905
Americans and socialism (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
295 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 2 years ago (18 children)

No. "Socialized medicine" is not "people owning the means of production"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 2 years ago (17 children)

    It is in a democratic state. Who else do you think owns it?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Pretty sure no one with universal healthcare calls it "socialized medicine". That's just a buzzword Americans use to scare each other.

    It's not a means of producing anything other than health. Health is seen as a human right and it makes sense even in most western capitalist countries for it to be extended to everyone.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    I'm Canadian. It's what the founder of our healthcare system, Tommy Douglas, called it.

    And yeah, it's the people owning the means of producing health. Socialist healthcare.

    Americans scare people with these references to brutal authoritarian dictatorships that call themselves "socialist" but the real cause of all these problems is that they weren't democratic, not that they socialized industries.

    Anyways, maybe it's just my autism making me literal as fuck, but I think you guys need to clear that up. This is what the people owning the means of production looks like. It's always going to be adjacent to capitalism, whether it's a socialist industry in a capitalist country, or a socialist country in a capitalist world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    It is not Socialist. Social programs are not Socialism. Every economy is a mix of private and public property, that doesn’t make it mixed Capitalism and Socialism. Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors for economies at large, as you cannot remove entities from the context they are in. A worker cooperative is not a “socialist” part of a Capitalist economy, because it exists in the broader Capitalist machine and must use its tools.

    What determines if a system is Capitalist or Socialist is if private property or public property is the primary aspect of a society, and which class has control. In Canada, Private Property is dominant, so Social Programs are used to support that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    By this absolutist logic, a socialist country is not a "socialist" part of a capitalist world, because it exists in the broader capitalist machine and must use its tools.

    What is the point then? If you don't want to call anything "socialism" until the very last human on earth is socialist, fine, I will focus more on improving people's lives than haggling over definitions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    This isn't true, though. Socialism is a transitional status towards the goal of Communism, states that are pushing forwards on that goal, or "on the Socialist road," play a progressive role, while Capitalist countries take a regressive role. Socialist countries indeed exist in the context of a world economy dominated by Capitalism, but are moving against that.

    I call many countries Socialist, like the PRC, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, former USSR, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    "Tankie" is a person who cares more about whether a country flies the flag of socialism, regardless of their actions, and dismisses any criticisms about them as "western propaganda".

    China is a capitalist country. They are more capitalist than the western countries you hate so much. Open your eyes. Stop believing Chinese propaganda.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    “Tankie” is a caricature. The idea of a tankie is the ideal vision of a McCarthyian Communist. In reality, the overwhelming majority of people labeled as such don’t actually fit that label, it’s more of a way to cast an image of someone’s positions based on, say, support for AES countries, and twist that into the evil Commie Pinko that haunts the dreams of 1960s children in the US.

    The PRC has a Socialist Market Economy. The vast majority of large firms are firmly in the public sector, while the small firms and self-employed make up the bulk of the private sector, along with cooperatives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    Interesting, thanks for the Canadian history lesson Perhaps that's where the Americans got their weird terminology from.

    you guys need to clear that up

    Who needs to do what? I'm not sure what I said that somehow gave you the impression I was an American.

    My society pays for universal free healthcare, like everywhere in the civilized world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    How is democracy related to ownership?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    A democracy is a state in which the government is owned and controlled by the people.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    No wtf. Democracy is state that holds elections. Wtf is "owned and controlled by the people"? How are people supposed to control the government? The government is controlled by govt officials. Common people don't control shit. How can a government be owned by people? Is government even a property that can be owned? That doesn't make any sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    How are people supposed to control the government?

    Through elections.

    The government is controlled by govt officials.

    That we elected.

    How can a government be owned by people?

    Through democracy.

    Is government even a property that can be owned?

    If I ask a friend to water my plants, do I no longer own the plants?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Through elections

    Umm, no. Elected politicians can do whatever tf they want. There's no legal mechanism to make them fulfill the promises they made during their campaign.

    That we elected

    Not to mention that elected politicians aren't controlled by the people, most of the government positions aren't elected.

    Through democracy

    Democracy is when Government is owned by people. People own government through democracy. Great argument.

    If I ask a friend to water my plants, do I no longer own the plants?

    If you ask government to persecute people who break the law, do you no longer own people who break the law?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Umm, no. Elected politicians can do whatever tf they want. There's no legal mechanism to make them fulfill the promises they made during their campaign.

    The next election is the mechanism that makes them fulfill the promises they've made during their campaign. If your politicians aren't afraid of losing the next election, you don't live in a real democracy, you probably live in a FPTP country, and you should fix that.

    Not to mention that elected politicians aren't controlled by the people, most of the government positions aren't elected.

    I don't know what country you are assuming counts as the entire world with this sentence, I'm going to assume America because it's usually Americans that do that.

    But even then, what is wrong with me hiring someone to hire more people?

    Democracy is when Government is owned by people. People own government through democracy. Great argument.

    What is your counterargument other than "no"?

    If you ask government to persecute people who break the law, do you no longer own people who break the law?

    You can't own people, you never did, what are you trying to ask here?

    What do YOU think the people owning the means of production looks like?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    The next election is the mechanism that makes them fulfill the promises they’ve made during their campaign

    Why are you saying this? Who's the target audience of this bs? What makes you say that if it's demonstrably false? Elected politicians don't keep their promises, they just don't.

    If your politicians aren’t afraid of losing the next election

    Is Trump scared to loose the next election?

    what is wrong with me hiring someone to hire more people?

    It's perfectly fine, but unrelated to the question at hand. You don't hire politicians.

    What is your counterargument other than “no”?

    "No" is actually a stronger argument than yours bc you're making a positive statement here and the burden of proof is on you.

    You can’t own people, you never did, what are you trying to ask here?

    I dunno. I guess your initial analogy was shit that explained nothing. Don't use analogies then.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent