central power who decides how the fruits are dispersed (mostly to parties sympathetic to the central power).
TulliusCicero 6y ago
Unfortunately, pretty much nobody agrees on what socialism means, exactly. Even avowed socialists will sharply disagree on what forms of government 'count as socialism'. For example: was the USSR socialist? That's the common understanding, but plenty of socialists disagree, arguing that socialism means that workers own the means of production, and that in the USSR, workers didn't really own the factories, not in any meaningful sense, since at the end of the day they were under central government control.
- praptak 6y ago
  There's some agreement what socialism isn't though. In particular it isn't "Socialism is when the government does stuff and the more stuff it does, the more socialister it is."
lm28469 6y ago
I stopped talking about "socialism" online the day I understood the US and European definitions are completely different Most people in Europe associate socialism with things like healthcare, paid vacations, &c. Americans associate socialism with china, cuba, no freedom, gulags and famines... Just the fact that Biden is called a "socialist" or part of the "radical left" (or even close to the left) by a non negligible portion of Americans tells you all you have to know. America/Biden's socialism is the equivalent of progressive conservatism in Europe
- flohofwoe 6y ago
  I'd say that most people in Europe (especially in Eastern Europe) associate "socialism" with the failed Eastern Bloc socialist countries. "Social democracy" or "social market economy" would be more correct terms. All current European countries have capitalist economies, they're just more regulated in favour of the people than in other parts of the world. There's a lot of wiggle room between a state-controlled planned economy (traditionally called "socialism") and 18th century style capitalism.
  - lebuffon 6y ago
    Even "Communist" China now has a capitalist economy. :) But they don't have a Democratic government. What should we call that? Totalitarian Capitalism? "wiggle room" Exactly right. I liken it to a control that you can turn to the left or the right. There are an infinite number of degrees in between. My life experience seems to indicate that the control must be continuously tweaked, like a servo control, to keep a country working. Lock it one place and the system runs out of control. Side bar hypothesis: Perhaps democracy works merely by chance in that it jerks the control back and forth never allowing a stationary position. (?)
    - flohofwoe 6y ago
      In Germany I've seen the term "Staatskapitalismus" used for the Chinese system (== state capitalism).
    - 6y ago
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
Socialism is a broad term and can cover a wide range of topics. Everyone who isn't pedantic understands what the title is saying. The current vernacular matters in words like democracy/republicanism/communism/socialism.
- Miner49er 6y ago
  The point is clear, sure, but I'm talking about the continued misuse of the word. Many Americans seem to think socialism is when the government does basically anything. Many people unironically believe Joe Biden is a socialist or communist. Sure the meanings of words can change, but what about actual socialism? Is is it supposed to adopt a new name?

paulryanrogers 6y ago

What pray tell is socialism?

