Modern economists don’t normally align themselves with simplistic ideologies
Yeah… there’s just a whole bunch of them whose sole purpose seems to be coming up with simplistic fairy tale narratives to brainwash the masses with. After all… what would Reagen have been without Hayek, or Pinochet without the Chicago Boys?
Koreas “chaebol” system isn’t just any kind of conglomerattion, though… it was based on the system the Japanese used to dominate Korea during it’s colonization of that country, which the US simply encouraged after the war. The dictatorships that followed basically ran with it… and now you have these gigantic, government-subsidized “chaebols” that is the epitome of “too big too fail.” South Korea is about as oligarchic as it gets.
It’s utterly hilarious to me when “free market” cultists try to use South Korea as an example of how miraculous their fairy tale economic ideology is.
Gardening is more dangerous than being a cop. It’s not a high bar.
Lol!
Found another fascist!
Putting everything in the hands of the State is a recipe of disaster.
Tell me you don’t understand what the word socialism means without telling me you don’t understand what the word socialism means.
And if it does everything, it’s communist-er.
If a socialist calls you a dickhead, it means they’re still trying to spare your feels.
A socialized economy would pretty much result in everything else being socialized.
Not socialism.
There is such a thing as a “non-extremist” right-winger?
Fun fact… lobster and crayfish were so disdained once that it was literally only used to feed prisoners.
I have never understood the cishet obsession with virginity.
Most of my coworkers can barely make it through their own tasks
I guess you haven’t met many CEOs, then.
They will still sell the products they produce in a marketplace.
There is no rule that states they have to sell squat in a marketplace. They could, but they also couldn’t. That’s the whole point of the workers owning the means of production - the workers involved makes those deicisions, not a capitalist or bureaucratic parasite class.
There’s only one kind of democratic economy and we already have a word for it - it’s socialism. If the means of production isn’t owned by the workers it’s not democratic. It’s not socialist.
Yanks won’t like South African cooking, then…
Pig is as pig does. There is no reason for doubts.
That’s not true… the term “terrorism” was originally used to describe the actions of states - it’s only due to the media that, for rather obvious reasons, states have been “absolved” from the vastly greater levels of terrorism they commit in contrast to the comparatively minor levels committed by non-state actors.
So yes, this is terrorism. I’t s not “eco-terrorism” (which is mostly a non-issue invented by the media) - it’s bog-standard, common-or-garden-variety fascist terrorism. The kind the media goes out of it’s way to never call terrorism.
Better for whom? Tell that to all the people doing the heavy lifting under capitalism.
Besides… a “communist” dictatorship isn’t communist - it’s just a dictatorship. If you’re doing dictatorship, you’re not much of a communist.