Analysis of Late Stage Capitalism

AN ANALYSIS OF LATE STAGE CAPITALISM & THE CONFUSION OF OF SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM WITH STATE CAPITALISM:
Socialism explained:
Socialism is an economic system that implies social and collectivised ownership and management of the means of production and services such as energy,healthcare etc by the workers themselves with zero state or.corporate control but rather direct control by the workers themselves with a form of decentralised planning. Social ownership is the appropriation of the surplus product produced by the means of production to society as a whole.It is the defining characteristic of a socialist system.Public ownership the key defining characteristic of socialism and it can take various forms including the form of community ownership,state ownership,common ownership,employee ownership,cooperative ownership and citizen ownership of equity.All forms of public ownership are democratically run and managed that is all people are elected democratically and all actions are democratically decided.Most forms of public ownership in socialism are run groups of people that manage them on community levels or by the workers.Public ownership does not necessarily mean state control as there are many forms of socialism that can take on public ownership where the public themselves Independent from the state with zero state interference are elected and controlled by democratic control community ownership,common ownership,employee ownership etc all of whose definitions can be found on Wikipedia can manage society and parts of the economy such as factories and businesses where democratic processes exist.At the same time forms of public ownership can exist where the state has ownership or control of a sector of the economy but unlike state capitalism in these forms of socialism public ownership that involves state ownership it is democratically controlled that is all state representatives are democratically elected and their actions are democratically decided upon that is any government interference must involve democratic processes wherein a state representative is elected by the public and all of their actions are democratically decided through refferendums etc.This eliminates.corruption and authoritarianism.This type of public ownership does not involve the state gaining profits from it and is not the same as state capitalism as it does not involve state owned corporations as seen in Maoist China,Soviet Russia and Venezuela with it either funded through taxpayers money or funded by profits shared equally.State owned corporations like the ones that existed in Maoist they China,Soviet Russia etc are not a form of public ownership that can only exist in socialism as they also exist in state capitalism.Unlike nationalisation and state owned corporations the actions of the state is democratically controlled.Public ownership is the ownership of an industry,asset or enterprise by the state or a public representing a community, as opposed to an individual or private party.Public ownership specifically refers to industries selling goods and services to consumers and differs from public goods and government services financed out of a governments budget.Public ownership can take place at the national,regional or local level or municipal levels of government; or can refer to non-governmental public ownership vested in autonomous public enterprises.Public ownership is one of the three major forms of property ownership, differentiated from private,collective/cooperative and common ownership. Public ownership of the means of production is a subset of social ownership which is the defining characteristic of a socialist economy.However, state ownership and nationalization by themselves are not socialist, as they can exist under a wide variety of different political and economic systems for a variety of different reasons.State ownership by itself does not imply social ownership where income rights belong to society as a whole. As such, state ownership is only one possible expression of public ownership, which itself is one variation of the broader concept of social ownership.In the context of socialism, public ownership implies that the surplus product generated by publicly owned assets accrues to all of society in the form of a social dividend as opposed to a distinct class of private capital owners.There is a wide variety of organizational forms for state-run industry, ranging from specialized technocratic management to direct workers self-management and others involving democratic process and control.The state can have influence in a sector through public ownership in ways outside of state owned corporations that were not present in Maoist China and Soviet Russia etc that follow different organisational structures but the extent of its reach is limited by democratic processes.State owned corporations do not have democratic processes and are found in and the predominant and traditional conceptions of non-market socialism,public ownership is a tool to consolidate the means of production as a precursor to the establishment of economic planning the allocation of resources between organizations, as required by government or by the state.Therefore public ownership in socialism does not automatically imply state owned corporations as in reality due to the hierarchical structures modelled on corporations and the profit motive state owned corporations are a capitalist phenotype not a socialist one it’s just that they can exist in mixed socialist systems.There are many forms of public ownership that are different from state owned corporations that are democratic or socialist in nature with state owned corporations being one of many forms of public ownership that is predominantly present and associated in state capitalism and also state other forms of capitalism meaning the term “public ownership”.State owned corporations are the predominant form of and defining feature of state capitalism not socialism as it is only one form of public ownership of the means of production with capitalism having these forms and state owned corporations that exist within a socialist system is not socialism it is a mixed capitalist economy.All so called “socialist” countries in human history such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia just because they had state owned corporations were not truly socialist economies due to the fact that state owned corporations were the predominant form of enterprises and the fact that private enterprises also existed something that is not allowed in socialism with the state and society modelled on the undemocratic hierarchical structures of corporations further making them state capitalist unlike socialism which is a democratic institution.They did have cooperatives and facets of socialism but these can be found in state capitalism making them state capitalist mixed economies as they had a mixture of cooperatives,state owned enterprises and private enterprises.The various subtypes of socialism denotes the degree of control the state has and type of democratic control that manages the states power and limitations of the state and democratic institutions that exist with it also determining how profits and resources are allocated within worker owned cooperatives as well as how government agencies are run and managed and whether it market driven or not as well as how enterprises organisational seductions are managed by society.There are however the same key facets remain the same across the board in all private enterprises – no private enterprises or privatisation of the economy can exist and the state cannot control the economy through a command economy but only a democratic planned economy with input from the public,that all and any enterprises ie hospitals,farms,businesses etc,it cannot own any sector and resource of the economy ie oil and healthcare it cannot own any sector and resource of the economy through either nationalisation and state owned corporations ie oil,healthcare,energy,100% of all enterprises and businesses such as farms,factories,banks etc must be worker owned cooperatives and collectives.The various types and subtypes of socialism also denote how businesses are controlled either through democratically controlled state entities or those run by different types of entities managed by collective groups of individuals.This includes community ownership,common ownership,employee ownership,cooperative ownership and citizen ownership of equity.These are forms of ownership within socialism where the state has no control of the economy or society.All forms of socialism involve democratic processes that allow the public to control all facets of the economy etc directly and indirectly through democracy.Traditionally, social ownership implied that capital and factor markets would cease to exist under the assumption that market exchanges within the production process would be made redundant if capital goods were owned and integrated by a single entity or network of entities representing society;but the articulation of models of market socialism where factor markets are utilized for allocating capital goods between socially owned enterprises broadened the definition to include autonomous entities within a market economy.Social ownership of the means of production is the common defining characteristic of all the various forms of socialism.The two major forms of social ownership are society-wide public ownership and cooperative ownership.The distinction between these two forms lies in the distribution of the surplus product.With society-wide public ownership, the surplus is distributed to all members of the public through a social divided whereas with co-operative ownership the economic surplus of an enterprise is controlled by all the worker-members of that specific enterprise.Social ownership of any sector of the economy of which defines socialism can only take the form of that sector being turned into a cooperative and other aforementioned means with zero state ownership that are completely democratic in nature.As stated even public ownership and those wherein the state has ownership involves democratic processes present to ensure that the public has control of the government or government official present.The goal of social ownership is to eliminate the distinction between the class of private owners who are the recipients of passive property income and workers who are the recipients of labor income (wages, salaries and commissions), so that the surplus product (or economic profits in the case of market socialism) belong either to society as a whole or to the members of a given enterprise. Social ownership would enable productivity gains from labor automation to progressively reduce the average length of the working day instead of creating job insecurity and unemployment. Reduction of necessary work time is central to the Marxist concept of human freedom and overcoming alienation, a concept widely shared by Marxist and non-Marxist socialists alike.Socialisation as a process is the restructuring the economic framework, organizational structure and institutions of an economy on a socialist basis.The comprehensive notion of socialization and the public ownership form of social ownership implies an end to the operation of the laws of capitalism,capital and the use of money and financial valuation in the production process, along with a restructuring of workplace-level organization.As a result all facets of all of society are in the form of cooperatives business that are worker owned and managed and all profits are shared equally between all workers worldwide and all individual businesses working conditions such as rotas,shift lengths and conditions in factories etc are democratically decided by all workers with the state enacting setting federal business regulations that are democratically decided upon by all workers and the public through referendums.The only types of business in a socialist systems are cooperatives and collectives.Private enterprises and state owned enterprises are not allowed.Each cooperatives are managed by their workers of the companies themselves that vote democratically on all aspects such as working conditions such as rotas,economic decisions and ventures,new products and services,hiring and firing etc that occur and with regards to working conditions this includes what type of work each person does and the quality of the workplace ie factories,shops etc and also business operations with there being different subtypes that determines the way in which decisions are made and how profits are allocated to all worker.All facets of a cooperative are run democratically by all workers present.The various types of cooperatives include business that are worker owned and operated.In otherwards everything that is decided by managers and CEOs is instead decided through democratic processes by the workers themselves through meetings,computer forums,discussions and voting.The various types of cooperatives include business that are worker owned ones managed by the people who use their services (a consumer cooperative)organizations managed by the people who work there (worker cooperatives),multi-stakeholder or hybrid cooperatives that share ownership between different stakeholder groups.For example, care cooperatives where ownership is shared between both care-givers and receivers.Stakeholders might also include non-profits or investors,second- and third-tier cooperatives whose members are other cooperatives,platform cooperatives that use a cooperatively owned and governed website, mobile app or a protocol to facilitate the sale of goods and services.Having workers own the means of production in socialism is thus having all businesses,hospitals,factories etc owned and managed by the workers themselves with zero state control and interference.It is where workers own and operate a business etc and thus are allowed a democratic say in all of its operations with again zero state control.Get that through your thick skulls.How profits are allocated is determined by the workers themselves democratically such as either having all profits shared equally,normal flat wages that are determined democratically or percentage shares where each worker or worker type gets a set percentage of profit ie each set of different employees ie janitors,cashiers,cooks,shelf stackers etc will be paid different percentages of profits ie cooks paid 50%,janitors paid 10%,cashiers paid 40% of all profits.In this system although there is an unequal distribution of profits,wages still rise in proportion to profits.How profits are allocated in the form of wages can be democratically decided by all workers in demand.How wages and profits are allocated can also vary.This includes the net income of the CEO.Normal cooperatives and collectives in market socialism involves all profits shared equally amongst all employees meaning the wages of each employee roses and falls in proportion to the success of business.Variations of this could exist in market socialism where all employees including to the normally lowest paid worker in a capitalist enterprise are each guaranteed a set percentage of profits based on their role in the company with in democratic socialism this including CEOs absent from market socialism meaning even the lowest paid worker is paid wages that are a set percentage that rises in proportion to the companies profits it still means that their wages rises when the business is more successful.Each set of different employees ie janitors,cashiers,cooks,shelf stackers etc will be paid different percentages of profits ie cooks paid 50%,janitors paid 10%,cashiers paid 40% of all profits.In this system although there is an unequal distribution of profits,wages still rise in proportion to profits.If the lowest level employee of a company,enterprise,business or corporation in either socialism and democratic socialism that makes only $1,000,000 in profits every year gets only 10% of the profits then that person makes $100,000 a year compared to $31,200 or less if they were paid a $15 minimum wage.It is a win win situation that negates the need for a federal minimum wage and keeps employees hard working and well paid for their hard work and managers and CEOs rich and in business provided they don’t hire too many people with ample automation.That is only in the case of a business that makes only $1,000,000 – it doubles for every extra $1,000,000 that they make with those that make millions and billions of dollars the lowest paid employee in a capitalist system that in capitalism makes $31,200 a year would in socialism make six,seven or eight figure salaries from $100,000 – $10,000,000 a year with this including janitors,cashiers etc.The more profits each business makes the higher the wages each person makes regardless of the contract.Other workers would be paid 10% of the profits or 20% of the profits with these decided by the workers.Since the workers of each enterprise decides everything democratically then they can decide how profits are allocated and change this allocation and means of socialism.Other methods of payment can occur including all workers being paid a flat wage but the wages much higher than normal or them increasing exponentially overtime the more successful is and the longer a person is hired or have bonuses paid every few years with the method of the distribution of profits being democratically decided upon by all workers.They may be decentralised where there are no hierarchies or they be centralised like private corporations where a CEO and board of directors comprised of workers or have no workers in it may exist with the structure of the cooperatives decided by all workers democratically.CEOs and board of directors that exist would likely be the public face of the cooperative and may carry out the same functions of a CEO with like board of directors be elected and changed every few years by democratic process by workers and their actions and decisions for the business may have to be authorised by democratic process of all workers.They would discuss all major decisions with the workers of coops with this structure.The same hierarchical structures in corporations can exist in cooperatives but they are still democratically run with the actions of the CEO discussed with and initiated or authorised by the workers.This means that the CEO can make decisions by itself but most if not all important ones especially risky ones must be democratically decided upon by all workers as it affects them with the CEO of a cooperatives being a figure who legally authorises decisions within a cooperatives with CEOs.How wages are distributed to all employees and what structures cooperatives take are democratically decided upon and can be changed at a whims notice by employees meeting and discussing things.Thus it is the worker’s themselves that decide how wages derived from profits are allocated These are the sort of policies that exist in both market socialism and even capitalist democratic socialism.There are many structures that cooperatives can take and many different ways in how profits are shared and distributed but the democratic process remains in all forms where workers are allowed a say and vote in all procedures.If workers don’t like how things are run,don’t like whose in charge and how things are run etc and how profits are allocated they can meet together,discuss things and then vote to change things to their favour through democratic processes inherent in them meaning if things become draconian or not to their liking then there are always democratic process to change things for the better.Thus in socialism the more profits the businesses makes and more successful it is due to the profits being shared equally thus the higher wages of each person goes up and the richer everyone gets rather than in capitalism where it is a case of all profits going to one person at the top and everyone else being paid the same flat wages.The form they take and how profits are allocated as wages for each worker can vary across each types of cooperatives and these can be changed on demand through democratic processes within cooperatives.In all cooperatives the same democratic processes are present in all of them that are run by workers etc.Thus there is a wide variety of the structures and how profits and wages are allocated allowed in cooperatives but in all forms the same universal democratic process still remain in all forms allowing all workers to change these forms of structures and how profits are allocated on demand through democratic process..All enterprises in a socialist state are either cooperatives or collectives with their being no private enterprises,privatisation of any sector of the economy and no state run enterprises and no nationalised sectors of the economy.In socialism the control the state has in the economy is limited and in fact all actions of the state are democratically decided upon by the workers of all enterprises and thus eligible citizens.A government planner that is an individual can be elected to manage the planning if the economy or and even operation of factories,farms or agriculture etc in general but their actions unlike in state capitalism where it is not democratically decided on wherein a state bureaucrat installed by the state runs them without democratic input whereas in socialism the government official etc is usually one who is elected by the public and his decisions well at least most of them especially important ones must be democratically decided upon through public ownership.He has some freedom and some direction from the state but overall he must carry out actions decided democratically by its workers.Thus if any type of socialism involves a government official,planner or any type of government agency or government control of the economy or government control enterprises exists through various forms of public control then they are still democratically controlled by its workers and society through democratic process meaning the control of the state is still limited.Public ownership can also involve the factory etc being converted into a cooperative with zero state influence or it can be through government control that is still democratically controlled.All taxes,bailouts,regulations relating to businesses on a federal level enacted by the state such as worker regulations and those with regards to the environment are democratically decided upon by all workers and in fact society at large through democratic processes such as public refferendums especially those initiated by popular imitative similar to Switzerland..This eliminates corruption and cronyism as well as over regulation.Laws such as age of consent,legality of abortion,recreational drugs and all laws regarding social issues would also be democratically decided upon by the electorate through refferendums.The purpose of socialism is to therefore democratize both businesses and society as a whole and integrate democracy into all facets of society by ensuring that all actions of the state and all actions of a business to be democratically run by the workers and society as a whole thus reducing the ability for governments to become tyrannical and eliminating their control on society.By introducing democracy into the workplace it allows all facets of a business such as working conditions,rotas,shifts etc to be controlled by its workers.By introducing democracy into society as a whole it allows all actions of the state to be controlled by society thus eliminating corruption,over regulation,cronyism etc and the rise of tyrannical dictators as the state cannot do anything unless it is authorised by democracy and if the state does gain too much control then democratic safeguards exist that can overturn this or prevent this and also punish them acting as a deterrent.Socialist systems are divided into non-market and market forms.Non-market socialism substitutes factor markets and money with integrated economic planning and engineering or technical criteria based on calculation performed in kind,thereby producing a different economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws and dynamics than those of capitalism.A non-market socialist system eliminates the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system in capitalism.The socialist calculation debate originated by the economic calculation concerns the feasibility and methods of resource allocation for a planned socialist system.By contrast,market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets and in some cases the profit motive,with respect to the operation of socially owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them.Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.Anarchism and libertarian socialism completely hate the use of the state as a means to establish socialism,favouring decentralisation above all,whether to establish non-market socialism or market socialism.Real market socialism that is advocated by 99% of real socialists is where all businesses and enterprises and all essential services such as healthcare,energy,education are collectively owned and managed not by the state or by CEOs but by the workers themselves with no state control and no private enterprise yet the economy is not controlled like state capitalism with the price market system used in capitalism to determine the success and fate of businesses with zero state influence and control and is thus a type of decentralised planning – the exact opposite of state capitalist Soviet Russia,Cuba,Maoist China etc and more in line with the ideals of Bernie Sanders.Put simply it is the workers themselves not the state that runs everything hence the term workers revolution in relation to socialism because it is to bring everything such as banks,farms and all businesses etc under the control of the workers themselves and prevent the state or bourgeoisie having any influence in their businesses.Thus a workers revolution to bring about socialism would have all enterprises be brought under complete control of the workers themselves and not the state hence why socialism implies social public ownership not state ownership.Why would Marx espouse through socialism have all enterprises be brought under control of the workers themselves when so called socialist hellholes had the state control the economy.Socialism or socialist thus does not imply government control of the means of production or the government gaining control of society or doing stuff it actually implies the exact opposite wherein workers gain control of the means of production,the workers gaining control of society including gaining control over the actions of the government and the workers doing stuff.These two things the state gaining control of the economy in state capitalism and the workers gaining control of the economy in socialism are two very completely different things altogether that are complete polar opposites yet so called adults are unable to tell the difference due to successful brainwashing.The state/government gaining control of the economy,means of production and society can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism not socialism or communism.State control of the means of production can only occur in state capitalism and is not socialism which is worker control of the means of production.You can have coops,private enterprises and state control in state capitalism but you can’t have private industry and state control in socialism.One involves state control of the means of production the other involves worker control of the means of production and these are two very different economic systems.Why would a workers revolution as espoused by Marx that aims to have all industries brought under worker control where they have a democratic voice in them have the end result be have their entire lives be controlled by the state just like the bourgeoisie?The only reason is that this can happen is that you’ve got an ignorant proletariat led by an even more ignorant charismatic leaders.Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Guevara as well as possibly Chavez likely used the words Communism and Socialism to describe their movements in order to gain support from the ignorant masses who had never read Marx for power and control especially to garner support for workers who left behind by the previous adminstrations capitalist economic system which led to corruption and them being screwed over thus you have charismatic leaders move in who want power and use the terms workers revolution to gain support from an entire class screwed over by the bourgeoisie.Even if Marx was taught in schools people were tricked into believing they would be eventually led to real classless communism or money making socialism even though they were always kept under authoritarian state capitalism.This how state capitalist dictators gain control of a populace you use oxymoronic language,pull the wool over the eyes of the ignorant especially when they have been screwed over by the bourgeoisie and then you promise them a socialist or communist paradise constantly yet give them suffereing,destitution,poverty and famine as well as subservience to the state through state capitalism.Hence why so many people who lived in so-called Socialist and communist countries still believe they are communist or socialist despite a strong presence of private enterprises making them state capitalism because the brainwashing and propaganda by the state capitalist government was so successful.This is how easy it is debunk rubbish by right wingers.Decentralised planning can take shape both in the context of a mixed economy as well as in a post-capitalist socialist and democratic socialist economic system.This form of economic planning implies some process of democratic and participatory decision-making within the economy and within firms itself in the form of industrial democracy.Socialism involves 100% of all business and enterprises as well as governments services such as healthcare and education etc run entirely by its workers in the form of cooperatives and collectives run entirely by the workers themselves with no CEOs or managers where all profits are shared equally and the states control and influence is extremely limited and relegated only to enacting laws and federal working regulations with whatever control it has is democratically decided upon all eligible voting citizens and workers.This means that the state cannot run any farms or businesses with it also involving the complete abolishment of all private enterprises and privatisation of any sector of the economy is to be completely abolished.The state in true socialism as advocated by 99% of socialists has limited control over society thus it cannot by its definition run any business,factory,farm or industry at all in any way at all the exact opposite of state capitalism in Maoist China and Soviet Russia and cannot interfere in or run any businesses or sectors of the economy and is only relegated to limited different roles such as enacting laws and different business regulations such federal minimum wages,working regulations and environmental regulations,taxes and in some cases nationalising sectors of the economy such as healthcare,resources such as oil but it’s role is limited with it being democratically controlled.Cooperatives and collectives can and do exist in capitalist system namely mixed economies in countries around the world but just because they exist doesn’t denote the country as socialist as virtually every country across the world has coops and collectives.If having coops and collectives makes a country socialist then America and most of Europe and Asia would be socialist.All so called socialist countries such as Venezuela,Maoist China,Soviet Russia did have coops and collectives but they were a small part of the economy with these countries having state control of the economy and private industry and private enterprises which cannot occur in a socialist country it can only occur in capitalism especially state capitalism.In a truly socialist country all business 100% of them would be cooperatives and collectives with zero private industry and private business and the state having zero control of the economy with any control it does have being extremely limited and democratically controlled with all of the states actions with regards to regulations,taxes,bailouts are democratically controlled means that the electorate public through democratic means ie public mandatory referendum in the form of the workers themselves has to authorise and even initiate each new tax laws,enterprise and environmental regulations to prevent the state becoming authoritarian.What this means is that there would be very few if any taxes all of which would be low and very few regulations that hinder the ability for people to set up new business and that hinder economic growth and the growth of businesses would exist with if possible almost none would exist with mainly environmental regulations,safety regulations and those that protect workers themselves would exist because all taxes and regulations would democratically decided by the workers themselves who be affected by it.In socialism all actions of the state such as taxes,bailouts,regulations etc on a federal level must be democratically decided by the electorate and in turn the workers.This eliminates cronyism and corruption by etc.As a result workers would have adequate protections,environmental protections would be kept,taxes would be low and it be extremely simple to start up a business and maintain it with zero state interference.It can nationalise sectors of the economy but it must if to be socialist have the the same non hierarchical structures present as in coops.Nationalisation as we will see technically is not socialism or public ownership as the nationalised entity is state operated not publicly owned.If nationalisation occurs,state ownership of farms,factories or any operation and interference it is a mixed capitalist economy because the government can only interfere in the economy in a capitalist or mixed economy it cannot do this in a socialist economy.Thus any action the state undertakes with regards to taxes,regulations,bailouts etc and any changes to the law must be democratically controlled by all eligible citizens – the state cannot do anything with regards to changes in the law as well as changed in the economy including new economic policies without authoritarisation by the general public through democratic processes such as refferendums.A country to be considered socialist must have zero state interference in the economy,it cannot control prices etc through a command economy,there must be zero state owned enterprises,it must have zero control of the means of production with no private enterprises and privatisation of the economy and have all businesses being coops,collectives etc with in reality their only being pure market socialism with their the possibility of mixed economies that have the presence of coops,collectives with socialist policies and ideals but these are at their base capitalist economies due to the presence of state run enterprises,nationalised institutions and private enterprises.State intervention through a planned economy can exist with command economies also present decided through democratic input.The second a single private enterprise,state interference,state owned business or privatisation occurs in a socialist country it is no longer socialist but rather a mixed capitalist economy.Any country that has claimed to be socialist or was labelled socialist was state capitalism,capitalism and mixed economies due to their being private competitors,nationalisation and government control of the economy.Variations can exist where the state does interfere in the economy and society but all of these interventions must be decided by democratic intervention.A country and politician can have or espouse socialist ideals from the various types of socialism and integrate them into a capitalist economy but that does not make them socialist or socialism.Socialist policies that can be integrated into capitalist systems that are mainly means to democratise the workplace,society etc in relation to labour and improve the working conditions of workers and aid in those unable to work due to physical incapacitatation,technological unemployment etc include the following such as raising the federal mimimum wage,universal basic income,universal healthcare,have some government laws and changes to the constitution passed by democratic majority vote,introduce and strengthen labour and trade unions,form cooperatives and collectives,introduce planned economies,increase the federal wage,social welfare programmes,having private enterprises boards of directors comprise of a set percentage of their workers etc but they are not socialism.They are meant to increase the wages of employees and democratise the workplace improving working conditions and reward hard work especially those who actually work hard.The wealthy especially CEOs are the subject of tax hikes in socialist policies in order to punish them because they do the least amount of work by sitting in their office all day long and extracting the surplus value of their employers labour who are doing all of the work the money from these tax hikes is then given to the people who actually work their assess of in each business through increases in the federal minimum wage etc.The more effective way to prevent a business going bankrupt in face of the federal minimum wages being raised and people losing their jobs as well as preventing prices going up especially independent mom and pop businesses is through turning a business into a cooperative and merging with other cooperatives of the same type and franchising your business through a merger with other similar mom and pop businesses or even merging with well established multinationals because cooperatives are exempt from the federal minimum wage due to the proportional profit wages measure with if they merge with enough cooperatives their employees could earn enough above the highest $15 an hour wage in capitalism at least equivalent to between $15- $50 an hour on average without losing profits because the profits are shared equally amongst workers.The federal minimum wage is and always been designed to aid workers of large multi-billion dollar companies whose CEOs make more than enough every year to afford an increase up to at least $15 a hour per low level employee and do the least amount of work in their companies and have at least enough savings in their bank account amounting to billions of dollars to keep them going forever since they employ nationally more people than independent mom and pop independent business with the laws affecting independent mom and pop businesses a knock off effect and likely the result of existing cronyism and over regulation that is in itself also intended to stunt their growth.Hence why you have socialist politicians as part of workers unions it is because their socialist policies are meant to improve the working conditions of the workers the people that are actually responsible for the success of the business in the first but don’t reap the benefits not the assholes sitting on there asses all day in their offices and mansions reaping off the rewards of the labour of their slaves.In otherwards it is meant to reward those who actually work their assess off to ensure that a business is successful.Hence the difference between socialism and capitalism – it is to bring business and society itself under the control of workers not of CEOs and have the workers gain the benefits of their labour not have CEOs gain the benefits of their workers labour.If you’re a capitalist and you’re a defender of hard working Americans you should be defending tax hikes on the wealthy because they are the lazy assholes who sit on their asses all day long and reap the benefits of their workers and you should be defending socialist policies because they are rewarding the actual people who do all of the work in the first place.That is why socialism involves all businesses being cooperatives that are controlled by their workers and have the states actions be under control of the workers with socialist policies in capitalist economies being present to at least somewhat democratitize the workplace and to an extent the state as much as possible and also improving the livelihoods and income of the workers while at the same time introduce democratic reforms to the state.CEOs whine about socialist policies because they are being punished for being lazy which is what they should be punished for.Sitting on your ass all day in an office does not qualify as work you really think Bill Gates,Jeff Bezos,Elon Musk work harder than all of their individual workers combined or individually?Yes they came up with ideas for services,products and companies but that’s about it they do little if any of the work and the people below them are doing all of the labourThe fact they do everything to extract as much money from their workers,for as much money as possible and treat them like shit shows they are not hard workers..90-95% of the work carried out in Tesla,Amazon,Microsoft is done by their employees who have no say I their working conditions.The socialist policies put forward by people like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are meant to improve the lives of those millions of hard working Americans conservatives like to whine about.This the hypocrisy of conservatives and capitalists who value hard work – they harp on about the value of hard work and those “hard working Americans” who are the ones actually doing all of the hard work in a business and yet whine about tax hikes on the wealthy,raising the federal minimum wages and other progressive socialist policies which are meant to improve the conditions and wages of those “hard working Americans” they venerate in the first place and punish the lazy fucks who sit in an office all day long doing nothing who these hypocrites they are actually defending.You are punishing the hard working Americans who are doing all the work responsible for the success of a business and rewarding the lazy fucks who sit on their asses in an office all day when it should the other way around which what actual socialist politicians are doing.This is cognitive dissonance..This why capitalism encourages laziness because shutting down socialist policies rewards the laziness of CEOs etc with it making things worse for those hard working American.Socialist policies are meant to reward the actual workers who are responsible for the success of a business and punish CEOs and managers who sit around all day doing nothing.Many capitalist countries have these policies and yet are not socialist thus introducing these socialist policies into a country does not make one a socialist or a make country socialist.The fact that you fail see this makes you a ficking hypocrite and idiot.Most countries that introduce socialist policies end up with less corruption,higher wages and better working conditions for employees.Socialism requires all actions of the state to be democratically decided upon and abolishement of all private enterprises in charge of worker owned cooperatives and collectives etc therefore policies of Hugo Chavez,Maduro and Bernie Sanders etc is not socialism,they are socialist policies that can function in the confines of a capitalist economy.Socialism and socialist policies are two completely different things one is an economic system while the other are economic policies again these are two different things as socialist policies can exist in both socialism and all types of capitalism thus making capitalism they are integrated into mixed economies.Particularly in the United States,the term socialisation,has been mistakenly used to refer to any state or government-operated industry or service (the proper term for such being either nationalisation,state owned corporations or municipalisation).It has also been incorrectly used to mean any tax-funded programs, whether privately run or government run, like in socialised medicine.If you cannot tell the difference between the two you’re a fucking idiot.Socialist policies like these trade unions,federal minimum wages such as a $15 federal minimum wage,social welfare etc exist in virtually every capitalist country in the world such as America,Britain,Ireland,mainland Europe,Asia,Africa etc yet these countries are not considered socialist.Thus a country having socialist policies does not make it a socialist country and it does not make a person a socialist.The purpose of socialist policies is to introduce policies and facets that are part of socialist economic systems that benefit the workers of companies into capitalist economies by improving working conditions and also increases their wages while punishing the lazy CEOs and managers those who sit in their asses all day long in their offices.It is to introduce aspects of socialism into a capitalist system and therefore social welfare and other government programmes are not socialism they are socialist policies.This includes formation of cooperatives either from scratch or converting existing private institutions into cooperative well as increases in the federal minimum wages,social welfare,creation