Message from @The Big Oof
Discord ID: 540600105980395553
Do you really think you made a good argument here?
I have
Well, I don't, and I think you're retarded.
If I had nothing to say, and wanted to kick you for your views or for me not having an argument, I wouldn't haveopened the door for you to offer a challenge
You don't argue like that in a semantical argument, especially
<:ohno:520006095125872641>
Since it's literally about definitions
Both participants
think they have the correct one
restating the same one over and ovr
will get you nowhere other than pissing the other person off
This is correct
thank you
I will argue not so.
But not for the reasons you stated
Only in the marxist-leninist definition is it correct
Socialism is seen as the transition from capitalism to communism
Remove marxist-leninism
And it makes no sense
Socialism has it's goals to abolish the market
Market socialism?
Doesn't exist
i will argue the definition above is incorrect since it only makes sense under one version of socialism
it doesn't exist, but the concept does
Marktet socialism is as real as libertarian socialism
it directly contradicts socialism
That is the purpose of a semantical argument, we're literally... arguing definitions
...but you just said
state intervention is socialism
so
Yes
a socialist policy
The USA has a market economy
correct
So is it market socialist?
No it's just a mixed economy
So it has aspects of market socialism, a position I don't agree with, but it's the only one that makes sense
according to this train of logic
that you are putting forth
What exactly do you define as market socialism tho