Monday, March 21, 2016
Two ways
In the realm of political systems, dictionary definitions are always wrong. Anyone who attempts to prove or disprove an argument with a dictionary definition of Conservative or Liberal or Socialist or Fascist has automatically lost the argument.
The wrongest of all is Socialism = State Owns Means Of Production.
When you compare allegedly Socialist countries like Sweden with allegedly Capitalist countries like USA, you find that Sweden has less state ownership.
Reality stubbornly refuses to conform to theory, but you can still use the definitions as learning tools. Convective thought:
There are two ways of reaching the Socialist condition, State Owns Means Of Production. Additive and subtractive.
You can do it the classic additive way, confiscating and nationalizing industries. OR you can subtract all production that isn't owned by the state.
The former is typical of third world revolutions like Venezuela and Cuba. Doesn't work well, because people will continue to make and sell things via the black market. [Sidenote: It worked better in Russia because Russia hadn't developed entrepreneur-style capitalism. In 1917 Russia was closer to feudal, more inclined to collective and cooperative action.]
The latter is what we have in US/UK, but not quite yet in EU. We are eliminating all production of REAL VALUE, eliminating every business that MAKES THINGS. The only PRODUCTION that remains is the production of ABSTRACT NUMBERS by the Federal Reserve, which is the State.
¶ 6:28 AM 