of universal basic incomes etc and also have private institutions become hybridised with cooperatives they have a set number of their workers on their board of directors,tax hikes in the wealthy and tax cuts on the workers and lower income workers.It may also include social programmes that are meant to reduce poverty.Trade unions are key socialist policies as it is a policy that integrates aspects of cooperatives into private enterprises where workers lobby managers and CEOs to improve working conditions.Other socialist policies would include instigating laws on a federal level into the government such as introducing anti-corruption laws,those to eliminate cronyism and also remove over regulation that stunts the formation of new business and also even amendments to the constitution that allow for democratic process to for example vote in laws that changes the term limits of heads of state,those that eliminate corruption,eliminate over regulation and eliminate cronyism,those that eliminate monopolies etc and giving people more democratic power in the running of the state and issues that affect them.These other socialist policies are to introduce changes to the government on a federal level to allow the voting public have more democratic control over the government that is to eliminate cronyism,corruption,monopolies and have worker and other regulations decided democratically so as to improve the pay and working conditions of all workers in a country decided through democratic processes.Hence socialist politicians are part of parties that are the workers party.Just because socialist policies and facets of socialism exist in a country does not mean a country is socialist.Socialist policies such as social welfare,social programmes etc can exist in capitalist economies including state capitalist ones.These socialist policies existed to varying degrees in state capitalist Soviet Russia,Maoist China etc thus why they were erroneously called socialist economies.Socialist policies are to thus democratictize the workplace and the government and introduce facets of socialism into the confines of a capitalist economy to punish CEOs,corrupt politicians and reward the workers of the businesses and to all allow all laws and actions of the state or at least those with regards to business regulations to be decided by the workers and society at large.This is why the phrase “The main problem with socialism is that eventually you always run out of other peoples money” because by definition it actually capitalism not socialism in which this occurs in.Using taxpayers money to pay for things and over lending as well as letting the government run things is not socialism it is capitalism namely state capitalism as it can only occur in this economic system.The state taking control of anything of doing anything can only occur in state capitalism.That quote comes from Margaret Thatcher one of the worlds worst politicians with the economic literacy of an onion – a piece of shit who made efforts to eliminate trade unions,deregulation and other ridiculous economic policies that damaged the British economy all to favour the top wealthy 1% that it took decades to recover from not only that but the amount of people made unemployed by her actions and thus dependant on social welfare in otherwards tax payers and “other people’s money” actually increased under her administration and the years and decades after it because of her actions making her and anyone on the right who uses that quotes the biggest hypocrites I have ever met – her actions is what led more people to become unemployed and thus dependent on social welfare etc the very thing that she wanted to get rid of and her supporters deride as laziness and parasitism and what they believe socialism is.Her actions of being a selfish asshole is what led to what dumbass conservatives actually believe what socialism is – people becoming dependent on other people money in the form of social welfare.The dumbass who was quite possibly the most economically illiterate Buffon only to be surpassed by Donald Trump who came up with that genius quote her political and economic policies of being a selfish asshole are responsible for the biggest increase of people quite possibly in the entire span of human history or at least British history becoming unemployed and then dependent on social welfare which by taxpayers money essentially means other people’s money the very thing she and her supporters were and are against in the first place.The economic policies of the idiot who came up with that genius quote led to hundreds of thousands or millions of people ending up unemployed and then having to be reliant on social welfare which is taxpayers money or other people’s money..In fact it’s the economic policies of most conservative capitalists of being a selfish asshole usually ends up increasing the amount of people unemployed and forced into living on social welfare and other people’s money.Hypocrisy much?Then of course there was the genius idea to start an unnecessary war in the Falklands.Hence why you had millions of Britain’s jumping up and down for joy and celebrating her death when she died with them singing and dancing in the streets to the tune of “Ding,dong the witch is dead” and very few people praising or lamenting her.Few people mourned her death the majority of the country celebrated the fact that she finally croaked and for good reason her capitalist neoliberal policies scarred and damaged the British economy for decades to come.Its also the same reason you’ll have millions of Americans jumping up and down when Trump,Pelosi,Bolton and the entire RNC/DNC are going yo be locked up and tortured for the next few hundred million years.But on the plus side she did accept anthropogenic climate change and pushed for nuclear power.You are quoting the words of an economically illiterate tyrant.People who quite that line “The main problem with socialism is that eventually you always run out of other peoples money” from Margaret Thatcher ironically and hypocritically are quoting someone whose economic policies of deregulation and shutting down trade unions and other policies that favoured the wealth 1% led to an increase of people becoming unemployed and thus dependent on social welfare which is paid through taxpayers money or more correctly other people’s money.Therefore Thatcherism and indeed the policies of the conservatives in all countries including deregulation etc ironically and hypocritically always leads to massive spikes in unemployment and people becoming dependent on on taxpayers in turn other people money.Taxation is not theft it is punishing lazy ass fuck CEOs and managers who sit on their asses all day long and have that money diverted to the people in any actual business who do all of the work in the former the people underneath the managers and CEOs of increases minimum wages and other social programmes.The person who works the hardest in a business ie the actual workers themselves is the one who should earn the most not the asshole who sits in an office.Taxation is also not theft when you don’t pay taxes by having the luxury to work as a blogger in YouTube or pundit in OANN and Faux News etc and earn all your money through Patreon,Monitisation,advertising revenue and paychecks from PragerU etc which does not qualify as hard work.Taxation is meant to fund government services like the postal services,paying for infrastructure and carrying out illegal wars – I mean spreading freedom therefore making them investments.You pay taxes and in return you get services paid back to you – this is kindergarten level crap.All of you conservative idiots on Fox News who were and still are banging the drums of war for Afghanistan,Iraq and Iran,Syria,Venezuala think about this for a second where the do think the money comes from to pay for these imperialist wars – I mean spreading freedom it has to come from the taxpayers and the fact that you are pushing not to have the wealthy pay their fair share and expect the middle and low income sectors of society to pay for these freedom spread on wars is why it boggles the kind why people especially conservatives defend this nonsense.Furthermore considering the fact that the Afghanistan cost so much and was wasteful in taxpayers money don’t you think it would have better to have had the private sector carrying out these illegal wars in first place why is that wasting trillions of taxpayers dollars for the military is acceptable but not on healthcare etc.Why is it that the military is only thing funded by and run by the government.Shouldnt private corporations be funding and managing the military and illegal wars since you know they are meant to be more money efficient and less sloppy as well eliminating the need for taxpayers footing the bill?If private corporations are only allowed to run healthcare because it would waste taxpayers money why is that taxpayers money is wasted on the military instead of the military being privatised.Perhaps then you could spend the trillions of dollars wasted on spreading freedom in Afghanistan etc to be spent on providing universal healthcare,a high speed rail system,ending homelessness as well as social programmes to help those who cannot work for whatever reason and also put towards improving a crumbling infrastructure.Taxes are not theft – they are an investment as they are spent on government services that are then paid back to the taxpayers by providing services to the taxpayers such as healthcare,postal services and maintenance of infrastructure thus not making taxes not theft but rather an investment.Profit in a capitalist system is theft as you have managers and CEOs extracting the surplus value from his workers as he gains a large percentage of the profits for doing nothing and his workers get a flat wage which is scraps that means they are paid a flat wage instead of a higher fluctuating wage in socialism.Profit in socialism is not theft because the profits are shared equally between all workers for their work.These socialist policies are to integrate aspects of socialism such as democracy,trade unions and better working conditions into a capitalist economy and introduce socialist institutions into the workplace to punish lazy CEOs and reward the hard working people who are responsible for the success of business and on a federal level introduce legislation that introduces democracy into the government allowing both workers and citizens to vote on important legislation that eliminates corruption,cronyism and over regulation that stunts the growth of workers and small and new business.This is the exact opposite of what corrupt politicians and corporations intertwined with them want and so they will run smear and disinformation campaigns by comparing them to the bullshit definitions of socialism and communism and state capitalist China,Russia etc and end all and any attempts to shut down these reforms thus keeping things the same as they are so as to prevent any real change to society and thus keep the rich rich and poor poor.People in Congress,the military industrial complex,big pharma,fossil fuel companies and the mass media in the form of Fox News,CNN etc are in power because they thrive on corruption,cronyism and over regulation to keep their power structures in place and so actual attempts of introducing socialist policies by progressives and the work of state capitalist Venezuala etc that had socialist policies that are to designed to remove corruption,cronyism and over regulation are shut down with propaganda and smear campaigns by using propaganda and misunderstandings of Marxist from the Cold War.This is Cols War era politics with Cold War era propaganda in the 21st century.If you don’t understand this your as thick as a lamppost,have the intellectual and maturity capacity as a kindergartener and are part of this Orwellian nightmare.This is why it drives up me up the wall everytime when conservative and libertarian pundits decry progressives like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocazio Cortez as “communist” or “socialists” in the bullshit definition and yet they at the same time want small government and hard working people to be rewarded for hard work,want to get rid of over regulation,corruption and cronyism etc which is the exact same thing that Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocazio Cortez are trying to institute.Nationisalisation which is when the government gains control of an industry and sector of the economy is the exact opposite of socialism and can only occur in capitalism.Social welfare etc is not socialism it can be described as a socialist programme or policy and can only occur in capitalism or possibly it could be present in true market socialism democratically controlled by the electorate with simply being taking taxes and giving it to those who currently unable to work with social welfare existing in virtually every single capitalist country across the world.Having a social welfare programmes and other social programmes is not socialism if this were true then every single country on the planet would be socialist and not capitalist – this is not true just like how every single country in the world that has nationalised healthcare which is what Bernie Sanders wants to do would be by the logic of conservatives mean every capitalist country in the world is now automatically socialist – this is not true.All actions of the state within socialism must be democratically decided upon meaning the state cannot enact any new taxes,bailouts,regulations and even laws that infringe on the rights of citizens and affect the economy and businesses in any way whatsoever without authorisation through democratic processes and also cannot legally carry out curfews,mandatory processes and also any crackdowns on civilians without democrat authorisation thus meaning all actions of the state must be democratically decided.Any time any draconian law is enacted it can be legally repealed by democratic process and the state in a socialist system must therefore be legally obliged to obey the democratic processses under the control and will of the electrorate not the other way around thus the democratic processes present in a socialist system are present to prevent the rise of tyrannical dictatorship.Thus even if draconian laws are enacted they can be repealed with ease through democratic processes.If the state enacts any laws especially draconian ones that infringe on the rights of the citizen without democrat control then it is not socialism its state capitalism.The state if it does anything without democratic input it can be through legal means such as holding democrat elections etc overthrown and replaced by a new adminstrations.If refferendums do not have the desired effect one wants then democratic institutions always exist to Uniate counter refferendums and persuade peoples opinions to change their minds.Thus the purpose of socialism is to democratise both the workforce and the state by ensuring the populace has complete control of the actions of the state to prevent the rise of tyrannical dictators,corruption,cronyism and oligarchies and plutocratic governments.By doing this the state is prevented from infringing on the rights of individuals and infringing on the economic prosperity and growth of the average citizen which is the exact thing most idiot libertarians and anarcho capitalists want because all actions of the state whether it is new taxes,regulations and all laws are to be democratically decided upon by the general public of which the workforce comprises of with in certain versions of socialism popular initiative used by the voting public used to initiate these laws and regulations.This eliminates corruption,overregulation and cronyism both in the workplace and society as a whole.That is the purpose of both democracy and socialism something the majority of idiot libertarians,conservatives and capitalists seem to be against.Socialism is to preserve and integrate democracy and democracy is not a tyranny of the majority it is to prevent a tyranny of the minority by having the majority(the voting populace) control the actions of the minority(the state) to ensure that it carried out actions that best interests of society.If a tyrannical dictatorship does arise within a socialist system they are legally obliged to be removed from office through legal means such as initiating elections and referendums or through coups and international intervention.Though this is highly unlikely because stated the state is under complete control of the constitution and also the power of democratic processes.Thus the purpose of socialism,socialist politicians and socialist policies and even capitalist systems that integrate socialist policies so as to keep the states control of society under the control of the populace itself and democratise the workplace thus preventing the rise of tyranny with the end goal of communism is to eliminate the state altogether.If you actually read Marxist literature or looked these terms up on Wikipedia you’d know this.Tyranical dictorships such as to a degree under Maduro/Chavez etc and to full extent the Mao,Lenin,Stalin,Castro,RNC/DNC are thus only present and can only occur in capitalist systems because they are designed to harbour the growth of plutocrats,oligarchs and corrupt classes as well as corporations gaining control of the government in the form of lobbyists and corruption and this is Dione overthrowing democracy – get that through your thick skull.These were state capitalist because private enterprises existed,the state enacted regulations without democratic processes and also the workers had no meaningful control in the workplace in both state and private enterprises,despite cooperatives existing but the extent of their power was limited to themselves and not the actions state.No amount of reform through the wishful thinking of the retarded libertarians and anarcho capitalism can change that fact.Capitalism in all of its forms such as laissaz faire capitalism,state capitalism,anarcho capitalism etc thrives on the quashing of democracy and actual economic and civil liberty and freedom because democracy is eliminated and it is through democracy that corruption,cronyism and over regulation is eliminated thus capitalism is the only system that leads to corruption such as in 20th/21st century America,Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge which is the very basis of it meaning it boggles the mind why people always vote against their own self interest by voting for republican and corporate democrats in both the DNC/RNC and not progressives.The whole purpose of capitalism is to remove democracy from the workplace and society by ensuring a wealthy elite consisting of profit seeking CEOs,their lobbyists and corrupt politicians can control all aspects of society by influencing regulations of politicians and are kept wealthy despite doing almost nothing while a large majority of people are keep poor despite doing all of the work which is the exact opposite of both socialism and communism.This is why you have corruption,cronyism,over regulation in the economy exists primarily in capitalist countries especially those run by right wing conservatives and corporate democrats because by removing democratic control of the states actions you end up with politicians being open to corruption,cronyism and over regulation by the corrupting force of corporate lobbyists which is what socialist policies are meant to get rid of especially from the likes of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Bernie Sanders hand other progressives including Chavez,Lula,Morales and other “left wing dictators” in predominantly oil and fossil fuel rich countries.What people like Morales,Chavez,Cortez and Sanders are trying to it’s to introduce policies and democratic process in to the workplace and federal government that aid directly workers and punish lazy ass CEOs and corrupt politicians.It has nothing to do with “freedom” but ensuring profits for large monoploistic corporations who lobby to have the government put in regulations to crush new business and lobby to overthrow democratically elected politicians in oil rich nations who want to nationalise oil,gas etc to lift millions out of poverty with Everytime a democratically elected individual in oil etc rich nations and they make huge reductions in eliminating poverty the American government,big oil,military industrial complex and mainstream go on the same campaign that we need to overthrow these tyrannical socialist dictators for “freedom” and every time they succeed they install right wing dictators that end up being even more corrupt and carry out some of the worst human rights abuses and war crimes imaginable and suppress democracy and usually the country ends up being a complete bloodbath wherein all out chaos breaks out and the country is in worse shape than before the American government went in – Afghanistan,Iraq,Iran,Syria,Libya etc anyone?After said left wing dictator lifts millions of people of poverty you end up with a coup or shady election that installs a corrupt right wing politician that then reverses all of the previous adminstrations hard work.If you think this is acceptable evil you’re a piece of shit and you think that one must break a few eggs to make an omelette.Afghanisthan is a prime example 20 years wasted,millions of lives lost,$2,261,000,000,000 wasted that could have paid for universal healthcare forever,eliminated homelessness etc we we went in to take out the Taliban only to have the Taliban back in power alongside ISIL etc leaving us at square one with the Iraq war an equal disaster that brought us ISIlL,zero weapons of mass destruction and millions of lives lost again and the same for Libya and Syria which are now officially disaster zones.Yes Saddsm Hussein,Mohamadar Gadaffi,Assad were brutal dictators but at least their death toll was lower than the wars they were deposed in and also they kept country stable.People were kept in line by fear meaning there were little to no human trafficking etc in comparison to what they are now with this destabilising effect of American imperialism the main reason you have millions of homophobic,misogynistic refugees flooding into Europe and why you have lone wolf attacks in Europe and America is because you fucking around the Middle East for oil as top dog.You see what dictators do best is keep their citizens kept in line and the country somewhat peaceful and preventing it from descending into chaos.Iraq,Afghanisthan,Syria etc under dictators were kept in a somewhat stable situation and peace yet every single time American comes for the liberation