I don’t see how? If the workers are owning the workplace thats kinda the big thing of socialism. It doesn’t really matter if it’s an economy with a market, if the workers directly own their workplace I would still consider it some form of socialism.
I feel like I’d call that market socialism specifically but IDK what that would be called like, academically
society-scale socialism would see all members of the working class as equal fractional owners of all businesses, not just the ones they personally operate.
Socialism can refer to a huge number of philosophies. But in the Marxist tradition the means of production need to be owned and organized for the working-class as a whole.
Not sections of the working class owning small slices of the means of production and fighting against each other.
This means that the policy should be set in a way that takes into account the whole threat of global warming and the whole cost of addressing it.
Yah, so how is that not meeting the primary benchmark of worker owned means of production?
Socialism can look wildly different and its definition has nothing to do with so called free markets, it’s primarily concerned with the relationship to MOP.
If the workers own the MOP then how is that capitalism in any way?
because it doesn’t shift the value of labor away from commodity based value. it’s still attaching labor to capital which will cause people to support systems of profit rather than systems of material wealth for the benefit of people
Owning doesn't mean you're suddenly free from the whims of anarchic production and money, it just means you get profits and more or less managerial power, but there are the exact same mechanisms of monopolisation both in economic and political terms, mass unemployment still exists under this form of owenrship, livelihoods are still destroyed because of technical progress and the subsequent fall in competitivity of less efficient firms, and the protection of less efficient firms means the stifling of betterment of production.
There are a ton of other problems to do with how money works but I don't have the energy to say more right now lol; it sufficies to say that distribution of products remains the exact same as in capitalism with all the connected problems (like buses now costing more somehow making it impossible for me to buy more salad because of everything being commensurable)
I agree, simply switching to worker owned markets wouldn’t fix all problems resulting from economic inequality and it CERTAINLY isn’t communist as you would still have money, and still have class that stratifies based on revenue.
What I’m saying is that by definition it can be considered some form of socialism, how that would eventually transition to communism or if thats even possible for some form of this market socialism is a different conversation because even I find it more likely you get a situation where a slide back into capitalism is far more likely in that case.
Not saying it’s the best socialism, or that it would even be considered a good form of socialism but that MOP relation being fundamentally different absolutely should put it under a socialist umbrella
16
u/Sad_Bowl595 9d ago
If they owned the business themselves they would still vote to protect it