@𝕿𝖔𝖙𝖆𝖑𝖎𝖙𝖆𝖗𝖎𝖆𝖓 𝕲𝖗𝖆𝖓𝖉𝖆𝖉𝖉𝖉𝖞 Agreed, their main historical demonstration was to become co-opted

yeah franco took over

I would liked to see the evolution of Rivera and the Falange, too bad Franco cucked it out

@Bee dude I've read the Falangist "manifesto" (21 point something-or-other?) and it still explicitly recognises the capitalist class as part of its vision, that is not socialism, in socialism there **is no capitalist class**

its better than the abject horror that is La Dottrina del Fascismo, but only so much

depends on the definition
fascism still sees international financier capitalism as a cancer

Embrace

corporate

no

socialism

NO

😩

ffs

yes

YES

socialism = worker ownership of the *bloody* ***MEANS OF PRODUCTION***

Socialism is whatever I say it is

Bapiro goes solipsist

Pinochet was a socialist

ewww

go away

it's late and i'm shitposting

so what do you think is better, the workers acting directly with the state, or the state acting as a mediator between the workers and the businesses/corporations to get fair wages and conditions etc etc

When the state owns the means of production what it is called?

@Bee obviously the workers utilising soviets/councils to self-manage the public affair in the total absence of business/corporate/capitalist class

what if its a small business

i wouldn't consider them elite

nothing that worker-coops can't do as well. petty bourgeois business is meaningless, obsolete.

i only consider petty bourgeois as trust fund kids and upper middle class

there's no need to retain petty bourgeois forms of property

we can directly transition to public, cooperative and personal property

can a family still have personal private land that they're had for generations or nah
i feel like people would work their own land and would have more pride working on it if they knew it was theirs, etc

same with any other small business

corporate can get fucked tho

I think the whole issue of the land is sentimental at best. As long as there is housing, and the housing distributed is *yours and cannot be taken away,* that is good enough.

why should that housing be then used to cultivate capital?

why?

it doesn't make sense from a *true anti-capitalist position*

which 3rd position doesn't in fact maintain

wait what are you arguing lol

You are saying that the people should be allowed land for petty bourgeois farming right? Working the land and stuff?