Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SuperSirVexSmasher t1_iv68wqs wrote

Reply to comment by salamader_crusader in "A socialist society has no room for parties or trade unions. [...] The struggle is for the simultaneous abolition of both market and production relations, [...]for the abolition of the differences in the working class brought about by the capitalist division of labor." by Maxwellsdemon17

This is what I get from a google definition search:

"an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."

Anyways i don't want to spend much time arguing about this. There is plenty of that in this thread already lol

4

salamader_crusader t1_iv6b7h4 wrote

Hello again,

Yes, capitalism can be described as such, though I have seen some debate among scholars of the issue of whether or not something like State capitalism can exist such as the case with China once the precepts and statutes of capitalism are more closely looked and how china makes use of them even though their enterprise is not entirely private, but I don't know much about Deng's ideas to tell you. However, the definition you provided does necessarily reinforce your original comment.

I agree that capitalism does use the idea of free trade among free individuals, but if that were all that it entailed we would have never made another term for something that already existed. The key word would be profit. What separates capitalism from simple commerce or trade is that surplus value is generated by these transactions instead of just satisfying the needs of the two parties.

Also, although a quick definition might be a good starting point for discussion of the topic, it is also too short and simplified to capture the nuances and intricacies of an ideology that has had books written about it.

2