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

B. docile_body at yahoo.com
Sun Sep 24 19:57:19 PDT 2006


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. "



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list