this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2025
4 points (66.7% liked)

Main, home of the dope ass bear.

16060 readers
83 users here now

THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)

(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)

A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!

Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!


gun-unity State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership

guaido Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources

smoker-on-the-balcony Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)

frothingfash Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with

just-a-theory An Amainzing Organizing Story

feminism Main Source for Feminism for Babies

data-revolutionary Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide


ussr-cry Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
  1. i think that a true socialist government involves a three-way party-state-union framework: the party leads the state through organic centralism and multi-party democracy (i call a multi-party socialist democracy 'proletarian liberalism', rather than centre-right bourgeois liberalism); the state controls and coordinates (led by the workers and farmers themselves - a dictatorship of the proletariat) with a coalition of political parties in the government (the vanguard socialist party is the lead party, the big cheese); the union handles economics and such (a planned market economy is a true socialist economy) in a 'council of the economy', led by a national trade union federation.

  2. all political parties should be put in the care of the proletariat, rather than the oligarchs (or the people who enable the oligarchs. the general secretary of the vanguard party is the highest-ranking role, but the president and premier are the real leaders. the policies were enforced to prevent authoritarian stuff.

  3. in addition, private property exists alongside public and collective property; competition exists as it helps drive innovation; strict antitrust and antimonopoly laws were enforced; all corporations get split and collectivized by the workers. landowners get stripped of their landowner role, so the tenants get to be their own landowners, and they pay the taxes to the land and other stuff (taxation is NOT theft in any way, shape and form). property (whether private or public or collectivized) becomes regulated to avoid inequalities and such

  4. wealth is redistributed among everyone, and everyone is paid fairly - everyone gets a dividend of $1000 per month (financed through public banking run by the government). labor value is measured through an accounting system. the government controls how much money people spend - if they wanna exchange currency for goods and services without getting the guilt of being poorer, they can use labor vouchers. ethical consumption is allowed under market socialism. private, public and collective ownership co-exist peacefully (but private companies are regulated).

  5. rich people are taxed, and so does churches. food stamps (and snap benefits), bridge cards and welfare are important.

what do you think?

edit: listen the point is that i support full-fledged market socialism within a government that had three-way power between the parties, the state and the union. seriously!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RedSturgeon@hexbear.net 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Okay I'm gonna give props to you for trying to think and come up with ideas. You seem to have at least basic understanding of some socialist thought, so you've stepped into this further than a lot of people.

There's a lot of inconsistencies, but if I understand you currently basically the desire is collectivization and re-distribution based on workers 1st policies? But then you put a lot of emphasis on trying to cling onto concepts like competition, small business, being poor. Competition and being poor is in large parts what creates conflicts and shatters communities.

Shouldn't we eliminate these old world ideologies and replace them with something healthier like instead of rich/poor think "From each according of his ability to each according to his need."

Instead of competition driving innovation why can't desires and the need for self actualization drive innovation?

Why does private business need to exist? I'm not gonna steal your toothbrush, but why do you need your own business to sell/design toothbrushes? Why can't you use the State Hygiene Sector to make them or work together with it to design a good toothbrush to your liking or why can't you just go use their equipment to make your custom design?

There's also the matter of who is going to enforce all this, how do I convince the people of my to-be nation to actually work towards it? Who is going to teach them how to manage themselves? What do I do if they don't wanna let go of the Status quo?

I'm gonna give you an assignment to look for problems faced by your local community and maybe even those that effect you. A problem that exists even though there's no mandate for it and maybe there's even laws in place to protect you from it, but why does the problem happen anyways? Try to think of the root cause and, once you find it, try to think about how would you address it. Apologies if I end up being way too ruthless I promise you it comes from a place of care and sincerely good job on learning I hope you keep doing it.

[–] DylanMc6@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

what i'm saying is that i support market socialism in some way or another.

[–] starkillerfish@hexbear.net 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

you didn't just say that, you also said quite a few other things that are not coherent

[–] DylanMc6@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] starkillerfish@hexbear.net 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

like those that i pointed out in my other comments. for instance the way you describe property relations. you say that private property exists, but then you say that all corporations are collectivised and everything is regulated. where is private property then if its not in the economy and it is not respected by the state? then, you say that there are no landowners, but then say that all tenants become landowners and pay taxes for the land. then you seemingly walked back your "planned market economy is a true socialist economy" statement, now you just say market economy. so which one is it?

[–] stink@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 days ago

Everyone has their own personal toothbrush, not a collective one!

[–] DylanMc6@hexbear.net 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  1. when i say that corporations should be collectivized, what i mean is that i think monopolies and conglomerates (very large corporations) should be broken up and then collectivized by the workers. 2-3. private property should be regulated.
  2. the part about tenants being their own landowners and paying taxes for the land is derived from georgism.
  3. what i'm saying is that i support market socialism.
[–] starkillerfish@hexbear.net 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  1. so something like NEP? It's kind of strange to view it as an ideal system imho. If you recognise that private property relations are an issue, why do you still want to keep them
  2. what exact problem are you trying to solve with a land tax that cannot be solved with just public ownership of land?
  3. cool
[–] DylanMc6@hexbear.net 1 points 1 day ago
  1. a bit like that
  2. i think there'd be public ownership, but in georgism, land can still be privately owned, as you have to pay a land value tax to the community.
  3. thank you. seriously!