Arguably, The US does have several socialist policies, albeit implemented very badly. For instance, public education. Does capitalism stick its grubby fingers into it from every possible angle? Yes. But at its core it has collective funding through taxes (therefore owned/controlled by the state), universal access, and the prioritization of public welfare over profit (at least on paper). Those principles are strictly socialist and not capitalist.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Socialism does not mean controlled by the state, that is just a state service, which can be capitalist.

Socialism, and I cannot stress this enough, is not when the government does stuff

[–] abfarid@startrek.website -2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Where did I say "government does stuff"? If a service is provided not for profit, funded by the community and is otherwise not privately owned, it's socialist. It needs to be for-profit and/or privately owned to be capitalist.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 days ago

No, this type of thinking is anti-dialectical. Capitalism is a system where private property and commodity production is primary, and socialism is a system where collective ownership and planning is primary. This does not mean systems are partially Socialist and partially Capitalist, but that property relations are not uniform in most systems. I think reading Marx would be helpful for you.

[–] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 3 days ago

This may help clear up much of where you are butting heads with MLs in your comments.