Miner49er 6y ago
The workers owning the means of production, it's not government handouts. "Socialism for the Rich" should be phrased as "Welfare for the Rich", IMO.
- hoseja 6y ago
  Are you sure you're not mixing up socialism/Marxism/communism/...?
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    Pretty sure, yeah. The first line of Wikipedia's page on socialism: "Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and democratic control or workers' self-management of enterprises." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
    - lm28469 6y ago
      This is exactly what I'm talking about in my other comment. Look at the french definition on wiki for example: "The word socialism covers a very diverse set of currents of thought and political movements1, whose common point is to seek a fairer social and economic organization. The original goal of socialism is to achieve social equality, or at least a reduction of inequalities2 and, especially for the Marxist-inspired currents, to establish a classless society. More broadly, socialism can be defined as a political tendency, historically marked on the left, whose basic principle is the aspiration for a better world, based on harmonious social organization and the fight against injustice. Depending on the context, the word socialism or the adjective socialist can qualify an ideology, a political party, a political regime or a social organization."
- killtimeatwork 6y ago
  > The workers owning the means of production This has lost a lot of its relevance since when it was originally coined in XIX century. I mean, what are the means of production in companies like CD Project Red? The laptops and workstations? Employees can easily afford them. Since we've moved beyond the factory-based model of capitalism, it's become clear that it's not the control of means of production that is the central issue.
  - Miner49er 6y ago
    I think it's still a useful term. To make a company socialist, all you have to do is distribute the companies shares to the workers, rather than shareholders. Now you have a co-op and the workers own the means of production, and can vote on the board of directors or set it up however, since they own it.
  - toti 6y ago
    > I mean, what are the means of production in companies like CD Project Red? The means to deploy knowledge. This ranges from a robust social safety net (healthcare, childcare, housing, food, etc) to as you say laptops and workstations. > Employees can easily afford them. For a very specific set of Employees, this is true. For others the outlay for even a derelict hand-me-down laptop is the difference between making this months rent and not. > Since we've moved beyond the factory-based model of capitalism The factory isn't making "widgets" anymore, but it's still there and it's making /something/. > it's become clear that it's not the control of means of production that is the central issue Owning the means has, is, and will be the central issue until we are post scarcity.
abrezas 6y ago
Wikipedia: "Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and democratic control or workers' self-management of enterprise". Which is not "...characterised by government giving handouts".
- JoeAltmaier 6y ago
  But isn't that implied by 'social ownership'? That means, society owns production and thus decides who shares in it? That's where they get conflated, I think.
wtf_is_up 6y ago
Historically: A non-hierarchial concept where workers own the fruits of labor by pumping them through a hierarchy of central power who decides how the fruits are dispersed (mostly to parties sympathetic to the central power).

TulliusCicero 6y ago

Unfortunately, pretty much nobody agrees on what socialism means, exactly. Even avowed socialists will sharply disagree on what forms of government 'count as socialism'. For example: was the USSR socialist? That's the common understanding, but plenty of socialists disagree, arguing that socialism means that workers own the means of production, and that in the USSR, workers didn't really own the factories, not in any meaningful sense, since at the end of the day they were under central government control.

praptak 6y ago
There's some agreement what socialism isn't though. In particular it isn't "Socialism is when the government does stuff and the more stuff it does, the more socialister it is."

lm28469 6y ago

I stopped talking about "socialism" online the day I understood the US and European definitions are completely different Most people in Europe associate socialism with things like healthcare, paid vacations, &c. Americans associate socialism with china, cuba, no freedom, gulags and famines... Just the fact that Biden is called a "socialist" or part of the "radical left" (or even close to the left) by a non negligible portion of Americans tells you all you have to know. America/Biden's socialism is the equivalent of progressive conservatism in Europe

flohofwoe 6y ago
I'd say that most people in Europe (especially in Eastern Europe) associate "socialism" with the failed Eastern Bloc socialist countries. "Social democracy" or "social market economy" would be more correct terms. All current European countries have capitalist economies, they're just more regulated in favour of the people than in other parts of the world. There's a lot of wiggle room between a state-controlled planned economy (traditionally called "socialism") and 18th century style capitalism.
- lebuffon 6y ago
  Even "Communist" China now has a capitalist economy. :) But they don't have a Democratic government. What should we call that? Totalitarian Capitalism? "wiggle room" Exactly right. I liken it to a control that you can turn to the left or the right. There are an infinite number of degrees in between. My life experience seems to indicate that the control must be continuously tweaked, like a servo control, to keep a country working. Lock it one place and the system runs out of control. Side bar hypothesis: Perhaps democracy works merely by chance in that it jerks the control back and forth never allowing a stationary position. (?)
  - flohofwoe 6y ago
    In Germany I've seen the term "Staatskapitalismus" used for the Chinese system (== state capitalism).
  - 6y ago

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

Socialism is a broad term and can cover a wide range of topics. Everyone who isn't pedantic understands what the title is saying. The current vernacular matters in words like democracy/republicanism/communism/socialism.

Miner49er 6y ago
The point is clear, sure, but I'm talking about the continued misuse of the word. Many Americans seem to think socialism is when the government does basically anything. Many people unironically believe Joe Biden is a socialist or communist. Sure the meanings of words can change, but what about actual socialism? Is is it supposed to adopt a new name?