Of course there’s a difference, but the mechanism of resource allocation is what’s important here. Also I have no idea where anybody got the idea that the pricing system of capitalism is efficient in allocating resources.
Bayzeek Ecanomicks
Jayden Green
William Murphy
the class struggle is the worker's fight for freedom. you just want peace for it's own sake
and they suffered for it. without the threat of strikes, bosses and shareholder could exploit and abuse to their heart's content
and they also had the fastest economic downfall after declaring war on basically everyone because MUH ARYAN CLAY
Camden Nelson
Wew lad
Ethan Sanchez
Unions weren't needed when they had a labour front. The labour front was superior because it had the same function of a trade union but on the national scale and could be mobilized far easier than independent unions.
Under Germany's socialism was Volkish socialism not Marxist Socialism. The MOP were given to the German volk.
All private business had strict state oversight just because the state was not a shareholder did not mean the banking system was free of regulation. You can read Feder to learn more about this
It was a component of Germany's Volkish socialism
Logan Carter
Class collaboration is the Volk's fight for freedom
No they couldn't because of the labour front
So you're admitting I'm right? thanks.
Mason Evans
en.wikipedia.org
*blocks your path
Leo Hughes
Again, doesn't have to be a state.
And again, the state isn't the """collective""" it seeks to serve its own interests first and foremost. Anarchists for example would advocate for federation, libertarian municipalism, syndicalism or participatory/ direct democracy. Are you telling me people voted for Australia's past two prime ministers? No. They didn't have a say, so the """collective will" hasn't been enforced.
No, a collective is an illusory term, as I mentioned before. A collective doesn't have to be the a state, it can be, as you mentioned, and organisation or a group of people.
Hence, why they're illusory terms. The collective and the individual are illusory terms for the reasons I mentioned before.
How? Workers syndicates and federations would create a form decentralised planning so no single organisational entity has say over where resources are distributed. How exactly is it a centralisation of power? Because "muh precious individuality"? Cry more lobster boy.
It isn't.
Carter Thompson
what does this even mean. I've heard it slung around, but no solid definitions
didn't give a shit. they just put up a front of everything being ok.
¿que?
Xavier Hall
the view of german society was seen as the struggle between the german people and internationalists instead of proles and bourgeois like in marxism.
ok so you're willfully being ignorant of the german labor front and dismissing it because of that.
You said conditions got worse. I replied with "this is just a lie. Germany had the fastest economic recovery in human history after implementing Socialism"
you rather than contesting this added to what I said by bringing up the war.
Also WW2 has nothing to do with the economic theory.
James Jackson
Why am I not surprised?
It's funny how you go on about "muh socialism is not democratic" but you chose the example of the Nazis and all of a sudden shill for them "controlling the MOP". The volk is an illusory concept, it literally just means "if you were born in the country you can control it".
Again, state control over private property doesn't make it socialist, and again, the graph CLEARLY points out that the state were not active shareholders, in these departments. That means that private property was still allowed to flourish without regulation.
Which again, is still not socialism. It still maintains private property, class relations, and doesn't even maintain an element of democracy.