• Cowbee [he/they] ( Cowbee@lemmy.ml ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I appreciate the sentiment, but the public sector supporting the private is not “socialism.” Socialism describes an economic formation where public ownership is primary in an economy, ie where large firms are publicly owned and controlled. Segments of an economy cannot be Socialist or Capitalist just like an arm cannot be a human, it can only exist in the context of the whole.

      Socialism, in reality, refers to a broader economy where public ownership is primary, while Capitalism refers to a broader economy where private ownership is primary. All Socialist societies have had public and private Capital, and all Capitalist societies have had public and private Capital, it matters most which one has the power.

      I recommend reading my post here on common problems people run into when determining Modes of Production.

      • eurisko ( eurisko@lemmy.ca ) 
        link
        fedilink
        Français
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Original commenter: jokes in class solidarity

        Response: « I appreciate the attempt, but what you said was wrong on sooooo many levels, in this essay, I will… »

          • eurisko ( eurisko@lemmy.ca ) 
            link
            fedilink
            Français
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            I understand what you mean, really. I just think the methods of circulating that info can sometimes seem or feel ecclesiastic.

            In my opinion, context and rhetoric matter. That’s why I joked a little. But I don’t mean no harm, truly. And I appreciate what you do.

      • melsaskca ( melsaskca@lemmy.ca ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        A rose is a rose is a rose. I get your point though. Terms must be defined specifically in order to hold academic discussions. Welfare is called socialism by some.

      • European countries aren’t Socialist, though, and they depend on Imperialism to fund their safety nets like the US does, it’s just that in the US this money goes pretty much straight into the pockets of the bourgeoisie outright, instead of also funding safety nets.