Re: Is ownership of public stock a socialistic concept?

Brablo wrote:
> I read this about Socialism: "Socialism and communism are alike in
> that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership
> of the means of production and centralized planning."

In taditional theory, Socialism means any system in which the worker
owns the means of production, this can mean that the State owns all the
means of production, as in State Socialism (what is often wrongly
called "Communism"), it can also mean that each worker and/or company
of workers directly owns the means of production that they employ, as
in Anarchism, or it can mean that the State alows private ownership of
the means of production, but uses Taxation to claw back private incomes
and redistribute them by way of funding public goods and social
programs, as in New Liberalism or Social Democracy.

"Communism" is actually a theoretical statelesss, propertyless society,
which in Marxian theory is identical to Anarchism, however unlike
Anarchists, traditional Marxist believe that "Communism" can not be
achieved directly, but first the workers must seize the State and
initiate a period of State Socialism, at the end of which, the State
would "Wither Away" and leave "Communism" in it's wake.

Thus the social order found in "Communist" countries is not called
"Communism," but rather State Socialism (as in the "Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics"), what makes them "Communist" countries is not
their current society, but the alleged fact that they are supposedly
working towards Communism.

Anarchists dispute this State Socialist phase, and insist that the
Socialist State will never "Wither away", but will instead lead only to
tyranny and only replace the exploitive Landlord and Capitalist Class
with a new Administrative Class that will be even more efficient in
exploiting the worker.

Public stock ownership is a form of private ownership of the means of
production, as stock holders are owners, not workers, thus they are
Capitalists, and the concept is therfore not Socialist at all, although
Social Democratic/New Liberal societies allow it in combination with
tax-based socialisation of the resulting income.

Hope that helps.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: question about the "far" or "extreme" right
    ... 'Socialism is usually defined as 'common ownership of the means of ... capitalism, it can solve the problems of production and consumption. ... Orwell became more vocally anti-Stalin after Britain allied itself to ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Spiders Heinlein novel [was: Re: ConCarolinas 2006 is coming!]
    ... :: means of production are owned and controlled ... The dictionary refers to "collective" ownership: ... Owen's socialism did have collective ownership, ... http://www.jim.com/ James A. Donald ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: Distribution & Redistribution
    ... >conversation regarding the right meaning of socialism. ... >production and distribution are owned, manages, and controlled by the ... Instead, large-scale government ... >A kind of command economy in which the government owns and operates ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Dont Forget Mises -- and Dump the Third Way!
    ... >> voluntary exchange, ... >> Can you explain to us why capitalism does not ... >> socialism does not rely on bureaucratic control? ... >value production, commodity production, and in the ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: Does nobody at this retirement site ever talk about retirement issues???
    ... a system of society or group living in which there is no private ... production are owned and controlled by the state ... Early socialism at the beginning of the nineteenth century was usually ...
    (soc.retirement)