Gregory's ServerWell, that wasn't socialism since the means of production were not collectively owned. It was welfare capitalism, and I would say that it being eviscerated by neoliberal capitalism highlights a major flaw in the capitalist welfare state, that being that as long as capitalism still exists it will challenge any attempt at achieving social equality.
|
6 comments
You're wrong about the definition of socialism and communism. Socialism is the direct or governmental ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods. Communism is a classless, stateless society in which all property is owned communally. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter I doubt it since socialism originates from Europe, and this definition is based on socialism as derived in Europe. @Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter From an English dictionary: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/socialism Maybe spend more energy attack capitalists, not Socialists? This definition doesn't go into specific detail explaining what socialism actually is, and instead gives an extremely quick description of socialism that lacks any of the key details of socialist ideology. Maybe spend more time looking up more comprehensive definitions of political ideologies instead of settling for definitions that try to summarize a several hundred year old ideology into one brief and nondescriptive sentence. |
@Radical_EgoCom @FisherPeter
Socialism doesn't depend on collective ownership, communism does, but anyway that government took a great deal of assets into public ownership such as Rail, Health, Welfare, roads, aviation, the Bank of England, electricity, gas and steel.