Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks reads from Hilter's 'Mein Kampf' while bashing Democrats,media

[Dill]

(03-27-2019, 03:13 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I can't find many corroborating definitions of socialism that considers it the economic system where the government owns the means of production.

Well there are, sort of, but that's tricky.

If the constitution of the government in question states that it is socialist and defines a goal of wealth control/redistribution explicitly to offset the problems/contradictions inherent in private ownership of the nation's means of economic production, and it does this on behalf of a sovereign citizenry defined as naturally equal in rights, then I would say yes, that is socialism for sure--especially if the means of production are nationalized.  The tricky part is whether the government then really represents the public. Do they have real elections?

Fascism doesn't really meet these criteria, as it embraces natural inequality--and however much the von Mises folks want to claim that the state somehow "in effect" controls privately owned means of productions, in fascist Italy and Germany, the Fiats and Krupps were still making crazy PRIVATE profits and in immediate managerial control of their concerns operating with the same incentives as "free market" societies. Further, the Nazis privatized many state concerns which had been nationalized under the Kaiser and during Weimar.  Sure, they at times attempted to control investment and production allocation through measures like forced cartelization, but this never worked efficiently precisely because privately owned firms were still privately owned and followed market incentives. Then there is the small matter of dictatorship, and how the state is thought to represent a sovereign nation, but not a sovereign people.

Defining National Socialism as "socialism," while not likely to survive close logical/historical analysis, is certainly politically useful in a country where few people know little about either--except through the examples of the Third Reich and the Soviet Union.  And one party is proposing expansion of government services--i.e., "socializing" their costs--which will increase the tax burden on the top ten percent.
Medicare=socialism=fascism.  Now Google fascism and see what that's about!!!!

This what you're voting for, Dawg!?!  Shame!!