you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Your extremely limited definition for socialism I would call Communism - all owned by the government, which would be great except that all governments are arbitrarily run by corruptible individuals who can profit from their position over others.

It also does not account for other things like authentic democracy (not like rigged elections) in worker directed enterprises, aka worker co-operatives. What would you call those?

Marx ideas were perverted by the Russians, Chinese, and Cubans - each in their own unique ways. Bringing Marx into it or having him define Communism is like blaming Henry Ford for Tesla Motors.

[–]DffrntDrmmr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The definition of socialism I shared is the correct definition, and the first and most prominent one finds if one googles "define socialism."

You're guilty of letting your own grasp (or lack of) and what you read in social media muddle the proper definition of the word.

[–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't say it was wrong, I said it was limited. Where ever you found that definition I'll wager there are more definitions. To say there is only one definition is clearly wrong as so much of these comments clearly indicate there is more than enough room for interpretation and misinterpretation.

I recommend you go to one of the best authentic socialist sources for crystal clarity, Marxist professor Richard D. Wolff who can explain it to anyone willing to listen.

https://www.democracyatwork.info/eu_3_basic_kinds_of_socialism

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=YouTube+Richard+Wolff+3+types+of+socialism