American Capitalism is not capitalism. It is a mix of socialism (half of peoples' income is stolen and redistributed by the state) and cronyism (political privilege is granted to some over others)

submitted by useless_aether from twitter.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

Socialism is a system with worker control over the means of production.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

That is marxism. Jesus, learn your terminology.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

It's a Marxist term.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Uh? What is that supposed to mean? Are you saying Karl Marx coined the term? I believe this is incorrect and the term was first used during the French revolution of 1789, long before Marx.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

History of socialism

The history of socialism has its origins in the 1789 French Revolution and the changes which it brought, although it has precedents in earlier movements and ideas. The Communist Manifesto was written by Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels in 1848 just before the Revolutions of 1848 swept Europe, expressing what they termed "scientific socialism". In the last third of the 19th century, social democratic parties arose in Europe, drawing mainly from Marxism.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yes, I know the extremist Karl Marx got inspiration from Socialist ideas for his totalitarian and extremist doctrines. Do you have a point? Being "inspired by" to "invent a new thing" does not mean the new thing is the same as the thing he was "inspired by".

If you can't understand this, I don't know what to tell you. :-(

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Do you have a point? Being "inspired by" to "invent a new thing" does not mean the new thing is the same as the thing he was "inspired by".

It doesn't say, or imply this. You're making up excuses.

There's no point in wasting time discussing this with you any further.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

So there were revolutions that are said to have expressed "Scientific socialism" in the mid-1800s. OK. So what?

And then the article says "social democratic" parties arose drawing mainly from Marxism.

Therefore socialism and marxism are the same thing? Therefore it means socialism means the state has to own the means of production?

It doesn't say that either! And if it did, it would be wrong, quite simply. Let me provide some links that will make you see that your position is erroneous through no fault of your own.

The actual definition of the word "socialism" is known worldwide by many peoples in many languages, and in English by anyone who has received schooling in economics before the millenium.

This is the correct and accepted definition of socialism: https://philosophyterms.com/socialism/

However, many online dictionaries as well as shillypedia have started peddling the notion that it means "the state taking ownership of the means of economic production". Which, if you know anything, is totalitarian communism and not socialism at all. Right? OK let's continue...

Here's the shittypedia page with the false and wrong definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Randomly, the first site that popped up for me in my search engine, which happens to have the same wrong definition: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/socialism?s=t

But lastly and most importantly, a google auto-translation of the French Wikipedia page on socialism, into English: https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FSocialisme

Now it seems obvious to me that (((somebody))) is trying to change the accepted meaning of the term in order to further (((their))) agenda.

I believe the target of this psyop is the USA. Radicalizing US citizens against "socialism" by its false definition seems to be in (((their))) interest.

But either way it's a glaring example of widespread, and DEEP Orwellian disinformation TODAY.

Let's talk.

[–]mikipika 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Bravo!

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

I don't know if you are poking fun, but many Americans believe the definition of socialism that is actually communist propaganda. That's pretty bad. It needs to be known.

[–]Chipit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Nope. Because the workers are idiots. Can't let them control anything. See Trump, Brexit, and populism. Elites must make the right decisions for them.

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

Nope. Because the workers are idiots.

The public education system has ruined robbed the society of it's Independence.

Elites must make the right decisions for them.

That's why they created public education. To make you stupid and dependant.

Either way, socialism is worker control of the means of production. That's the literal definition.

It's actually an American concept. The public education system was created to rob is off our actual history, and replace it with nonsense.

[–]Chipit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The workers are the government and the government are the workers. Seriously, are you not familiar with your own system?

Except they're not actually equal, since workers are idiots. Hence elites have to take over and make the hard decisions. Government control, in the name of the workers.