Well maybe you should learn about about communism before you start posting ignorant comments then.
There’s a lot of debate about past socialist states in every leftist community but a lot of people consider countries like China and the USSR to be transitional states and not communist yet. They took over the existing apparatus with the goal of slowly transitioning to a communist utopia. I am oversimplifying of course and if you are truly interested I suggest you read Capital by Marx or at least an abridged version. You can argue about whether their intentions were pure or if they could ever have succeeded, but you can’t argue that Mussolini had the same stated goals as any past or current socialist nation even if you just focus on economic policy.
So, in your eyes, discussion about anything but the absolute end-goal of communism is moot. That’s the most no true scotsman argument I’ve seen; I suppose if socialists can choose to do that then capitalist pigs can just say that their end-goal of a completely free market where competition solves everything is the only state of capitalism that can be discussed. All current or previous forms of capitalism are really just regulated capitalist systems and all problems within those systems comes from the different levels of the regulation of it.
As I suggested to the other commenter, Read L. Mises Human Action , the latter part of part 6 chapter 33 completely agrees with my assertion that corporativismo was just guild socialism v1.01. The entire book is rather long (~800 pages depending on print) but damn does it set a good foundation for discourse.
You have no analytical framework, just pattern recognition. Please pick a better way to spend your time than arguing with strangers about things you have no interest in understanding.
Well maybe you should learn about about communism before you start posting ignorant comments then.
There’s a lot of debate about past socialist states in every leftist community but a lot of people consider countries like China and the USSR to be transitional states and not communist yet. They took over the existing apparatus with the goal of slowly transitioning to a communist utopia. I am oversimplifying of course and if you are truly interested I suggest you read Capital by Marx or at least an abridged version. You can argue about whether their intentions were pure or if they could ever have succeeded, but you can’t argue that Mussolini had the same stated goals as any past or current socialist nation even if you just focus on economic policy.
So, in your eyes, discussion about anything but the absolute end-goal of communism is moot. That’s the most no true scotsman argument I’ve seen; I suppose if socialists can choose to do that then capitalist pigs can just say that their end-goal of a completely free market where competition solves everything is the only state of capitalism that can be discussed. All current or previous forms of capitalism are really just regulated capitalist systems and all problems within those systems comes from the different levels of the regulation of it.
As I suggested to the other commenter, Read L. Mises Human Action , the latter part of part 6 chapter 33 completely agrees with my assertion that corporativismo was just guild socialism v1.01. The entire book is rather long (~800 pages depending on print) but damn does it set a good foundation for discourse.
I won’t read that book. It sounds terrible.
You have no analytical framework, just pattern recognition. Please pick a better way to spend your time than arguing with strangers about things you have no interest in understanding.