In particular, I've noticed how the pro-capitalist people don't seem to realize that we're not living in a pure capitalist system. Instead we're living in a mixed economy where key elements are socialist: road building, firefighting, postal services, food and drug safety testing, old age pensions, even ambulances (except for one minor exception).

A 100% socialist (a.k.a. communist) system might not be possible (at least not yet) due to human nature. The few times that it has been tried, at least in theory, it has quickly become an authoritarian system instead. But, AFAIK, it's so obvious that 100% capitalist would fail completely that no society has even bothered to try it. Hundreds of years ago there were brief experiments with things like capitalist fire services, and Pinkertons as police, but they failed so spectacularly that nobody even thinks of going back.

So, instead we quibble about "capitalist" vs "socialist" when we're really just arguing about whether the mix should be 80% capitalist, 20% socialist or 60% capitalist, 40% socialist.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Socialism is not when the government does stuff, so those institutions are not examples of socialism. Anti-capitalists are arguing for the complete abolition of exploitative capitalist property relations that violate workers' human rights.

This is a false dilemma. There are other alternatives to capitalism besides communism. It is entirely possible to have a non-capitalist non-communist system (e.g. an economy where every firm is democratically-controlled by the people that work in it)

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Socialism is not when the government does stuff

Socialism is when the "means of production" are owned by the people as a whole rather than individuals. Capitalism is when the "means of production" are owned by individuals. Every modern state contains a mix of both.

If the US is 100% capitalist, then explain how the fire department is a capitalist institution.

[–] jlou@mastodon.social 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Capitalism is not just when the means of production are owned by individuals. For example, in an economy where all firms are democratically-controlled by the people that work in them, the means of production can be owned by individuals, but such an economy is not capitalist because exploitative property relations associated with capitalism are abolished

load more comments (38 replies)