• MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    In any place where state ownership of means of manufacturing was implemented it lead to dictatorship or dictatorship like state. So, one can see how one can confuse them. But no, I do not confuse them, for one is economic system, and another is political.

    So, let me ask, in that model that you describe, who owns the means of manufacturing? State or not?

    • Ookami38
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Why must the state own anything, for it to be a more equitable situation? The people who do the work should own the work, all getting a say in what happens, in terms of what they’re doing, where they’re going, and who’s getting fired. The closest thing to “owning” an individual would have is a person, or likely a team, functioning as spokespersons for negotiating with the state or other companies, but only to communicate how the workers have chosen to conduct business, the only real power they have being communication.

        • Ookami38
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Why must the state own anything -with regards to the conpany-…

        • Ookami38
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          This is, yes, one of the options my post allows for.

          • MxM111@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            So, we have it now, then? Or are you advocating for forced Unionization?

            • Ookami38
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Perhaps not forced, I’m not really a fan of that much state control, but broader adoption, more public and government support (support, not force), things like this. I’ll confess I don’t have a “perfect” solution, I doubt anyone does, but it’s definitely not any of the ones we’re using today.

              • MxM111@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yeah, I am here with you. That’s what I meant in my original post by “but what’s the alternative?”. It is just many here acts as if there is an obvious thing to do, but the reality is far from it.

                • Ookami38
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I think that a lot of people are jaded with capitalism specifically because there’s not as much buy-in for unions as there should be. For instance, someone earlier made the distinction of “crony capitalism” elsewhere in this thread. That’s a lot more like what we live in right now FEELS than actual capitalism.

    • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      You mean in communism? I’m no expert but I believe it’s the workers, even though “owning” doesn’t mean quite the same as we use it now.

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        “Workers” is too abstract. Which workers? How is it handled? How do you start new business? Who/how it is paid? Who gets the profit? In what proportions? The natural solution is to have state ownership and saying “the state is the people”, but this is exactly what was done in, say USSR. And it does not work well.