this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2025
32 points (84.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

186 readers
87 users here now

Ask Lemmy community on sh.itjust.works. Ask us anything you feel like asking, just make sure it's respectful of others and follows the instance rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 hours ago

Well, in theory is pretty different from in practice

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 6 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