Message from @campodin
Discord ID: 486243291617034251
but money isn't the means of production
It literally has nothing to do with the fruits of labor being translatable to capital.
also spelling capital as capitol pisses me off
when ur wrong so u just call people an idiot 🔥 👌 😂 👌 🔥
I called you an idiot for saying I said the same thing
From my perspective you were saying it was the same thing, and from your perspective you were mistaken in the words you were using which caused me to misunderstand what you were actually trying to say.
You're wrong either way.
good point
Is the owner on? <@&452955165624893451>
You're assumption that means of production is only material just shows that you know nothing about being a "capitalist"/entrepreneur. They only have what you call means of production because they have the capital (happy?). By turning capital into "means of production" you are simply turning it into real wealth. That real wealth can be directly transferred back into capital. Capital and real wealth are equivalent. That apple example you gave is a means of production, aka real wealth. It can be turned right back into capital by selling it again.
If you take capital from a wealthy person you are necessarily removing his means of production (or if you prefer potential means of production). Alternatively he could take that capital, invest it, and create more capital. Thus his capital was used to produce more capital.
Yeah but that's not what socialism is. Socialism is quite succinctly the ownership of the means of production by the workers, not the redistribution of it by capitalists OR government.
IT's the same principle as when a worker gets a paycheck. If the fruits of their labor is being distributed to them by the capitalist do they then work in a socialist system?
Of course they don't.
Dictatorship of the proletariat is a distinct concept from a welfare state, succeeding a proletariat revolution that takes over the function of the state.
Means of production is similarly a distinct concept. A welfare state has the MOP firmly in the hands of capitalists.
What? Being paid for your labor is not redistribution, it is a fair trade
But it's the same as if government took money from the "capitalist" class (the wealthy) and gave it to you through social programs.
Which is already a horribly false equivalency because it's not overt redistribution of wealth, they're meant to be temporary programs most of the time.
Socialism is when everyone says "gib me dat"
Point is, you're confusing MOP which in a socialist system must be *controlled by* the workers. It says nothing about capital being translated from the result of production. That is completely irrelevant. It's literally about the workers directly controlling the MOP.
This is just a bad false equivalency meant to make Bernie into a communist.
Who cares if it's fair trade? I'm not a socialist, it's irrelevant if I think it's fair or not.
I'm just explaining how socialists think.
The only way for social programs to be socialist is if the proletariat took over the government and established a dictatorship of the proletariat, in which case it would barely be recognizable as a welfare state.
When the people enacting social programs are a ruling class, not the workers, how is it socialist?
This is a direct contravention of the meaning of the word.
@εïз irma εïз if the mop are collectively owned then if it were to be sold each person would receive a partial amount of the amount it was sold for. Even then, the distribution of capital has been distributed. If they pool their capital to buy more mop they now all collectively own it again. You cannot separate mop from capital.
How are they "buying more MOP"? This would just turn them into a capitalist. Socialism is collective ownership, not redistribution of wealth.
Socialism is wholly incompatible with a capitalist welfare state on a foundation level.
The Nordic Model isn't socialist, Nords have said so themself.
Nords are also moving away from social programs
That doesn't actually change anything though.
The Nordic Model is a system that's been around for a few decades, they said the Nordic Model isn't socialist.
Even the "socialist" parties people talk about are self-labeled as social democrats.
Democratic socialist is a meaningless populist term.
@εïз irma εïз anything can be used as currency, the workers could trade their mop for corn and then trade the corn again for some other mop
But corn isn't MOP. <:HyperLmao:459545665517780993>
For a farmer it is
The farm that makes the corn is the MOP. If you buy a farm you become a capitalist.
No, it isn't.