oil,I mean “freedom” you always end with said country becoming a lawless hellhole that descends into complete chaos,political vacuums allow even worse dictators like ISIL to move into power who openly execute people in public including Americans and the country ends up being a complete bloodbath and is in worse shape not only before you went but in worse shape then it ever has been and you always end up with millions of refugees wanting to flee said hellhole that have no choice but to flee into Europe and Asia with nowhere else to go who are not accustomed to the different social mores of the western world and are thus likely misogynistic,homophobic,rapists that the left is forced to tolerate them in order to not stoke the hornets nest even further and prevent things getting worse and you always end with more lone wolf terrorist attacks in the west.Dictators have to keep their country in a peaceful state otherwise they would be deposed and the country would descend into chaos – Saddam etc were murdering their people etc but they killed nowhere near the amount killed in the Iraq,Syrian,Libyan etc war caused by American imperialism,those after the these illegal wars or that of the Coronavirus and the country was at least somewhere geopolitically stable.You hate lone wolf terrorist attacks,Muslims and the left tolerating the intolerant then you only have yourself to blame because this only happens because of American imperialism for oil.The fact you fail to see that makes you an idiot.You could at least be somewhat better at planning out your coup detats and have somewhat better exit strategies and better puppet governments.Perpetual warfare and the quashing of democracy is what capitalism thrives on to survive whereas socialism a and socialist policies from socialist politicians are meant to eliminate this completely.If you can defend that then you are now different than Hitler,Stalin,Mao,Saddam etc or just about anyone else.The whole purpose of socialist laws and policies etc is to introduce legislation that integrates democratic control to the government on a federal or even state level thus removing corruption,cronyism and over regulation.Since the state by its very nature in a capitalist system is corrupt due to the lack of democracy and cooperatives are quashed by corporations ad the predominant institutions in capitalist systems then the role of socialist policies from socialist politicians is to introduce democracy into the workplace and into the government in order to eliminate corruption,cronyism etc and introduce legislation that aims improves the working condition old workers since workers themselves cannot do because of the undemocratic conditions of capitalism.The corruption and cronyism on Washington is because of capitalism not socialism becomes corporations and their lobbyists are allowed to influence the actions of the state and not the workers etc through democracy.As long as corporations exists then tyranny,plutocrats,oligarchs,cronyism,poverty,censorship,warfare and corruption will exist and democracy and civil liberties will no longer exist because corporations by their very nature will always have in place through lobbyists be able to gain control of the government.Socialism avoids this by having corporations replaced by cooperatives and ensuring that all actions of the state including bailouts,regulations,taxes etc are democratically controlled by the population thus eliminating them altogether with them if they do occur would be those that favour small business and the average citizen and the nature of them controlled by the workforce.If you are a defender of capitalism you are a defender of poverty,warfare,corruption,censorship,authoritarinism etc and not freedom because these are always the end result of capitalism as seen with the Khmer Rogue,Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Venezuela and corporate America and the only way for these to be eliminated to adopt socialism and ultimately an extent accept the inevitable arrival of minarcho technocratism and communism.This is why George Orwell was a democratic socialist or democratic capitalist and not a capitalist because he saw how it always inevitably brings about tyranny through the state being corrupted by corporations.As long as corporations exist then the state will always be corrupted by lobbyists to push through regulations,taxes and laws that favour their dconomic interests.The over regulation and cronyism on Congress is not socialism its capitalism at its base purpose if you don’t see that you’re an idiot.Thus socialist policies are put in place to help small business and eliminate corruption,cronyism and over regulation.Thus authoritarianism,censorship,tyrannical dictatorships are a conservative and capitalist phenotype not a liberal,communist or socialist one.Sectors of the economy such as healthcare,oil\gas\energy that is usually nationalised in capitalist systems cannot be socialism as it is like all business is managed as a cooperative that is run by all workers with government agencies being rather limited and them even run entirely as cooperatives or hybrids of conventional government agencies with in some cases most government agencies not present.They can be variants that include state agencies that are quasi cooperatives that are hybrids between cooperatives and conventional government agencies in how they are run and structured with it likely them being run by competing cooperatives or those that act on a federal level.These sectors in true socialism would rather than being managed by a state agency would be managed by a large federal cooperative consisting of all buildings associated with that sector forming a singular cooperatives ie in healthcare all hospitals would be merged together and all profits from all hospitals in a country would be shared between all doctors,surgeons and nurses in a country with for energy it would involve all power plants merged and all profits from the use of electricity shared amongst all power plant employees or they would be run like a business where each building part of each sector would be turned into cooperatives ie healthcare would have each hospital and clinic run as competing cooperatives that have all hospitals sharing profits amongst all doctors,nurses etc with them forming mergers with other hospitals and again power plants being separate cooperatives that share profits from electricity bills with the former being federal cooperatives that would only work on a singular federal level while the latter involving cooperatives not working on a federal that could form merged with cooperatives in other countries with them also unlike the former able to lower prices etc via competion.With regards to state control of society and economy it can be through the state having different levels of control there is it is always democratically decided upon with the change from one type of socialism to next always done democratically.Even the most authoritative forms of socialism do not involve state control of enterprises and it still has enough democratic control to allow transition to more democratic less authoritarian subtypes to be allowed and also allow the state to have limits over the freedoms of everyday citizens in terms of civil liberties and economic freedoms.In otherwards in the most authoritarian forms of socialism the state is still democratically controlled and still has limits with regards to how it interferes in the economy and both the economic freedoms and civil liberties and it can be removed from office and the type of socialism present being able to be changed to more democratic less authoritive versions with ease with these again all democratically decided upon.There are still democratic processes built into the most authoritarian subsets of socialism in order to remove any corrupt officials from office,remove draconian laws etc and change to other more democratic forms of socialism.This means a country can change from one form of socialism to another very easily through democratic processes as even the most authoritarian versions of socialism still have enough democratic processes in them to allow for them to be changed into more democratic versions with less government control and remove from offices and imprison dictators.That is the purpose of true socialism it is keep all of society such as the economy and the state itself under complete control of the workers themselves not the state hence the term workers revolution because it is to bring the economy and society itself into direct control of the workers not the state and in fact limit the states control of the economy and society to the point that it is inevitably to dissapear completely into oblivion hence the term withering away of the state.Hence the phrase it wasn’t real socialism because in all state capitalist countries such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc the state not the workers had control of the workplace and society itself.Thus there are no authoritative forms of socialism where the state has complete control of society it is always even in the extreme forms where the government has increased control completely democratic containing enough democratic processes to allowfor any tyrannical or corrupt governments to be removed from office through legal means and more democratic less authoritarian forms of socialism can be installed in place of these authoritarian versions by the voting public.Authoritarian governments can thus only occur occur and take place within capitalist economic systems not socialist or communist systems.Some types of socialism involves the government having decreased control of the economy with others having almost no government presence with money and cooperatives still being present ie anarcho socialism.Democratic socialism as espoused by Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is not a type of socialism it is in fact a form of capitalism as the state is allowed to nationalise sectors of the economy and private enterprises are allowed to exist which is not allowed in socialism.In democratic socialism each private business must have a set number of its board of directors consist of a set percentage of its workers say between 20-50% thus allowing the workers have a democratic say its operations but they are still not cooperatives and they the economic system is not socialist it is capitalist again because private enterprises,nationalisation and state owned enterprises are allowed to exist something which cant exist in any type of socialism.The control of the government over private enterprises is just as limited in free market capitalism making no different than neoliberalism and the capitalism of Donald Trump etc as the state can only do the same things as it can in other forms of capitalism such as set down regulations with the key differences being it is mandatory for healthcare and education to government run and all private enterprises must have a set amount of workers on their board of directors roughly 20-50% to ensure that workers have a say in how they are run.The same by laws of business such as boom and bust cycles,invisible hand of the market determine the fate and success of businesses and supply and demand etc seen in neoliberalism and free market capitalism are allowed to exist in socialism especially market socialism.Due to the presence of private enterprises which is not allowed in socialism,democratic socialism as espoused by Bernie Sanders etc could be considered a form of capitalism not socialism and might as well be called democratic capitalism.Therefore Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocazio Cortez are capitalists not socialists or communists.Decentralised planning of the economy in true market socialism espoused by 99% of socialists allows the spontaneous nature of prices,choices made by consumers,supply and demand,markets and boom and bust cycles determine the fate of business etc just like in laissez-faire,libertarian,free market capitalism meaning the state cannot plan the economy as in state capitalism.Mergers,acquisitions,takeovers of businesses that occur in capitalism can also take place in socialism.Thus the same laws and by laws of businesses that exists in free market capitalism would still exist in socialism particularly market socialism such as boom and bust cycles,allowing the invisible hand of the market to determine the fate and succes of businesses as well as allowing business to compete amongst each other is still allowed in all forms of socialism especially market socialism but the difference is that CEOs and managers don’t exist with all businesses being worker cooperatives and collectives run by their employees allowing profits to be shared within the confines of each businesses thus meaning each business is still allowed to compete with other businesses.All departments of private enterprises exist such as marketing departments,accounting,research and development etc except they work together collaborativily and democratically rather under the directions of a corporate CEO.The ownership of the means of production can be based on direct ownership by the users of the productive property through worker cooperations or commonly owned by all of society with management and control delegated to those who operate/use the means of production; or public ownership by a state apparatus.Public ownership refers to the creation of autonomous collective and cooperative institutions..Cooperatives and collectives are the predominant type of businesses in all forms of socialism.Some socialists feel that in a socialist economy,at least the ”commanding heights” of the economy must be publicly owned by the state though this is not a prequisite.Management and control over the activities of enterprises are based on self-management and self-governance,with equal power-relations in the workplace to maximise occupational autonomy.A socialist form of organisation would eliminate controlling hierarchies so that only a hierarchy based on technical knowledge in the workplace remains.In socialism all business would be either cooperatives and collectives where they would be run entirely by the workers themselves with no hierarchies as seen in corporations and state owned corporations in state capitalist Soviet Russia,Maoist China etc.Every member would have decision-making power in the business and enterprise and would be able to participate in establishing its overall policy objectives.The policies/goals would be carried out by the technical specialists that form the coordinating hierarchy of the firm, who would establish plans or directives for the work community to accomplish these goals.Collective ownership is the ownership of means of production by all members of a group for the benefit of all its members.A cooperative (also known as co-operative, co-op, or coop) is “an autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic,social,and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly-owned enterprise“.Cooperatives are democratically owned by their members,with each member having one vote in electing the board of directors if they exist or the board of directors consisting of the workers themselves.State enterprises may exist in nationalised or more correctly publicly owned enterprises.All enterprises and business in a true market socialist country would consist of only coops,collectives with zero state control of any business or means of production and zero private businesses and privatisation of the economy.All business,farms,factories etc are worker owned and thus operated and controlled by the workers themselves and not that state or privately owned.This means profits are shared equally and all workers have a democratic say in the operation of them such as working hours,working conditions etc as well as hiring and firing,the creation of new products to their portfolio and addition of new services and thus worker run with zero state control with each person having one vote.In socialism the same businesses and enterprises that provide the public with goods and services such as hotels,restaurant chains,retail outlets etc and manufactured products that exists in a capitalist systems also exist the difference is that is they are run differently with no hierarchical structures and profits are shared equally meaning the more money and profits a business or enterprise makes the more money each person as part of each one makes thus making everyone more richer the more money the business makes rather than the CEO and manager gaining an increase in wage in proportion to profits while everyone else is paid a flat wage.As a result in market socialism because profits are shared equally between all employees in each business the more profits a business makes each week,month,year the higher the wages of every employee in the business involved rises and the richer everyone gets.Thus workers may in their contract be rewarded a set percentage of profits based on their occupation or profits may be shared equally but in proper socialism whatever the contract is the wages of each employee as part of an enterprise and business rises and falls in response to the overall profits and success of a business encouraging them to work harder as the more successful and profitable it is the more each employee is paid every week,month,year and thus causes them to be more competitive with other business as like in capitalism the socialist businesses are constantly competing with each other for market share and profits.By having wages set by the sharing of profits that rises and falls in proportion to how much profits are made every year this negates the need for a federal minimum wage as successful cooperatives would provide on average yearly wages of at least $100,000 – $1,000,000 or more which is currently paid by white collar workers which would cause those with low profits and wages to either decide to go bankrupt or merge with a successful one to increase wages.If a person is sloppy and lazy then everyone else suffers in the workplace and customers lose interest,then the business loses profits and everyone’s wages including that sloppy person falls as a result – this forces people to make an extra effort to please customers and increase productivity and from a capitalists viewpoint this system would negate the need for a federal minimum wage as instead of businesses going bankrupt from having to pay a flat high federal minimum wage such as the proposed $15 minimum wage the profits of all employees even a CEO and manager in a democratic socialist system espoused by Bernie Sanders etc where this could work would make him profits alongside his employees getting higher wages in proportion to higher profits.Since all profits of cooperatives and collectives are shared equally amongst all workers the more successful and thus profitable a business becomes the higher the wages for all workers becomes making everyone richer with the more unsuccessful it becomes and the lower the profits fall then the lower wages for everyone becomes forcing workers to put in that little bit extra effort in pleasing customers and the each other by being more polite,preventing mistakes,providing more and better products and services,being on time and not making any mistakes that would drag the business down and increase worker satisfaction as they know that if they work harder and don’t screw up then their wages will go up and they will become richer.It would even encourage them to work longer hours and extra shifts.This in contrast to capitalism and privately owned businesses where asides from the CEO or manager who is the only person whose wages rises in proportion to the profits all other employees under him are paid a single flat wage every week,month and year that always stays the same causing them to lose interest in pleasing themselves,each other and customers etc as they are doing the same boring repetitious work for the same flat wage and as a result get cranky and are prone to mistakes and always lobby their boss for raises,better working conditions,holidays,maternity leave as well as not to push for automation and outsourcing jobs to third world countries and lobby politicians for higher taxes on their wealthy bosses to fund higher worker benefits and federal minimum wages,form trade unions etc.This is the exact opposite of both what their wealthy bosses want,what is present in cooperatives and collectives and of socialism and is why you have so many people hating their job and their employers and why you have have such a large anti capitalist and anti globalist sentiment amongst liberals especially progressives.In a purely market socialism economy consumers would still have the same wide variety and choice of services such as competing hotels,restaurants,shops,enterprises etc including franchised ones and independent ones and the same wide variety of manufactured goods such as vehicles(Porsches,Ferrari’s,BMWs,Mercedes Benz),electronics(smartphones,4K televisions,video game consoles),clothing and food(fizzy drinks,juice drinks,alcoholic drinks,pizzas,ready meals,crisps,chocolate bars,breakfast cereal),restaurants(Burger King,McDonalds,Wendy’s and diffferent ethnic cuisine restaurants),websites(YouTube,Facebook,Onlyfans,adult pornography sites) etc as in a capitalist society that compete against each other for money from consumers but the difference is that CEOs and managers dont exist as all enterprises and businesses are cooperatives and collectives with zero state control and they are democratically run by all workers in a non hierarchical structure with them having less staff via managers,CEOs and board directors eliminated by being unecessary with profits shared equally amongst all workers.The state has no interference in their every day to day running.The absence of CEOs etc means workers are not paid a flat wage every week or every year but rather their wages constantly fluctuates in response to the success and failure of the business as profits are shared across all employees.As a result the more profits and more successful a business is then the higher the wages of everyone goes up and the richer each employees becomes this forces people to work harder,be more polite and be better workers overall as it means if they keep and gain more customers then their wages will go up but if they are.,lazy and sloppy then the business suffers and their wages go down and they lose their job.The less successful a business is the lower the wages of workers forcing them to work harder and compete with their competitors as in socialism cooperatives are allowed to compete with each just as the same way do in capitalism.This incentivises people to