Canada
You’re stretching the realities here with your assertions. The vast majority of what the government does is in the interest of workers. It could be better, absolutely, but it’s a far cry from some dystopian corpo-state. The government could move towards more positive worker benefits, but a lot of those workers won’t actually vote for them if they did because people aren’t entirely rational. So we’re essentially getting what we deserve right now.
Profit-bound but still owned by the state would still be socialist. There’s no requirement that the means of production not generate profit to qualify as being owned by the workers.
OilyArena@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
So you’re a Social Democrat, got it. Those are pretty out of fashion over here and gave up pretending wanting to achieve Socialism long ago. Sorry, but I don’t really think that what you’re talking about is Socialism, it’s liberal reformism.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
I want Communism for Land, Socialism for Necessities, and Capitalism for Luxuries.
I don’t think that puts me into any of the existing labels to be quite honest.
OilyArena@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
It makes you someone who doesn’t understand what those terms mean, so a modern liberal.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
It makes me someone who treats them as economic systems, usually referred to as an economist.
Have fun being morally outraged by my proposal, but at least it’s grounded in reality. Humans are not capable of making or maintaining a full Marxist communist state. Our desires are limitless, reality is finite.