Can we have a civil, thoughtful discussion on this?

The religion of statism is the cause. Without this religion, the state could not exists and totalitarianism could never exist.

 

Yes.

 

Yup, you're identifying an effect as its cause.

 

Now you're offering confusing statements:

But then in other posts you say that WSDEs *are* socialism.

So, please, for the love of God, define socialism.

 

Yes, it is the result of all government that exist without being conquered or disolved.

 

Ok. This time please take notes. ( a bit of light humor)

But I don't want it to be "just" my definition. So I refer to Marx since every socialist I know studies Marx.

Marx said the workers would cast off their chains of exploitation. He said workers would rule. He said the economy is the foundation from which all else springs including politics, law, and therefore policy. So his vision was that of the working class casting off their chains by ending capitalism or private ownership of the means of production for private profit, and what would replace the capitalist economy would be one in which the working class owns the means of production and politics and law would serve that new economic base. He called this new socio-economic system "socialism".

So socialism is a system in which its main trait is that the working class owns and runs the means of production. So any country in which the working class does not ACTUALLY own and run the means of production, is not socialism. It may be working toward worker ownership on the large scale, in which case it is not yet actually socialism but it is being worked on. When builder are building a house, they don't yet have a house. They can't live in it yet because it isn't finished. They are working on it. And when a government is working on building socialism (worker ownership and operation of the M.O.P.), it isn't socialism yet because it is being built.

Now, how to build it.(?)

One of the leading strategies that is emerging from studies of what went wrong in the USSR and China is one of beginning in a small way to build socialism by creating socialist-type businesses that are cooperatively owned and operated by workers ("WSDEs").

Under this strategy, socialism will be built as WSDEs multiply, experience is gained, politicians turn up who are sympathetic to the cause and will work to advance the effort. Socialism will exist when capitalist no longer have any hope of resurrecting capitalist enterprises due to a government that is focused on worker ownership after experience with them proves their superiority in solving problems and benefitting all of society.

 

...and in socialism the state will never "wither away". This is why the USSR will always be the shining example of Marx's work.

 

Good. Socialism's goal is to dissolve it's government as that government "withers away".

 

That is not a logical statement or connection. It is impossible for you or anyone to know whether the state would ever wither away under socialism. It's a theory, and it's probably about 50 - 100 generations away.

 

It's a goal that can never be achieved. You will never be able to move from a statist society to a non-statist society as the panderers of powers and favors will never relinquish control. This is demonstrated in the US today and the the USSR in the past. It is a constant of all governments.

The state needs to be disolved, and then society established. The fatal flaw shared by Communist, socialists Georgist and the current oligarchy in the US is the state.

 

Nothing like an empty utopian preaching!

 

Marx was far, far more intelligent and informed on this than you or I, and in addition, your reply shows you don't grasp the concepts involved to assess the possibilities, and it doesn't take much, I assure you. So the bottom line is that it is impossible for you to know whether it can ever be achieved or not.

 

This is true. You're very blinkered regarding even Marxist Socialism

 

so killing 120 million human souls means he was informed? He urged workers of the world to unite, they did and 120 million human souls were slowly starved to death. Don't you ever worry about your after life?
How did you ever hitch your wagon to the most deadly force in human history? Do you love HItler too? Pol Pot? Who else?

 

I have refuted you with facts. You have provided no facts, only denials of facts. Everyone familiar with business history knows my statements are correct.

 

Only if you think force majeure is not an excuse. In a society where everyone is forced to be the victim of thieves, I choose not to be ONLY a victim, as I consider it supererogatory.

 

Yes, of course you do. You advocate the forcible, violent, aggressive physical coercion by landowners that ensures the effective enslavement of the landless.

See? You can't even address the issue. You have to pretend that the issue between us is the rightfulness of "property" rather than the rightfulness of privilege that takes the form of property.

Government administers possession and use of land in any case, because that is what government IS: the sovereign authority over a specific area of land. You just have to pretend that whatever is true of property in land is true of all property. But of course you know that is false.

 

I am not the one denying self-evident and indisputable facts of objective physical reality, here.

 

They aren't. As an old fart businessman with understanding of our histories, I don't recognise any of your *****.

 

@bringiton, in reply to your various posts: Are you aware that land is available for you to purchase? You can purchase some land and end your slavery.

 

This is the level of debate! "You moan about land but you can own some ain't it". No real attempt to say "hang on, you don't actually have any modern economic understanding?".

But that's right wing rant for you!

 

So, under such a system, would I be free to set up my own business to provide a product to consumers? If so, would I be free to pay people to perform work for me?

 

That would depend on where in the evolution of the new system we are considering. Right now, with capitalism dominant, you could do that. But at some point it would become less and less desirable in various ways for various reasons. And when the effort matures and WSDEs are the dominant business form, the hiring of employees would at some point not be allowed. No doubt, however, subcontracting with others to perform some tasks may be allowed for a longer period of time.

 

Crikey, its like the likes of Robert Owen never existed...

 

Would not be allowed by whom?