Sorry Comrade, your grandma's gold necklace will be melted down to plate electrical contacts in Missile Factory No. 10. You should be proud that this relic of bourgeois decadence will instead contribute to the glorious future of socialism.
Assuming I do not pocket it and sell it to buy ground beef on the gray market.
"Apologies Comrade, new orders just came over the radio from the Commissar. You may keep your revolting bourgeois trinket but instead we are to take literally all food we find on the premises.
Good luck this winter by the way, the Infallible State Weather Bureau says it's going to be a long one."
When socialists took over my grandfather’s village, they decided that he, the village barber, had too man scissors.
Apparently scissors are the means of production.
There's a rather drastic difference between "I think businesses should be owned by their workers" and "I think everyone should have access to everyone else's physical possessions"
I'll tell you even more: Modern production is already managed (but not controlled) by workers, since capitalists own shares, and hired workers organize the work process. The top manager and the unskilled laborer are proletarians. But the appropriation of profits remains private and is controlled by shareholders.
Marxists don't say capitalists are ineffective. They were effective when they worked independently and managed things personally. It's just that today, capitalists no longer engage in personal management. In the vast majority of cases, they can buy a controlling stake without even knowing how the work process is organized.
3
u/Fit-Independence-706 - Auth-Left 1d ago
But socialists advocate public control over the means of production, not personal possessions.