Capitalism and socialism are determined by what’s principle. All economies have elements of private and public property, what matters is which is principle, and which class is in control. The US is capitalist, “purity” has nothing to do with that.
Except that is not the principle in either country. There are plenty of cases where the state is in principle in control, or actually in control. Russia, similar to other economies, such as fascist Italy or China is structured in such away where you can exist as a “private” company as long as you ultimately bow to the state. You could also put many of the gulf states into that club. If socialism is not “when government does stuff” then capitalism is not “when rich people”
In China, the large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, and the working class is in control of the state. I never once said capitalism is “when rich people” or that socialism is “when the government does stuff.”
To a very dissimilar extent. The capitalists are in charge of the Russian state, and private ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. Russia has more state-owned firms than some other capitalist countries, but that’s about it, capitalists are thoroughly in control and private ownership is dominant.
If the capitalists are in charge of the state, they are the state. So it is not privately owned, it is state owned, the state just doesn’t serve the populace. That’s not capitalism.
Then is an absolute monarch capitalist? It is fundamentally a different system to have a state merged with corporation as compared to have them divorced. To deny that is to be intentionally obtuse.
Capitalism and socialism are determined by what’s principle. All economies have elements of private and public property, what matters is which is principle, and which class is in control. The US is capitalist, “purity” has nothing to do with that.
Except that is not the principle in either country. There are plenty of cases where the state is in principle in control, or actually in control. Russia, similar to other economies, such as fascist Italy or China is structured in such away where you can exist as a “private” company as long as you ultimately bow to the state. You could also put many of the gulf states into that club. If socialism is not “when government does stuff” then capitalism is not “when rich people”
In China, the large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, and the working class is in control of the state. I never once said capitalism is “when rich people” or that socialism is “when the government does stuff.”
To not too dissimilar an extent as modern Russia
Do you believe this for North Korea? If so, why not Russia?
To a very dissimilar extent. The capitalists are in charge of the Russian state, and private ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. Russia has more state-owned firms than some other capitalist countries, but that’s about it, capitalists are thoroughly in control and private ownership is dominant.
If the capitalists are in charge of the state, they are the state. So it is not privately owned, it is state owned, the state just doesn’t serve the populace. That’s not capitalism.
It’s absolutely capitalism. All capitalist countries have capitalist power over the state.
Then is an absolute monarch capitalist? It is fundamentally a different system to have a state merged with corporation as compared to have them divorced. To deny that is to be intentionally obtuse.
Feudalism is its own mode of production.