work harder,make less mistakes,be more polite and not screw up because if they do then their wages decrease.Worker review programmes do still exist but there is a better incentive to improve ones performance.The profit motive still exist but the profits are shared equally between all workers and not just one person.This eliminates federal minimum wages completely as it reflects a persons hard work and also because the proportional rise in wages is for successful business is always more than any federal minimum wage that could exists that eats into the revenue of CEOs etc and forces them to raise prices as higher minimum wages leaves less money for the CEO with most cooperatives that are successful would have wages be between $51.50 – $1,590 an hour.Increaases in wages do not eat into profits because the profits are shared equally between all workers as wages.Furthermore since profits are shared amongst all employees equally then a person may not have to work too many days or shifts as they may only need to work one or two shifts a week each lasting as little to one to eight hours and still become wealthy particularly in large multinationals that are successful with some even through computers etc allowing them to wotk from home such as accounting and those that manage stock.They may even have longer holidays such as three month summer holidays and two to three weeks for Easter,Christmas etc.One will still be paid for profits earned during days of the week and months of the year they are not working ie one will earn wages from profits earned during weekends and during the summer and Christmas etc that are allowed time off thus one may only have to work a small fraction of the time that they do in capitalism and yet still be earning exponentially higher wages.The fact that all wages based on profits are shared equally means a person would make exponentially more money for fewer working hours each week with the business expanding through mergers and franchising or even buying out competitors.This is again because they are given wages based on profits incurred by the business for every days of the week and year they are not working meaning a person can make exponentially more money every year despite working less with a person wages based on the profits of the business and not how many hours they work every week.Peoples wages are based on the profits of the businesses and not based on how many hours a week or year they work,what type of work is done or whats written in any legal contract meaning a person can become at least well off enough to survive or even be very wealthy and at least earn between $50,000 – $200,000 a year when working for a mid sized cooperative despite only working only one or two days a week,once a fortnight or once a month with automation etc possibly meaning they can become even more wealthy for working only once every few months and once every year.As a result of this shifts can be only a few hours roughly half as long as normal ones in a capitalist system with the opening hours also shorter especially at weekends.A person will get wages simply for being hired and will be paid profits earned throughout the entire year not from the amount of hours they work meaning from a single cooperative one may get the same amount of wages if they worked one day than if they work five days a week.Furthermore retail cooperatives may also branch out into online retail more often in order to lessen the working hours for employees and opening hours for physical stores since they would have all work done by the customer.One may only have to even be employed by a cooperative for a few months or weeks and then quit to earn this much.A person will work exponentially less but will be earning exponentially more money.To increase ones wages exponentially one can thus work for several different cooperatives each day of the week as much as three to seven different cooperatives and still have significantly long holidays as one will be given shares of the profits from three to seven different cooperatives earning at least $200,000 – $1,000,000 a year way more than the $31,200 – $50,000 a year or less that most Americans would earn.If possible one could work for as much as a dozen or even hundred different cooperatives at a time during the year that are in the same town,village,city,state or country by travelling between them using their second homes or staying briefly at the homes of friends and family and also using cheap hotels and motels or using computer networks and phones work from home for accounting,secretary work or similar occupations for multiple cooperatives around the world woth one working for one of each different dozen or hundred cooperatives one or two days a week with software doing the most time consuming and boring work with them still having sizeable breaks such as long summer holidays etc with them only working for each of these one hundred different cooperatives one day of the year leaving at least 265 days of the year free for holidays such as birthdays,anniversaries,Christmas holidays each a month long with summer holidays lasting three months and still be earning the shared profits of each of these individual separate one hundred cooperatives combined despite only doing the most time consuming and boring work with them still having sizeable breaks such as long summer holidays etc with them only working for each of these one hundred different cooperatives one day of the year leaving at least 265 days of the year free the majority of it at least 72% of the year free for holidays such as birthdays,anniversaries,Christmas holidays each a month long with summer holidays lasting three months and still be earning the shared profits of each of these individual separate one hundred cooperatives combined despite only doing at least only a few hours a day for each shift in each cooperatives because as stated even doing a few hours a day one will be given a share of all profits from all cooperatives they work for over the year combined thus exponentially increasing their incomes with again this being low skill work that doesn’t require college degrees such as working in Wall Mart,McDonalds and all major corporations worldwide.One would work only at most 3-4 months of the year and have at least 8-9 months of the year free from work to spend with friends,families and pets thus allowing one to have exponentially much more free time with families and still have exponentially more time with families etc with them using computer networks and phones to work some if not most of the four months of work from home saving on transportation costs and be able to spend spare time with home and familial responsibilities democratic process could allow one to decide and plan out ahead which days,weeks or months of the year one would have free with each worker having different rotas for each cooperatives.One could have a wide variety of jobs that require different skills and tasks thus giving one variety and preventing one becoming bored of the same repetitive tasks and preventing them bringing each cooperative down as they would be working in each one only one day of the year.Since they would be working in each job only once a year or even month then they if sick or sloppy due to any reason they will not bring the business down and will not risk themselves getting fired and if sick they can have a replacement and spend their free time sick.Since working in different cooperatives only once a year and for at most a few years then this means that they of having a bad day will not drag the cooperatives revenue and ranking down at all.A persons employee review will be almost non existent as they will only be working for a specific cooperative omce a week,month or even once a year.Each person in order to gain 10-1,000 times more money than normal in a capitalist system that is at least $312,000 – $56,000,000 a year would in socialism only need to work only one day a year for a single successful multinational cooperative since they are legally guaranteed an equal share of the cooperatives profits by working just one day of the year because of working that one day they are are automatically allowed legally an equal share of the business profits.That means people would have to work exponentially less than normal and to enjoy an upper class lifestyle on par with the upper middle class would only have to work only one day of the year every year and would have 364 days off holidays.This earning $312,000 – $56,000,000 for working one day of the year would apply for low skill jobs in corporations like McDonald’s,Wall Mart and Amazon wherein one was working flipping burgers,wotking as a cashier,working as a store greeter and working in a relay centre – in a capitalist system they would have work nine months of the year for 10 – 1,000 years to earn this much that is to earn at least $312,000 – $56,000,000 because they would earn only $31,200 a year at least possibly $56,000 a year.This would also mean that other high skilled people in jobs that need college degrees or even basic training who feel underpaid such as doctors,lawyers,prison guard or police officer or YouTuber who wanted to make a little extra on the side and a large boost would also just work one day in McDonald’s,Wall Mart to get an extra $312,000 – $56,000,000 boost to their income.A person in a socialist system would be able to live a lifestyle on par with the upper middle class and even wealthy elite and live in mansions or billionaires row the most expensive neighbourhood in the world and yet only work one day a year in low skill jobs such as for Amazon and McDonalds.However this fact would in fact encourage people to work more and in fact work for multiple cooperatives every year with them working for each one one day a year as doing so would increase their wages exponentially.As a result of this one can exponentially increase their wages every year by working for multiple cooperatives during the year.People would shop around for cooperatives that are profitable and thus have higher wages.The more cooperatives they work for even for just one day every year the higher their wages and incomes rise exponentially every year because they gain the combined wages that are the result of profits that are equally shared from each individual cooperatives they work for.Thus getting a guaranteed share profits for one days work would in fact encourage people to work for multiple cooperatives every year as much as several dozen or a hundred because working for only one cooperative just for day of the year or even a hundred days of the year would only make them so much while working for multiple cooperatives as much as a dozen or hundred each one day of the year would increase their wages,income and wealth exponentially every year because they would gain the equal share of profits from multiple cooperatives and not just one.This would rather than have people work only one day to get a modest income would encourage people to in fact work more every year thus incentives hard work more so than in capitalism and is a good safety net if one cooperative goes out of business,one gets fired and adopts more automation as they have others to fall back on and can have some time to look for extra cooperatives to work for..If one is to be fired they will still be legally guaranteed a share of that cooperatives profits for the year at the end of the year with them also unable to drag down a cooperatives performance or wages if they sloppy etc since they would only work for each one once day a year.This legal guarantee could be a federal regulation voted by the voting populace or be part of each cooperative due to the democratic processes because in socialism all working regulations are voted and decided by the populace including workers.Computer networks could be used to do other work from home such as secretarial work,accounting,customer service work etc and any work that needs to be done involving computers during their eight months off with software doing the most time consuming and boring work of the four months of work from home saving on transportation costs and be able to spend spare time with home and familial responsibilities democratic process could allow one to decide and plan out ahead which days,weeks or months of the year one would have free with each worker having different rotas for each cooperatives.Computer networks could be used to do all of their jobs including software work and allow them to oversee and control highly automated and computerised factories,relay centres,accounting work etc.Using computer networks could allow a person to not only work from home but work for a dozen cooperatives at once for one day thus exponentially increasing the companies they work for and exponentially increase their wages and income every year.Automation would exponentially increase productivity and exponentially lower the amount of labour one does thus exponentially increasing profits and there fore increase wages while also exponentially decreasing working hours and exponentially lowering the amount of hours ones works every day.On days one is not working one could use Onlyfans and vlogging on YouTube to gain extra money through Monitisation and Patreaon.As a result of working one day a year for different cooperatives as much as a dozen or a hundred different cooperatives throughout the year a person would be legally guaranteed given wages that are an equal share of each separate business profits thus ones wages would increase exponentionally every year for working for different cooperatives instead of working for just one especially when automation is adopted and them earning at least $312,000 – $56,000,000 a year with due to automation one would work for only a few hours a day less than the 8 hour 9-5 rota doing mostly work that would not be laborious or dangerous thus eliminating fears of getting overworked etc meaning a person would work exponentially shorter hours but be earning exponentially more money and wages.This would disincentive laziness and encourage people to find work at dozens or hundreds of cooperatives throughout the year as the promise of exponentially higher wages for working for multiple cooperatives would incentivise people to work more to get increased wages and thus allow them to retire much earlier than normal as early as 13-32 and thus spend more time with families and be able to start families as early as 22..In a capitalist system people who work multiple jobs only work a flat wage and only do so because their employers have other people to hire and this can’t hire the same person for the same job all the time.If a person worked one day a year for a hundred different cooperatives with them working for one cooperative one day a year spaced out together then its likely their wages would increase to between $31,200,000 – $5,600,000,000 a year meaning they would only have to work for at most 10 years and at least 1-5 years to gain a sizeable retirement fund of at least several million or several hundred million dollars and retire much earlier than normal between the ages of 14-30 and only have to work only thee months a years.Those who work for 275 different cooperatives a year with three months holidays will earn between $85,800,000 – $15,400,000,000 a year and will earn about $858,000,000 – $154,000,000,000 in a decade.This would apply to those working in multiple cooperatives that include low skill jobs such as burger flipper at Mcdonalds,janitor,cashier and store greeter at Wall Mart etc who currently earn $31,200 – $56,000 a year or less.People in high skill jobs such as lawyers,prison guard,doctor and YouTuber etc who feel underpaid or want a slight boost in their income can take a year out of their job and then work these jobs for a year and then retire.This means that most Americans at least 60-80% who currently work in minimum wage jobs in McDonald’s etc would after 10 years in a socialist hellhole as espoused by those commie socialist dictators Nicolas Maduro Moros,Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Bernie Sanders by the time they retire in their early 20s would after working a decade as a janitor,flipping burgers and as a cashier could be worth at least $154,000,000,000 that’s 51.3 times wealthier than Donald Trump who is currently worth $3,000,000,000 who was born with a silver spoon shoved up his ass and never worked a single day of his life and would certainly be worth more all his demonic hellspawn and Melania and that little brat Kushner combined again who never worked a single day of their life.In a capitalist system they would need to work nine months of the year for 2,750,000 – 4,935,897 years to earn this much.One could even retire at 13-18 with several hundred million dollars.If possible it could be as high as $231,000,000,000 if they worked for very successful major cooperatives that made them $56,000,000 a year each if they worked an extra 5 years until the age of 27 making them wealthier than Mark Zuckerberg($51,400,000), Charles Koch($66,000,000,000),Sergey Brin($90,000,000,000), Warren Buffet($93,000,000,000),Larry Page($94,900,000,000),Bill Gates($103,000,000),Jeff Bezos($136,000,000,000) etc all for working as cashiers,flipping burgers,janitors,in relay centres in Amazon,McDonald’s and Wall Mart.In our current capitalist system they would make only $31,200 -$56,000 a year which would take them 4,125,000 – 7,403,846 years to make this much.This shows just how much Americans are being screwed over by voting for Republicans and Corporate Democrats and not progressives and how socialism outrumps capitalism.The remaining minority 20-40% would be multi millionaires with at least $100,000,000 – $900,000,000 in their bank account rather than scraping by on paycheck to paycheck.They could live with their parents until their early or mid 20s and when they retire they could buy their own luxury apartment or mansions etc and never work a single day ever again,enjoy a lavish lifestyle and leave sizeable inheritances for their children who would also be this wealthy and in turn could pass even exponentially more into the next generation – wheras in capitalism most people at this point would be graduating from college with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and would be starting from scratch on unpaid internships and then have their mortagage to worry about which would leave them and their children when they die in severe debt for most of their life if not forever.Very few Americans would be homeless,poor or scraping by on paycheck to paycheck and almost none would be going bankrupt when they get sick and need to pay medical bills and for lifesaving treatment and very few would be dying prematurely from preventable medical conditions.They would certainly be much wealthier than most liberal elites in Hollywood who are only worth a few million dollars who live in mansions and use private jets in capitalism with they themselves able to afford mansions and private jets.As a result most people between the ages of 13-22 could retire and never work again and buy or build a luxury home in an exotic tropical country or island or carry out luxury refurbishements and extensions on their existing homes and never worry about debts and going bankrupt from medical bills.Very few people would go to college with it only reserved for only specialist jobs such as medicine and law etc.The same would apply to most Europeans etc including in Britain,Ireland and across the developed world such as Austrailia,Russia etc.This is how Americans are constantly shooting them selves in the foot by voting for Republicans and Corporate Democrats and not progressives like Bernie Sanders because if America was a socialist hellhole then the vast majority of Americans would be either multi-millionaires and even billionaires after a decade or even a single year of work between the ages of 13-22 rather than scraping by on paycheck to paycheck.If your are Republican and you voted for Donald Trump etc and other republican people in congress and govenors abd you work multiple jobs in McDonald’s,Wall Mart and in Amazon just to barley put food in the table and pay bills you’re an idiot whose been brainwashed into believing propaganda spread by Faux News about kindergarten level understandings of economics etc.Sweatshop workers in Africa and Asia in the developing world who make clothing for garment industry,constructing smartphones etc which currently earn $180 – $365 a year by working for one cooperative could earn at least $1,800 – $365,000 a year by working for one cooperative but but if they work for a hundred cooperatives can gain up to $180,000 – $36,500,000 a year again only working three months a year and earning between $1,800,000 – $365,000,000 in a decade.If they work for 275 different cooperatives for one of the year and thus work for 275 days a year with three months holidays they could earn as much as $495,000 – $100,375,000 a year or $4,950,000 – $1,003,750,000 after a decade.In a capitalist system it would take them 27,500 – 2,750,00 years to gain this much.Working until 27 they could earn as much as $1,505,625,000 a year.This would be not as much as Americans but enough to lift themselves out of poverty and thrn buy a luxury apartment can then at 22 can decide to work for 10 years in McDonald’s etc to get $154,000,000,000 by the time they are 32.Once a group of people retire after 1-10 years then another group of people can work 1-10 years and in turn retire to allow another group of people.That would be enough to allow to buy their own luxury homes or even build them and again retire after 1-10 years.This is a very quick way to bring hundreds of millions or billions of people out poverty and into a lifestyle on par with the very wealthy in the West making them multi millionaires and even billionaires very quickly in as little as decade or even a year.Instead of a few thousand billionaires in the world there would be several hundred million or even a few billion billionaires in the world and the rest would be multi millionaires with several hundred million dollars in their bank accounts with almost no one living in poverty worldwide.Thus socialism is the only way to eliminate poverty.This system of getting a share of profits from multiple cooperatives would exponentially increase ones wages they get each year despite working exponentionally less and would encourage people to seek employment at multiple different cooperatives during the year thus keeping them working and not just work one or two days a week or year as one would be able to arrange schedules to get work for most of the year or a good portion in order to earn exponentially more money but