4 ms·

State-owned banks of state-owned anything have nothing to do with socialism. Enforcing the opposite, i.e., not allowing state owned companies at all is right-wi

State-owned banks of state-owned anything have nothing to do with socialism. Enforcing the opposite, i.e., not allowing state owned companies at all is right-wing extremism. Many free market countries do perfectly fine with a mixture of independent and state owned companies, even within the same sector (banking, public transport, medical care). Socialism has fuck all to do with it. It's called pragmatism.

hackerboos 14y ago
Socialism has been redefined in the United States to mean state interference with any industry. But ownership of a corporation by the state is better labeled as Social Democracy. The traditional definition: 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. 2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory. 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism
- m0skit0 14y ago
  Depends if the state is democratic... The US government interferes all the time with private-owned industries by putting in place laws (e.g. anti-trust) and monetary policy. So this is socialism by the US definition... There's neither free market today in any country, nor there has been one ever.
  - hackerboos 14y ago
    Socialists of the latter definition would argue the same stating there has never been a `pure` socialist society without interference from an authoritarian government. It's utopian to expect either ideology to be implemented in `pure` form.
  - jchrisa 14y ago
    Biggest interference in the US is oil and agriculture subsidies... you don't hear the right wing complain about that much.
- Evbn 14y ago
  Not quite, socialism has been redefined to mean state involvement in the general public's consumers' economic lives at economy at all. (Shoveling money to small private organizatons is the "non-socialist" economic function of government. This is paid for by debt (which is paid for by "some future sucker", since taxes are socialist.)

hackerboos 14y ago

Socialism has been redefined in the United States to mean state interference with any industry. But ownership of a corporation by the state is better labeled as Social Democracy. The traditional definition: 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. 2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory. 3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/socialism

m0skit0 14y ago
Depends if the state is democratic... The US government interferes all the time with private-owned industries by putting in place laws (e.g. anti-trust) and monetary policy. So this is socialism by the US definition... There's neither free market today in any country, nor there has been one ever.
- hackerboos 14y ago
  Socialists of the latter definition would argue the same stating there has never been a `pure` socialist society without interference from an authoritarian government. It's utopian to expect either ideology to be implemented in `pure` form.
- jchrisa 14y ago
  Biggest interference in the US is oil and agriculture subsidies... you don't hear the right wing complain about that much.
Evbn 14y ago
Not quite, socialism has been redefined to mean state involvement in the general public's consumers' economic lives at economy at all. (Shoveling money to small private organizatons is the "non-socialist" economic function of government. This is paid for by debt (which is paid for by "some future sucker", since taxes are socialist.)