I mean individuals being paid doesn’t give them power over their social and political futures, because such questions are determined at a larger scale than the individual level. Socialism is about worker control of the means of production, as a class, not as a few lucky individuals.
Firefighters do not operate the means of production; firefighters being paid well does not give workers control over their social and political futures, because firefighters are not a class that is large or influential enough to dictate the flow of their society’s political and economic power structures.
You’re looking at things in a very individualist way is what I mean, and that’s… completely contrary to socialism in both theoretical and practical terms.
Firefighters do not operate the means of production
Sure they do.
firefighters being paid well does not give workers control over their social and political futures, because firefighters are not a class that is large or influential enough to dictate the flow of their society’s political and economic power structures.
Nor does any worker. That’s part of the deal with a society where things are communally owned, you know, socialism. If you want an individual to be influential enough to dictate the flow of their society’s political and economic power structures, you’re looking for a rich capitalist.
You seem determined to try to come up with a way to pretend that clearly socialist parts of a mixed capitalist/socialist system are not socialist, while maintaining that the parts that are capitalist are still capitalist. You can’t have it both ways.
You state it’s not socialist, but you don’t say why. What’s your argument?
I’ve said it multiple times now.
Everything is government owned, check.
Firefighters are paid and have control over their social and political futures, check.
You’re not looking at socialism at a social level, which is where the ideology operates.
What do you mean by “social level”? We’re talking about the political and economic theory called socialism, right?
I mean individuals being paid doesn’t give them power over their social and political futures, because such questions are determined at a larger scale than the individual level. Socialism is about worker control of the means of production, as a class, not as a few lucky individuals.
Firefighters do not operate the means of production; firefighters being paid well does not give workers control over their social and political futures, because firefighters are not a class that is large or influential enough to dictate the flow of their society’s political and economic power structures.
You’re looking at things in a very individualist way is what I mean, and that’s… completely contrary to socialism in both theoretical and practical terms.
Sure they do.
Nor does any worker. That’s part of the deal with a society where things are communally owned, you know, socialism. If you want an individual to be influential enough to dictate the flow of their society’s political and economic power structures, you’re looking for a rich capitalist.
You seem determined to try to come up with a way to pretend that clearly socialist parts of a mixed capitalist/socialist system are not socialist, while maintaining that the parts that are capitalist are still capitalist. You can’t have it both ways.
Lord.