still have enough time off of the year to enjoy time with family and ones hobbies.This would make the vast majority of Americans multi millionaires worth at least $100,000,000 and even billionaires by the time they reach their early twenties with this also applying to the developing world such as Africa and Asia eliminating poverty very quickly.In as little as a decade you would create hundreds of millions of multi millionaires and even billionaires thus lifting the entire population of the developing world out of poverty.So how exactly does socialism make everyone poor now when the vast majority of the population are now multi millionaires and billionaires?How is lifting hunfreds of millions of people and even billions of people out of poverty and making them multi millionaires and even billionaires evil and a bad thing?Most Americans in their early 20s in a capitalist system have just graduated college with hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt,indentured and indebted for life and are looking for their first jobs and probably still living with their parents due to this indebted servitude.Thus in socialism a person would be encouraged to work for different cooperatives each year as they will get their share from multiple cooperatives and thus the more more cooperatives they work for if even for one day the more money they will earn each year thus exponentially increasing their income every year for only work 100-275 days a year.Furthermore a person could do any job within a cooperative such as low skill labour that doesn’t need a college education such as cashiers,burger flippers and janitors etc and still get at $365,000 – $31,200,000 from each cooperative for working only one day.This thus gives one more flexibility in the type of jobs they can do rather than narrow fields that require college degrees meaning a person can do virtually any low skill jobs for only a few years and still become multi-millionaires.In capitalism a person even if they work for different corporations will not get an exponential increase in wages because instead of being paid a share of the profits from each company they are paid a flat wage for how many hours they work meaning working for different companies will pay the same as if they are working for only one company with the wages only being different for what type of job it is and not the success of the business thus further restricts those without college degrees.A person in capitalism will need a college degree that then specifies them for a specific job or narrow field of jobs and to earn anything above $31,200 a year.Even If they work for different jobs and some pay more per hour they are not much of an exponential increase because the value of their work is being extracted by their boss.This is because in capitalism a persons wages are determined by hourly wages and how long one works each day,week,month and year.Current capitalist system can bring people out of poverty but very slowly and it is usually through CEOs and managers exploiting workers meaning workers only get a small wage between $31,200 – $50,000 if dealing with the west with in Africa and Asia the wages being significantly less as little as $365 – $3,650 a year as most of the wealth goes to CEOs using them as cheap labour and relies on unproven trickle down economics that does not actually help people out of poverty.People can be lifted out of poverty but just barely with in socialism they are being brought to a high standard of living on par with the very wealthy in as little as year with capitalism it would require 10-1,000 years to achieve the same thing.Furthermore capitalism leads to extremely wide income and wealth gaps with those on the lower scale earning $31,200 – $50,000 a year and that is only in America in Asia and Africa the lower end scale is $365 – $3,650 a year with only a few millionaires etc produced while socialism creates large amounts of multi millionaires and even billionaires with small gaps between income levels and even if large gaps exist the lowest income level will be at least $365,000 – $3,650,000 a year meaning even the bottom income group will have enough to live a comfortable lifestyle on par with wealthy Europeans Americans with this eliminating poverty completely.This is why socialism is exponentially better at eliminating poverty than capitalism.Its prevents laziness as is incentivises people to work more jobs to get exponentially more money.Children as young as 12 years old can work only one year and then retire at 13.As a result to get a sizeable retirement fund of at least several million to a hundred million dollars a year most people could work only three months a year for 1-10 years begging at the ages of 12 years of age thus retiring at the age of 13-22 years of age and this would include low skill jobs in companies such as in Amazon,Wall Mart,McDonald’s etc that dont need college degrees with this being the lower income bracket.Those who work for dozens or hundreds of cooperatives in high skill jobs that require college degrees would earn exponentially more possibly several billion year.As a result most people would have no student debt and rather than having only at most 20 years of retirement as an elderly citizen they could retire in their early teens and have at least 72 years long retirement.Thus it would encourage one to keep themselves busy with multiple jobs.It would also discentivise people wanting to live on flat social welfare programmes such as social welfare and also universal basic incomes which would only exist to deal with emergency situations such as pandemics,natural disasters and economic recessions especially on a national or global scale with it causing people to shop around so to speak to look for new jobs in different fields and also those whose cooperatives are earning high profits.In otherwards by having social welfare and universal basic income be flat and people earning their share of profits this system in socialism would in fact encourage people to seek work and employment with multiple cooperatives during the year.In otherwards it would encourage people to work multiple jobs rather than having only one shift at one cooperative a week or year and not just sit around all day as the promise of getting the combined shared profits from multiple cooperatives rather than flat wages in capitalism and a flat social welfare would in fact encourage people to work multiple jobs throughout the year and encourage them to become harder workers because rather than getting a flat wage for each job or from one single cooperative they would get the combined wages from each successful cooperatives thus increasing their wages and income exponentially.By earning the combined wages of multiple cooperatives it increases wages exponentially thus encourages people to work multiple jobs at once in different cooperatives during the year as working in one cooperative would ensure one would get only $100,000-$300,000 from wotking from one cooperative and could 10-100 times between $1,000,000 – $30,000,000 from working in a hundred cooperatives..This means even those without college degrees who work in retail,fast food restaurants etc can earn as much as $500,000-$3,072,000 a year.Very few if any people would work more than 1-10 years and the concept of working till 65 or even working past the age of 13 or even 20 or 30 would be unheard of.Furthermore this would eliminate 90-99% of crime especially theft and murders releated to money as one would have to work very little and still earn enough to buy luxury apartments and homes and expensive things or have luxury rennovations and roof etc extensions on homes and apartments and still retire after a few years of work.Thus true socialism not the faux socialism rewards hard work by encouraging people to work multiple jobs not due to necessity but to increase their wages exponentially thus having them climb the social ladder much more quicker than in capitalism.Furthermore it acts as a safety net with if one is laid off due to one of the cooperatives they work is going out of business due to being outcompeted and a recession or them adopting full automation then they will have saved more than enough to survive a few years without work,retire early or still be working for other cooperatives to have a stable income.Since wages are determined by profits people will seek employment in successful cooperatives etc with them even doing work in low level or mildly successful cooperatives as each one will have all profits added to their wages with even low level cooperatives getting employees a little bit extra on the side.If one only worked for ten to a hundred cooperatives where the profit shares results in wages that are only $10,000-$50,000 will mean working for 10-100 of these will get one $100,000-$5,000,000 a year while working for 10-100 that result in wages of $100,000-$1,000,000 a year will result in one getting $1,000,000-$100,000,000 a year.Thus even working for a combination of low level cooperatives,midly successful cooperatives and successful ones altogether will still mean the average person will earn at least $100,000-$3,307,200 a year for only three months of the year.Workers to earn these wages would not need a college degree or even highschool diploma but just basic reading,writing and numeracy skills that they would have at 12-14 which is when they would start working.Thus by 22-32 they could retire early and be living by themselves with zero college debt,zero mortgages and decide to not work another day of their lives even live news anchors could do this with the only people not doing so and starting careers at 22 and retiring at 65 would be surgeons and lawyers and other people in white collar jobs.The vast majority of people in a socialist system would be retiring from work after only 5-20 years and then would only have to work 100 days of the year with it almost unheard of them working until 65 with them spending their 20s and 30s enjoying a early retirement and focus.These people who retire at 22 could continue to work for another few decades or they could use youtube and Onlyfans for Monitisation and Patreon based income.Furthermore since retiring from work at 22 they could start families and neither parents would need to work any more thus allowing them to focus 100% of their time on their children negating the need for au pairs and pre schools or in most cases elementary or secondary schools.since people would need only basic literacy and numeracy skills it would mean people would begin working at age 12 and children would only need to stay in school until 12 or they could be homeschooled by parents to have basic literacy and numeracy skills.On average the vast majority who currently live in minimum wage would in socialism earn sizeable enough incomes to the point they need not get a college or even highschool education and need only work at most 5-10 years or even at most 20 years and not 40 years to gain sizeable retirement funds.People would work for only a third of the year but make exponentionally more money and only at most 5-10 years and also have both parents working and possible working age children to further increase profits exponentially.In comparison most in capitalism people who work one or two jobs five to seven days a week with almost no free time during the year just to make between $31,200 – $50,000 and in some cases would involve both parents of a household to work this long.Thus people who work multiple jobs in our current system and are barely scraping by in capitalism earning $31,200 – $50,000 or less a year would be through working several jobs at once in socialism be considered middle class and upper middle class earning at least $200,000 – $3,307,200 a year with long periods of the year free from work.For those of you who are earning these wages in multiple jobs you are being screwed over by capitalism by voting for Republicans and Corporate Democrats.Having all members of all family both wife and husband and even children aged 12-17 working for at least seven or again a hundred different cooperatives each in person and using computer networks could exponentially increase the annual earnings of a family of at least four to seven individuals(consisting of two to five children)to earn as much as several million dollars a year as much as $10,000,000 or more a year.Children can start at 12 and then retire at 22.Automation can be used to eliminate most of dangerous and labourious work for most employees further decreasing the length of working days to a few hours exponentionally but still increasing productivity,in turn increasing profits and thus increasing wages exponentially for each person thus meaning each person would earn exponentially more money for working exponentially less hours.It eliminating a full person or while groups of people would be only done for those who are retiring or being fired with in both cases them already gaining a sizeble income.Furthermore this can if adopted by more cooperatives will mean a person can work for multiple cooperatives during the year thus increasing their wages exponentially.Unnecessary jobs such as board of directors,HR departmnts will be eliminated and most remaining departments will be skimmed down to just what is needed to the bare minimum.Computer networks,phones etc including those that manage and control computer systems and automated systems etc would allow one to work for multiple cooperatives whose relay stations,offices etc are located across the world thus increasing their employment prospects exponentionally and at the same time increasing wages exponentially.These technologies would allow one to the secretary,receptionist,account,software engineer,web developer,managers of automated systems etc for dozens a hundred of cooperatives based across the world with them arranging when their working hours and shifts are.Thus a person would have increased wages but lower working hours than in a capitalist system.Decreasing the amount of people hired through automation,a person doing multiple jobs and eliminating unnecessary jobs would decrease the amount of workers by at least 40-50% and thus exponentially increasing the amount of income for each employee with mergers,acquisitions and takovers done to increase customers and thus profits as well.Those eliminated from these measures would likely seek employment at other business and also set up their own competing business or get work in other fields,retire with a sizeable retirement fund measuring in the several tens of millions and/or return at least a few years later.The same measures used in capitalism to increase profits for the CEO would be used to increase profits and wages for all people present with this meaning they could only have to work anywhere between at least five to ten years in order to earn a sizeable retirement then allowing other new people to move in alongside those formally laid off.In socialism the same wide variety of competing business such as Amazon,Microsoft,Pfizer,McDonalds,Wall Mart,Apple,YouTube,Air bnb,Adidas,Converse,Ambercombie and Fitch,Facebook,Tesla and the same wide variety of products and services they provide such as smartphones,laptops,clothing,hamburgers,electric vehicles,pharmaceutical drugs etc and delivery services we have in a capitalist system would still exist it’s just that instead of being private enterprises run by a billionaire CEO who pays employees a flat minimum wage these companies would be cooperatives or collectives and they instead be run by all employees of these companies giving each person an equal share of the companies weekly,monthly and yearly profits and each person would have a democratic say in the running of the business such as working conditions etc with these comprising of all employees such as those who work in the relay centres,cashiers,kitchens making burgers,store greeters and packers,sweat shops and on the factory line with those who are paid the least and currently in a capitalist system rely on federal minimum wages and whatever low flat wage is in their contract that allows them to earn at most $10,000-$30,000 a year would be in a socialist system in these large companies all be multi-millionaires or at least earning a six figure salary between $100,000 – $3,307,200 a year the same as lawyers,surgeons,doctors both general physicians and specialists,anaesthesiologists,software developers,wall street stock brokers,actuariests,dentists,airline pilots etc and other high paying jobs in America rather than minimum wage,rather than living pay check to pay check and scraping by rather than just the CEO being a multi millionaire and billionaire thus making them earn the value of their work encouraging them to work harder alongside them able to control working conditions through democratic process.People like Jeff Bezos,Mark Zuckerburg,Bill Gate’s etc would still be household names as the founders of cooperatives like Amazon,Microsoft etc they just wouldn’t be billionaires but rather multi millionaires like all of their employees.If they wanted to be billionaires they like their employees would have to get up off their lazy asses and work for multiple cooperatives during the year.In some cases their income like their employees may be as high as $3,072,000 a year for more successful cooperatives and if automation is used to increase productivity and profits and some retire as well of competing cooperatives carry out mergers or takeovers thus increasing profits and when you eliminate unnecessary staff such as board of directors,CEOs and all levels of management and HR department as well as having a single doing multiple jobs over the course of each week.Famous large national and multinational cooperatives include Ocean Spray,Aces Hardware,United Western Grocers,Mondragon corporation etc.These are socialist institutions where all actions of them are democratically decided by workers.They provide different goods and services and are allowed to compete with other cooperatives and private companies.They are cooperatives and would be the predominant if not the only form of institution in all types socialisms alongside collectives.In a socialist system these and other companies such as Amazon,Apple,McDonalds,Tesla etc would exist and they would still provide the same goods and services such as laptops,smartphones,hamburgers and online delivery etc it’s just that they would be cooperatives that are democratically run.On average the wages of all workers in these cooperatives are 10-1,000 times higher than people in the private sector who do the same types of jobs and work the same amount of time ie work in hardware stores,work as cashiers and work on farms.Cooperatives workers in all sectors of the economy such as retail,service industry,manufacturing and agriculture etc always almost on average make 10-1,000 times more money than their private sector workers in the same fields and same size of businesses.Low level mom and pop cooperatives would make 10-1,000 times more money than low level mom and pop independent corporations and businesses.They would not make as much as large multinational cooperatives just like private mom and pop corporations and businesses would not make as much as large multinational corporations.To make as much as large multinationals they could form mergers with large multinationals or with other mom and pop cooperatives thus increasing their customers,increasing their profits and thus increasing wages.This fact and the Democratic processes within them is why workers in cooperatives always in average score better on studies about worker happiness and fufillment than in either state owned corporations and private corporations.All cooperatives would still compete with each other for customers by providing different services,products and incentives and abide by same by laws of business as seen in capitalism and neoliberalism such as boom and bust cycles,invisible hand of the market determine the fate and success of businesses and supply and demand etc seen in neoliberalism and free market capitalism are allowed to exist in socialism especially market socialism with democratic process allowing for planned economies to be instated with all business regulations democratically decided upon thus keeping taxes low,environmental regulations strict but sensible and eliminating cronyism and corruption with each business have workers set up their own working conditions etc.Even sweat shop workers who create clothing,shoes,smartphones in China,Africa and Asia etc who work on between $0.08-$1 day or about $180-$365 a year in third world countries would under this socialist system be earning a five or six figure salaries between $18,000 – $365,000 a year not as much as Wall mart employees but a lot more than they do now at least 100-1,000 times more than they do in our current capitalist system.Then again they can increase their wages exponentially by working for multiple cooperatives as much as 10-100 meaning they could earn between $180,000 – $365,000,000 a year.and could afford adequate housing and electricity and enjoy a lifestyle on par with most wealthy middle and upper class lawyers,surgeons,doctors both general physicians and specialists,anaesthesiologists,software developers,wall street stock brokers,actuariests,dentists,airline pilots etc do in capitalism or even just on par with the middle class in Europe and America meaning those who currently live in slums and can barely afford electricity and food could be living a standard of living on par with those who live in the suburbs of America with white picket fences and enough to get by..This would be true considering that everything in third world countries would be much cheaper than in first world countries and $18,000 – $365,000 a year would allow them to live a lifestyle similar to most lower to middle class people in Europe rather than abject poverty – they may be poor but they would be no longer living in abject poor and may even be living above the poverty line and some even reach lower to middle class especially considering most things would be cheap with this increasing the income of workers in cooperative farms and retail outlets etc.Thus those who currently are barely surviving on minimum wage in crappy 9-5 jobs as sweat shop workers,cashiers,burger flippers,store greeters and shelf packers,relay centre workers in capitalism would in socialism be earning as much as high paying white collar workers such as lawyers,surgeons,doctors both general physicians and specialists,anaesthesiologists,software developers,wall street stock brokers,actuariests,dentists,airline pilots etc currently do.In some case their income may be as high as $3,072,000 