Elizabeth Warren is going to break up big tech companies

How do you feel about this? Do you think she will be successful?
medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (563x636, 104.77K)

you cannot urinate against the wind

Is reformed capitalism going to work this time?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (885x516, 449.25K)

HAHAHA right, get me someone who can actually create legislation that passes

don't break them up

nationalize them

Good one.

hello chinese government

What are you talking about? Marx and Engels literally advocated for taking stuff like this in the hands of the state. Of course nationalization alone does not make something socialist

...

It didn't fail "last time" and it continues to work in several countries right now. I'd argue that the Soviet model isn't perfect but it cannot be said to have "failed"

ok ☭TANKIE☭
oh wait i forgot, china is a dictatorship of the proletariat i.e. just the ones in power

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (622x350, 433.2K)

China is obviously state-capitalist with a socialist party in power

are you Zig Forums pot poster?

There is no precedent for this so I doubt it would work unless the companies willingly split themselves up.

Attached: 6bcc62cace380206672c4632f7577eeb9e791d25a2bb15f6790adcc0cf6d2205.jpg (404x356, 85.7K)

yeah these cameras are obviously the will of the people, the party knows that

No she isn't.

she wrote the article and is the favourite candidate running for president, what more do you want

Surveillance is just another aspect of running a modern state. Any state, regardless of its class-character, would be retarded not to adopt surveillance methods to protect its internal security. The revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat's main tasks are to begin the construction of a socialist society and defend it against all attempts, foreign and domestic, to restore capitalism.

She isn't gonna do shit and if she does it won't change anything and if it does it's not relevant to us and if it is then it's pure chance. We do not endorse capitalist candidates.
We want to smash the throne, not a socially minded king.

then why are they the only state that uses this technology?

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1280x720, 2.09M)

listen brit, she is not the "favourite" by any metric, not by polling, individual donations, money raised, crowd size, or endorsements

if you take the two party system in the US to be war between different types of capitalists then the small fry tech companies are the beneficiaries here. The US is going to go into a recession at some point and the tech giants are the most overvalued stocks on the market, a lot of small try tech companies are going to try and take their place while the old companies are heavily in debt.

Because they have an edge in tech? There's literally nothing wrong with that pic.

No user.

Means of production, communications, transportation, etc are to be centralized in the hands of the state.

What stuff like social media, exactly? How do you even envision this working?

her campaign has a lot of money behind it, so far looks like she will be popular amongst the majority of people who vote democrat. Who do think is going to win the nomination?

Bernie seems to be gettin' a lot of press. FD: Am Foreigner.

key point: state is not controlled by the workers

he has no financial backing nor superdelegates

Read my original post . Merely having state ownership alone is obviously not socialism, the state is just transformed into the capitalist

Hasn't he raised millions already?

having a capitalist state defeats the whole point, it means the bourgeois still exists in some degree
the real bourgeois are the ones with the power to do so

that's cute

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (446x201, 54.75K)

How much did trumps cost?

supposedly less but i'd say 1 billion is what you need to win.
The point is that the richest donors always win elections

I honestly have no clue what we're arguing about at this point, I'm not advocating for capitalists

state capitalism with a socialist party will never be socialist

That's traditionally been the case, yes. but we live in a timeline where what's traditionally the case is collapsing fast.
There are countless examples of trends and norms being bucked in the political/electoral sphere in current time. I think it's premature to discount him, for now at least.

Learn basic economics, the simple principle of economy of scale teaches you a million times more than any bullshit about competition.
Not a thing.

Half right
The Chinese economy is actually socialist
As socialism is simply the transitionary period between Capitalism/State-Capitalism and Communism under the Marxist goverment

why do you think so many libertarians small business owners push for this stuff? you think they are just retarded?

and nobody argued that ?
the argument seems to be that state capitalism is preferable to regular capitalism for the people, especially in the case of public benefit infrastructures, which the gafa are

it's pretty delusional to think living in cuba is better than europe