`If x group advocates for y, then z is a policy of x
`

Is what you're saying

Are there any capitalists in the world except ancaps?

That doesn’t make any sense

Well no

Exactly, it doesn't make sense

@Kazimir Malevich

No your example doesn’t

It doesn’t make sense literally

My point is socialism actively tried to restrict and/or abolish the market

You're really stretching it with your definitions. You're taking the broadest definition of socialism possible, and then using it in defense of the strictest definition of capitalism possible.

Also

another note

By using interventionist methods

"mixed economy" doesn't mean mixed between capitalism and socialism

Who are the people who call themselves capitalists but are not ancaps?

You dont know what the term means

I’ve used the same definition width for both

Although it can refer to this

typically when viewing it in the context of the United States

Mixed economies are socialist and capitalism elements mixed in

it means

mixed between a command economy and a market economy

@Kazimir Malevich is North Korea a democratic republic

Not...all....socialists....want...a...command...economy <:brainlet:508484031625691156>

Most don't

Mixed is between a capitalist or socialist economy. Market forces mixed between interventionist policies

most do

Only a few don’t

Nope

Yes they do

Although that is an example of a mixed economy

it's not the only form

It **is** a mixed economy

Thats the only form you can get

There’s nothing else

@sɪᴅɪsɴᴏᴛʜᴇʀᴇ There are countless examples of North Korea going against the fictionary definition of "democratic". You go against the dictionary definitions of both "capitalism" and "socialism".

Your analogy is unfounded in reality.

What?

LOL

North Korea is clearly not democratic