a year for more successful cooperatives and if automation is used to increase productivity and profits and some retire.The amount of wages a person gets that is a share of profits is dependent on the revenue of the entire corporation and businesses each year globally from all outlets worldwide and its total number of employees globally worldwide with for large multinational cooperatives having all total revenue from all retail outlets around the globe shared amongst all workers it employs worldwide with small independent mom and pop business whether they be independent hotels,retail outlets etc with only one outlet having its profits shared between all employees.In all cases whether small Independent Mom and pop business and large multinationals on average the employees earn 10 – 1,000 times than what they earn in a capitalist system.It would in the case of business and corporations that have multiple franchises and outlets in a country,region,continent and across the globe involve all global revenue shared between all workers from accounting,marketing,factory workers,cashiers etc worldwide in all outlets,franchises worldwide of a corporation that rises in proportion to the profits of all combined outlets worldwide.Computer networks,forums and computers and audio/visual phone calls would be used for all workers worldwide to meet with each other and discuss operations from the comfort of home.Conferences etc would allow representives from all outlets worldwide to meet with each other and discuss things in person.As stated automation would exponentially increase productivity and profits and thus exponentially increase wages with other measures done by people such as working for multiple high performing cooperatives around the world would increase their wages exponentially meaning working for multiple cooperatives a year would mean an average person would earn between on average $500,000-$1,000,000 with others earning between $1,000,000 – $3,3072,000.Use of automation to lower working hours and labour and increase productivity and profits alongside a person working for multiple cooperatives at once will increase ones earnings exponentially as one would only have to work one shift a week,month or year at a cooperative.Managers and CEOs of businesses,corporations,factories,hospitals would not exist only workers and key members of sectors such as accounting and marketing.In independent mom and pop retail outlets,restaurants,hotels with only one operating business that is not franchise the profits would not be as high,however the wages of each employee would be higher but the number of workers would not be as high as well forcing them to work harder,be more competitive and franchise out into more outlets with more successful mom and pop independent businesses with fewer workers will have the workers have higher wages than less successful ones.On average in a true market socialist system the average person would be making at least 5-100 times more money in wages every week,month,year than in a capitalist system with other more poorly paid people getting at least 100-1,000 times more money than they do for doing the same type and same amount of work.What this means is that even the lowest paid people would be paid exponentially more than the normally are with in case of the United States where the minimum age ranges from $5.15-$15.90 in each different state with them currently paid between $10,712 – $3,072 a year would in a socialist system be making $53,560 – $3,307,200 or even $3,070,200 a year without doing any extra work the equivalent of roughly between $25.75 an hour and $1,590 an hour.Those who work in sweatshops for $180-$365 year would be earning between $18,000- $365,000 a year which is between $8 an hour and $877 an hour.This means that those who in a capitalist system earn barely enough to survive would in a socialist system be either well off enough to survive or would be in fact extremely wealthy despite doing low skill manual labour that in capitalism are looked down on by the rest of society as work that teenagers do for summer jobs while the people who reap the most from their labour in capitalism the multi millionaire and billionaire class by doing nothing are looked up upon by society as hard workers who worked their way to the top proving the American Dream – this is bullshit and Orwellian doublethink.Furthermore the lowest income bracket would be increased significantly and the lowest social class would be earning enough to live a middle class or even affluent lifestyle effectively eliminating poverty forever globally.Most minimum wage workers would be paid and earning at least double of what a $15 an hour minimum wage would get them every year meaning they would be earning between on average the equivalent of $15-$30 an hour for all employees in modestly successful businesses including mom and pop businesses depending on the success of their business without their business going bankrupt and without federal mandates or resorting to automation why because all profits based on its success would be shared equally and wages rising with the success of the business with the more successful the business is the higher the wages are with it rising as much as $96-$100 an hour or more for all employees including low end employees such as cashiers and sweat shop workers for the most successful enterprises and businesses.This proportional rise pay leads to an increase in wages without any federal minimum wage laws and businesses do not have to go bankrupt by increasing wages that interfere with bills and prices as the wages automatically rises in proportion to profits.In socialism thus even those who work blue collar,low skill jobs that don’t need an Honours degree in college or even an highschool education would be working in jobs in a capitalist system that would be considered low skill and bottom of the economic ladder minimum wage jobs be in a socialism be in well paid jobs with cashiers,janitors,waiters,relay centre workers,sweat shop factory workers for clothing companies,burger flippers in McDonalds and Burger King,Apple,fashion designers,Amazon,WallMart would in socialism would be earning on average six or even seven figure salaries between at least $100,000-$3,307,200 or even $33,072,000 every year on par with who in a capitalism these wages are earned by high skill workers such as lawyers,surgeons,doctors both general physicians and specialists,software developers and most modestly successful mangers and CEOs.These jobs are looked down as summer jobs for teenagers to learn the value of hard work in capitalism and also are used by college students to pay for student debts,loans,accomadation and university fees that are not considered jobs for a living wage and to raise a family on would be in socialism be jobs that would allow one to live a wealthy lifestyle on par with white collar workers and the upper middle class and upper class and raise a family on.It would thus allow cashiers,burger flippers,store greeters etc in McDonald’s,WallMart,Amazon etc be made just as highly regarded socially as surgeons and lawyers and other white collar jobs meaning adults aged 18-65 would under a socialist system would be millionaires thus making them jobs that not only pay a liveable wage without minimum wage laws or hikes but also without raising prices of goods and services and cooperatives going bankrupt.In socialism people would be lining up and forming long queues outside of McDonald’s and Wall Mart stores and Amazon relay centres not to buy anything but to get jobs in them as cashiers,burger flippers,janitors etc because they could easily become multi millionaires working at them for only a few years or even a year and wouldn’t not have to work that much each year at most as detailed here only one day a year to live a wealthy lifestyle on par with the upper middle class etc..People who work these jobs would be able to support a living wage and would proudly earn the title of “hard working America” that conservatives like to shove down people’s throats when talking about how great capitalism is and those that could be proud of because they would earn large amounts of money for little work and to encourage them to work harder they would begin to work in multiple cooperatives to increase their earning power and it would have renders the need for a €15 feddral minimum wage that would eat into profits.CEOs and managers are not hardworking Americans as they they leach off the hard labour of employees to extract as much of the profits as they can to gain as much profit as they can – this is not hard work this is laziness.Them working for multiple cooperatives during the year would be encouraged due to them earning the combined wages of each one would increase their wages exponentially.Sweatshop workers who make clothing and electronics for big brands such as Nike,Puma,GAP,Ambercombie & Fitch,Apple,Foxconn etc who make currently $180-$365 a year in a capitalist system would be in socialism be making slightly less than American workers in Amazon,WallMart etc roughly $18,000-$1,000,000 but they like American counterparts could work for multiple cooperatives to increase wages exponentially and also since everything is cheaper in third world countries would be able to earn enough to live like the middle class in America and Europe and it would reduce poverty.Considering these are minimum wage jobs these are considered the lowest income so if people that work in McDonalds,Amazon,sweat shops etc are earning between $100,000-$3,307,200 or even $33,072,000 as well as sweat shop workers earning between $18,000-$1,000,000 a year and this is the bottom income bracket with people that are in capitalism currently the top income brackets lawyers,actors,anaesthesiologist would be earning even more money then it means that poverty would be almost non existent in an socialist system with only a small percentage of the worlds population in poverty roughly 1-5% compared the current 50% in capitalism.Therefore socialism is the only economic system to end world poverty.For those of you in these jobs as permanent employees or as part of working multiple jobs and even just part time workers such as students for these companies it’s likely you are being paid a mere $180-$31,200 a year and you are being screwed over for voting both Trump,Biden etc and not either actual socialists or democrat socialists because in a socialist hellhole you would be multi millionaires living in mansions or at least upper class neighbourhoods and could afford healthcare by earning $100,000-$1,000,000 or more a year.Due to wages being shared amongst all workers and it rising for all workers due to increased profits rather than a flat one it means the wealth of all workers rises proportionally meaning it can be very easy for large groups of people to become very wealthy very quickly rather than a small number of people becoming wealthy and their workers taking longer due to the flat wage system wherein they have to save a set amount and spend the majority on bills of all types.Capitalism can bring people out of poverty the problem is that it takes much longer than socialism as you always have a small number of the population getting wealthy off the backs of others while socialism allows for a large amount of people in each cooperative to become wealthy thus there is a more fairer and more larger amount of people becoming wealthy wry quickly.Capitalism claims to have brought millions out of poverty over the last century and it may take until the middle or late 21st century to eliminate it forever thus taking at least 200 years.Socialism could have done that in a fraction of the time in only a decade or two had it been adopted at the start of the 20th century by encouraging mergers and ones wages rising exponentionally higher than the cost of bills and having the wealth distribution being less uneven meaning the gap between wealth groups being smaller.Furthermore democratic process would have eliminated corruption,cronyism and over regulation etc that stunts economic development.Considering the lowest income brackets would be $100,000 – $3,307,200 this would ensure enough money to eliminate poverty globally very quickly.How exactly does socialism thus make everyone poorer as spouted by capitalists when everyone is making much more money roughly 5-1,000 times more than in capitalism for doing the same amount of work due to business becoming more successful?The myth that everyone is made equally poor is propaganda spread by lazy fucks in the form of vloggers,CEOs,politicians etc who have the most to lose by doing nothing and being tossed aside and have a kindergarten level understanding of economics.The lower the person makes in capitalism the the more they would make under socialism with the higher a person makes in capitalism the lower the increase under socialism but this smaller increase is still a lot more and significant enough that they wouldn’t have to worry about getting bankrupt and can have a sizeable retirement fund.Thus it would be a true measurement of their labour allowing those who work hard become wealthier and lazy people get poore thus eliminating the issues of the surplus value of ones labour and all other complexity of capitalism.In reality socialism does not actually mean collectivisation through the state or other means where all of society is collectivised as the term collectivisation in socialism can only occur within the confines of each business with it not implying government control of the economy or business or “working together” for the common good with it is in fact much more freer and in fact much more cutthroat than the free market system as all government business regulations are democratically decided by the workforce and it unable to interfere in the economy at all with it only doing so at the behest of referendums and all businesses are able to compete amongst each other by providing better prices,better services and products and so on with them able to compete much better and easier than capitalism to compete with other businesses including larger ones as all regulations are democratically decided and cronyism is almost non existent.Thus business in the form of cooperatives and collectives are still allowed to compete with each other for customers by providing better services,lower prices,better products etc as they are in a free market system with all government regulations being democratically decided upon keeping government interference in the economy and society both extremely limited and democratically decided upon.In fact in a socialist system they are even more encouraged to compete against each other because the proportional rise in wages means cooperatives are forced to provide better services,better products and better customer service and lower prices as the more customers they get the higher the wages is for everyone.The profit motive is still a part of socialism it’s just that it’s shared equally within the confines of each competing businesses as cooperative business are still allowed and in fact more encouraged to compete amongst each other for customers in the same way as in capitalism.Business in the form of cooperatives are thus still allowed to compete against each other for customers just as they would and are in fact more encouraged as gaining customers over another competing cooperative will ensure higher wages for each employee thus causing them to provide better services at better prices etc thus making people work harder than in a capitalist system.Working for the common good occurs only within the confines of each cooperative businesses as each person must work that little bit extra as if they do profits go up and so does their wages if there is one weak chain then the business loses profits and thus wages go down meaning there will be the danger of going bankrupt.This forces workers to work harder and work together as the more successful a business is the more profitable it is and the more profitable it is the higher the wages of everyone gets.Conversely in a business is not profitable then the wages of everyone goes down thus incentivising everyone to work harder and work together again which can only occur within the confines of each individual cooperatives.Equal payment does not infer that everyone everywhere is paid the same for each job – this does not exist in communism or socialism it is a myth started by capitalists to denounce the actual true equal sharing of profits which can only occur within each individual business.No economic system exists that involves all citizens are paid equally.As stated a person can be paid the same as everyone else in cooperatives within socialism and that only occurs within the confines of each business and the sharing of profits means wages are higher the harder everyone works.Therefore it promotes collaboration within businesses while it still promotes competition between competing businesses as businesses still have the ability compete with other competitors for market share and customers and in fact its more cutthroat that capitalism as the state interference in the economy is controlled by the workforce limiting regulations with the fact that people’s wages rises with profits means they will compete much harder for customers and thus profits of course through legal means as corruption etc will be punished.By having all regulations democratically decided upon allows for regulations to be almost non existent except of course basic ones such as those with regards to health and safety,worker regulations and environmental regulations with them lax but also reasonable and fines etc being decided upon democratically.Fair working and environmental regulations would exist due to each worker voting for them with over regulation especially those that are tyrannical and are meant to stunt economic growth especially for small business being almost non existent due to the fact that again all workers would vote for them as they would have control over them and the actions of the state.Unfair and tyrannical regulations and taxes can only exist in a capitalist system due to there being almost no democratic controlled in the workplace and society.Anti-corruption and anti-monopolistic regulations would exist to allow businesses to be cutthroat but still ethical.All actions of the state whether it is taxes,regulations,bailouts etc are democratically decided thus eliminating corruption,cronyism,over regulation thus allowing them to be lax but still sensible ie regulations that would exist would only be anti corruption ones,those that protect the safety of workers in the workplace,prevent discrimination against one based on one’s religion,ethnicity,sexuality etc and sensible environmental regulation.Cronyism,bailouts and over regulation would be eliminated because they would be democratically decided upon as the state would need public authorisation.Regulations that stunt the growth of businesses especially new ones are eliminated because all regulations are democratically decided.Workers and the general consumer public would only authorise sensible regulations that protect the rights of workers and the environment meaning over regulation that hampers economic growth would be non existent.Over regulation only occurs in capitalism especially state capitalism because the democratic processes of capitalism are eliminated completely.The workers themselves can come up with and vote into place new laws and business regulations on how business are run both on a federal level and within the confines of each individual cooperatives meaning they can be innovative in new ideas that benefit them.The actions of state are controlled directly by workers and the general populace meaning the state cannot infringe on the rights of the individual or the economic growth of businesses because it can only do so if the population decides it should through democratic processes which would never happen therefore actual true socialism would never involve the state ever infringing o the rights of the individual and economic growth of business.Therefore socialism is therefore much freer than capitalism.The proportional rise in wages system makes socialism more cutthroat than capitalism as each businesses workers wages rises in proportion to profits gained from gaining more customers meaning they will undercut competitors by buying them out,providing lower prices and better services etc shutting them down just as in capitalism with the incentive to do so more pronounced since all workers and not just the CEO benefits.Since profits are shared equally between all employees there is a greater incentive to be more cutthroat than in capitalism as all employees benefit by having their wages rise by gaining more customers by out competing their competitors and thus profits therefore rather than just the CEO and board of directors benefitting from it all workers benefit thus encouraging them work harder to outcompete their competition.By having wages determined by shared profits it forced all people to work together to compete and push out of business their competitors.Capitalism has only only the CEO benefit as he receives all profits while socialism has all workers benefit by the fact that their wages will rise if they outcompete their competitors and shut them down with if they merge with them then they also benefit as well with even their competitors benifiting.It is therefore a more cutthroat system but it is still an ethical cutthroat system due to worker and environmental as well as anti-corruption regulations constantly present and rather than only a CEO gaining all the fruits of mergers,profits etc all workers in a cooperative get wealthier.Cooperatives can be just as innovative and productive as private enterprises because rather than just one person gaining all of the profits from new innovations and increased productivity all workers benefit thus forcing them to work harder to increase productivity and be more innovative in new ideas etc.Ethics are maintained by all worker,environmental and anti-corruption regulations are kept and maintained by the workers and public keeping them in place by having the public and workers democratically decide all federal regulations while workers of each cooperative are able to to democratically decide all working conditions in each cooperative.Since the workers themselves run each cooperative and control all actions of the government through democracy it is in the best interest of each cooperative business through democracy to install ethical and stringent but lax worker and environmental regulations and financial regulations since the workers and society themselves are