Socialism and Communism (was Re: [lbo-talk] Chomsky now at No. 1 on Amazon, No. 2 at Barnes & Nobl

[B.]

As some have hinted, there's no natural law that says
public ownership of the means of production must occur
through the agency of the state; public or social
ownership could occur through workers' organizations,
community groups, alliances of both, or other
non-state organizations.

Also, when someone says that state ownership stands in
contradiction to capitalism, I have to wonder if they
mean really-existing capitalism, where in fact state
ownership is a complementary part of the picture -- or

 if they mean ideal, utopian capitalism, the pure kind
that Murray Rothbard types wish existed, where state
ownership is indeed supposed to be anthitetical.
Philosopher Tibor R. Machan conceded: "Consistent
capitalism does not admit of government regulation of
the economy, subsidies to business, or trade
restrictions." But in, for example, the US, we do have
these things, and I think it's fair to say that in
spite of them (or because of them?) we live in a
capitalist economy.

Wilhelm Liebknecht said, "Nobody has combatted State
Socialism more than we German Socialists; nobody has
shown more distinctively than I, that State Socialism
is really State capitalism!" (1896)

-B.

jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net wrote:

"unless capitalism's definition has now broadened to
include state ownership of natural resources and large
industries,"

Angelus Novus wrote:

"State ownership does stand in contradiction to
capitalism. State ownership *can* be an aspect of
socialism, if the state is used as a tool to supress
the law of value. "