• Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Those are so similar to each other in comparison with capitalism that at this stage, we mostly use the same words to describe both.

    • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      No, they are not. The USSR and China (only in theory) had/has public ownership and it is quite different than the workers comtrooling their business.

      When the public owns the means of production you open up the likelihood of the state directly oppressing the workers as happened in the USSR and China.

      • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        All states oppress people, thats the point of a state. The goal of a socialist state is to oppress the bourgeois. While the workers of USSR and China did and do not have full control over means of production they had significantky more than we do