• merc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Similarly:

    Is every good or service-providing entity privately owned? No? Then it’s not capitalism.

    Is the fire department part of the government (i.e. worker-owned), or is it a private entity? Do you have pinkertons or police? Are there soldiers, or are the armed forces entirely mercenaries? Are roads privately owned? When people get old and need some kind of regular monthly payment, does that payment come exclusively from private insurance policies and/or investments, or are the payments provided by fellow workers in the form of a government benefit?

    Every modern economy is a mixed system involving some capitalist elements and some socialist elements.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Socialism is generally considered to be the workers owning the means of production.

      Welfare, infrastrucutre, and public services are not means of production, even if you think that the government is a workers’ state (and I can think of no major current governments which are legitimately workers’ states).

      Socialism is not simply when the government or community does or owns things in general, but the core means of generating economic output.

      • merc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You seem to misunderstand what the “means of production” entails.

        Why don’t you explain why a private firefighting company isn’t actually capitalist?

    • OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The meme said, “the means of production.” It did not say, “every, single means of production.”

      The OP could have meant anything from workers electing their CEOs in 51% of the steel mills, smelteries, oil rigs, cinemas, restaurants, etc. all the way up to 100% like you decided to assume.

      But honestly, it makes very little sense to read 100% into this, especially with your wording of “good or service-providing entity”.

      A hell of a lot of “good or service-providing entities” are sole proprietorships, which are in a blurry gray area between private ownership and cooperative ownership. On the one hand, many capitalists started out as sole proprietors. On the other hand, by owning one’s own means of production, a sole proprietor is both worker and owner, fitting perfectly in the definition of socialism. In fact, I would argue that the sole proprietor doesn’t really become a socialist or a capitalist until another worker joins the business and it becomes a cooperative or a private company. Until then, the distinction is meaningless.