affected by them and thus are able to decide them.Bailouts would have to democratically decided upon with financial regulations present through democracy to prevent the need for them and recent recessions and economic crashes.Therefore in socialism business can become as profitable and wealthy as they want and still allow for fair working conditions and environmental and financial regulations etc.Any workers in competing cooperatives that become unemployed by being shut down by their competitors will have saved enough money to retire after about ten years or can set up a new different business or be hired by other cooperatives who have employees being fired or retiring thus there is very little chance of workers becoming bankrupt etc if they are laid off when there cooperatinve goes bankrupt.Furthermore to increase wages they will likely be working for multiple cooperatives at once meaning even if one cooperative they work for goes bankrupt then they will still have other work and will still have consistent income as a safety net.If posdible they will work for and seek employment with the business that shut them out of carry out a merger where the combined customers are shared and thus they gain more profits and more increases in wages.All workers laid off would have a safety net of being themselves working for multiple cooperatives at once meaning if one cooperative goes bankrupt then they may have at least several others to work for and gain income from.Thus even if a business goes bankrupt workers are still economically secure enough to survive at least several years until they find more work.Automation would be introduced in sweatshop factories and relay stations as well as mining for gold,cobalt,tantalum etc to fully automate them with those laid off either having saved enough to retire early or would be working for multiple cooperatives with most automation being that that compliments rather than replaces workers that reduces workload by at least 50-90% thus ensuring they are still working and earning higher wages by automation increasing productivity with at the same time eliminating the most dangerous aspects of the work.Developing of automation would be more encouraged in socialism.Thus socialism is not only more cutthroat than capitalism it is actually more ethical as bailouts,corruption,inequality,bankruptcy,pollution etc is eliminated.Thus capitalism is the only economic system that ethics are thrown out the window.This is the exact opposite of what conservatives believe socialism is and what they have brainwashed people into it is.In a capitalist system those who work the hardest gain very little money and ability to climb the social ladder and those who work the least in the form of managers and CEOs earn the most of a businesses profits and wealth – this is the definition of wealth inequality.This in contrast to the flat wage method of payment in capitalism where those work the least in frivolous jobs earn absurd amounts of money for doing nothing.Live news and radio stations,newspapers and magazines will also exist with a wide variety available with journalists sharing profits from sales with live news and radio presenters paid via sharing profits from money gained from the amount of views and ratings and advertising contracts etc similar to monetisation from views on YouTube and real world business with actors in movies and television shows paid money based on viewings in cinemas,television channels and sales of DVDs etc.Hospitals,power plants,sewage treatment plants etc that maintain the infrastructure would involve each worker such as doctors,nurses,technicians etc paid wages related to the amount of patients,amount of electricity used,amount of sewage intaken from the general public or possibly taxes.Lawyers and psychologists etc would likely have law and psychology firms be cooperatives that have profits from all customers to all members and workers shared equally or similar methods.Actors and producers alongside directors rather than being given a set wage for each movie or television show episode would gain an equal share or set percentage of box office receipts,DVD etc sales,viewings and monetisations on online platforms such as Netflix with subscription fees shared amongst actors or purely just viewing similar to monitisation on YouTube through advertising revenue etc and Nielsen ratings and viewings on television and Netflix through again monitisation determined by software meaning budgets for movies would be lower and the box office success of a movie etc would determine the wages of an actor like the director etc with rather being paid first and the movie losing money and being a box office failure.In otherwards unlike capitalism where actors decide how much they are paid by setting a price tag or being able to demand pay rises and the budget of a project is set beforehand the wages of an sctor like the directors etc is determined by the financial succes of a movie worldwide meaning the higher the box office returns worldwide the higher the wages of each actor and all other crew members thus encouraging them to make high quality media with it also meaning that budgets are much smaller as they are spent on paying for locations and props meaning the budgets of media will be at leas half or even a third of what they normally are with again it taking into account not only box office receipts worldwide but also VHS/DVD/Blu Ray sales worldwide which they again get an equal ahare of and again monitisation and advertising revenue from viewings online on platforms such as Netflix and on televisions across the world.Most Hollywood actors and directors and also directors and actors for television shows including soap actors could get as much as $1,000,000-$100,000,000 per movie and episode of television shows based on a combination of sharing profits of box office receipts,DVD etc sales and rentals,monitisation on Netflix and Nielsen ratings,subscription fees etc worldwide over the course of several years with them continuously generating income continuously over several years if not forever from the same movie and television show long after it has finished airing or long after it premiered on television and in cinemas.Thus both A-list and soap opera actors would be generating income continuously for years or decades from a single episode or movie.Talk show hosts would likely get paid this much for each episode.Same goes for theatre actors with them getting a share of box office receipts with those staring advertisements likely getting money through monitisation based on how many people view ads on television and YouTube as well as since employed by the business could be given a share of the profits of the business for that year as well meaning even struggling actors who in a capitalist system would get paid very little if anything for starring in soaps,theatre productions and advertisements even for any sized businesses and would be struggling to make ends to meet would in socialism possibly get at least anywhere between $1,000,000-$20,000,000,per advertisement,per year making them just as wealthy as most A-list actors in Hollywood.The same would go for adult pornography stars with them paid not only the same set percentage of box office receipts and DVD sales but also online sales of streaming sites including those of the corporation they sign onto as well as monitisation for the amount of views on websites that create original content they are hired by and have contracts with as well as a set percentage of subscription fees meaning they would be unlikely become escorts to supplement paltry incomes.This means that unlike our current capitalist system where porn stars can make only $1,000-$3,000 only per scene filmed in each movie or online website then it is possible for them to make anywhere between $200,000-$20,000,000 a year or even per scene on websites and in movies based on DVD sales and monitisation on official sites meaning an adult actor would need to film at least 66-2,000,000 scenes a year in a capitalist system to match that of a socialist system.Live news anchors would make money based on viewers,advertising revenue and ratings rather than a flat wage making anywhere between $10,000,000-$100,000,000 a year with podcasters and radio program hosts would be making anywhere between $10,000,000-$20,000,000 a year based on ratings and viewers and advertising revenue.Journalists would likely be making the same based on advertising revenue and monitisation based on viewings of articles etc.Revenue for advertising cooperatives would would be shared between all employees with those who partake in sponsorship deals and advertisements on radio programmes,live news,television network cooperatives alongside actors and celebrities would get a percentage of the advertising cooperatives.Musicians would be be paid likely 50-100% of all profits from album sales alongside monitisation on YouTube and monitisation from every time someone listens to their song on the radio or on defunct music television channels and everytime a movie and television show episode with their songs is watched in cinemas,on television and DVDs etc meaning most musicians would be making between $1,000,000-$100,000,000 a year by doing nothing extra outside producing music with initial sales generating at least 10-1,000 times more money at least on average $10,000,000-$100,000,000 per album and also per released single both in defunct cassettes,CDs and iTunes,Spotify etc.Escorts would likely form cooperatives both physical brothels or online cooperatives or both that would then pay each one equally based on the amount of customers served with them forming national,international cooperatives as their would be more customers served globally or in one country with strippers wages being based on the success of the strip joint with both strippers and escorts able to earn extra in the form of tips etc and producing pornography on Onlyfans.Athelethes would likely be paid a flat wage or one that fluctuates due to endorsements,sponsors and advertising that rises and falls in relation to the success of the business that they endorse or that sponsors them with them getting a cut from each ones profits or a saved up amount every year.Teachers in primary,secondary and third level education could be run as coops one pays for directly or them paid through taxes that rises and falls in accordance with growth in the economy.All services provided by governmental bodies and corporations would be run as coops and collectives and similar entities or people paid through taxes.Law enforcement on local,state to federal level would be similar to hypothesised private police services or private security with their being competing law enforcement cooperatives that are paid directly through taxes or paid by being hired by the citizens of an area or being hired by the state itself to provide the protection of citizens and enforce the laws of the state with the military similarly working like private mercenaries hired by the state through contracts.Even government bodies would be run as cooperatives or being bodies run by the state whose actions would be democratically decided by the working class and electorate.In a purely socialised economy there would be no government run enterprises or services at all as education,law enforcement and military,healthcare,maintainence of infrastructure and all services provided by the government such as these and others would instead be run by competing cooperatives paid by either taxes or by members of a town,village or city paying them directly in the same way as businesses by hiring them through contracts.Thus socialised healthcare is not the government gaining control of healthcare but rather its actually having all hospitals,clinics,insurance and drug companies as separate competing cooperatives where they compete for paying patients and all profits are shared by all surgeons,nurses,doctors,researchers whose wages rise and fall in proportion to how many paying patients arrive with those with cheaper prices,better service encourage patients to be transported there for check ups,emergencies etc with pharmaceutical cooperatives also following pattern of competing for customers in the form of patients and hospitals etc run as cooperatives with insurance companies if they exist also run as cooperatives like this with their existence and also price fixing and similar government regulations with regards to healthcare like everything else democratically decided upon by the working class and eligible voters.This is what socialised healthcare actually is not the bullshit that Faux News etc spout where the government is the only provider and decided everything.Put simply all businesss are allowed to be set up with almost zero government regulation and red tape due to these regulations being democratically voted upon by all of the electorate as well as being allowed to provide any service or manufactured product they want to compete and they are encouraged to compete with each other even more so than in capitalism.The reason is because the more profits they get the higher the wages of each person goes up rather than going to one person at the top making them compete with each other much more vigorously by providing better customer service,better services and products,being more polite and helpful to all customers and providing better and different manufactured goods and services at more affordable prices than their competitors.The fact that the states actions are democratically decided by democratic processes allows the public and in turn workers as part of these businesses decide business,working and environmental regulations,bailouts and taxes on a federal and state level themselves through democracy and it eliminates cronyism,corruption and monopolies since a single business cannot bribe politicians and be bailed out or be allowed to have a monopoly on a sector of the economy due to these democratic processes where popular and majority voting decides taxes,regulations,antitrust laws and similar laws that prevent corruption,cronyism and the formation of monopolies or bailouts etc thus eliminating corruption as all citizens and thus workers must authorise through democracy taxes,bailouts or any government interference in the economy.Antitrust,anti corruption laws can be instigated by the public to be enacted into law.Corruption,over regulation of the economy and cronyism are eliminated in socialism due to the democratic processes in it as the workers and public are allowed to instigate and pass through laws that eliminate them.Since all regulations,bailouts etc have to authorised by democratic processes it means that this would eliminate corruption,cronyism etc that are present in capitalism.Corruption,cronyism etc is an inherent part of capitalism and cannot exist in socialism due to the inherent democratic process.Thus cronyism,over regulation of the economy and corruption are and can only occur in capitalism and in fact are inherent componants of capitalism because it eliminates democratic process with socialism in fact much more freer than even the freest versions of capitalism such as laizze faire,libertarianism and anarcho capitalism.This is a libertarians and conservative freedom loving capitalist ironic wet dream.You are actively doing everything to get rid of the very economic system you want which is limited government that is controlled directly by the owners of businesses themselves thus leading to zero corruption,zero red tape,zero cronyism and zero interference from the state as well as everyone getting richer for hard work it just boggles the mind everytime and drives me up the wall everytime a goddamm neconconservative,libertarian idiot on Faux News,Reason Tv etc derides socialism and over regulation,corruption and cronyism by the governmentat the same time because in socialism you wouldn’t have corruption,cronyism and over regulation at all and the income of most Americans would be at least 10-1,000 times larger than what is now without doing any extra work or hampering economic growth and continue label socialist policies as socialism.For those of you who are in the lower income bracket and middle class or even upper classes take out a calculator on your smartphones and type in your annual yearly income and multiply that by any number between 10-1,000 and that level is what you would be earning every year in a socialist system.Most minimum wage workers who currently earn $31,200 – $50,000 a year would be in a socialist system be earning between $312,000 – $50,000,000 a year for doing the same jobs such as flipping burgers in McDonald’s,a store greeter or cashier in Wall Mart.This would be the lowerst income bracket meaning poverty would be eliminated instantly.Those of you who are living on minimum wage in our capitalist system you are screwing yourself over for quashing out socialism..This is cognitive dissonance.If you like small businesses having no regulations,if you like people earning higher incomes for harder work,if like a world without corruption as well as cronyism and other bad facets of capitalist America and if you like having limited government control of society and the economy chances are in reality you are a socialist and not a capitalist because in capitalism you will always have these problems but in socialism you won’t because all actions of the government are democratically controlled and in cooperatives the more successful a business is the higher the wages of each employee goes up.The American Dream is and never was a capitalist utopia it was a socialist wonderland where people got more money for working harder and the government stayed out of the economic and civil freedoms.Thinking otherwise is Orwellian doublethink.Due to the non hierarchical and democratic nature of cooperatives each business sets their own rules and working conditions etc with democratic process allowing all workers that control cooperatives to via popular initiative and majority rule decide how the government sets environmental and business regulations as well as taxes and bailouts and prevents the government giving favouritism to any single business eliminating cronyism,bailouts,unfair taxes(if they exist at all ) and corruption meaning all actions of the government must be controlled by all voting citizens.Furthermore all workers in a business gain an equal share of the profits meaning the more successful a businesss is the higher their wages go up thus making every one equally richer rather one person getting wealthy for doing absolutely nothing.Its as if conservatives,libertarians want corruption,cronyism etc to exist in the first place – this is cognitive dissonance and Orwellian doublethink at its finest.How many times do I have to stress this the state in a truly socialist country has limited control over society even less than in gung ho capitalist countries or libertarians wet dreams as all of it’s actions are democratically decided upon by the workers and it cannot have any control of the economy nor it cannot run any farm,factory,business etc as all businesses and enterprises must be only cooperatives and collectives where wages are determined by the success of a business due to profits being shared equally meaning the more profitable a business the richer everyone gets forcing themselves to work harder and compete with other coops.What you think is socialism is in fact state capitalism a form of capitalism.Automation and AI may be used to eliminate labourious work and some staff may do two or more jobs at once and thus dual roles in marketing and accounting with it increasing wages for remaining staff but those once let off by the adoption of automation will have earned enough through a decade or more of working in successful cooperatives to have a healthy retirement fund and be allowed to start their own competing business,search for employment in a larger higher paying cooperative or even modestly paying one or work in the media funded by Patreon,Kickstarter and monitisation through YouTube and making amateur pornography on Onlyfans with zero government interference.Yes in socialist hellhole you idiot,lazy conservative vloggers on YouTube could still be millionaires through monitisation and Patreon donations on YouTube.In a few years to a decade they could return to the job when the remaining staff have worked enough to earn a sizeable retirement with a rotary system used for those working there where a person would work for a few years to earn enough to have a brief retirement and then return again to earn an extra amount after ten years to gain a sizeable retirement.Automation would in most cases be voted on democratically with it being automation to not fully replace workers but to improve efficiency by removing boring,repetitive and dangerous work thus making each employee more productive but at the same time leading to less stress,less injuries,more flexible and shorter working hours and betting working conditions meaning each worker especially those who work the most labourious and stressful work could earn more money for doing less work each day,week,month and hours as automation would increase productivity and thus profits but at the same reduce the workload in both terms of time and actual labour exponentionally thus improving the lives of workers with it even reducing ones working hours and number of shifts by half or to the point that each worker may only have one or two shifts a week or month with the number of workers the same but the this level of automation ensuring the same number of workers stay the same,but that they have shorter working hours and shorter number of shifts and that productivity increases thus profits increases which means each workers gets paid exponentially more for doing less work – these are the perks of living in a socialist system you get to democratically decide all aspects of the workplace and you exponentially lower the amount of work you need to do but at the same time exponentionally increase your profits and in turn wages.Rotas and shifts due to automation would be shortened so that as the automation increases productivity and thus profits each existing worker will still be employed but they may work even less say as much as one or two days a week in comparison to five days a week but still due to higher profits they will earn exponentially more money for exponentially less working hours.As a result of multiple cooperatives utilising automation it means that if a person works for several cooperatives at once through the year then their wages will be increased exponentially.Automation in cooperatives and socialism would in fact be encouraged and fact occur much quicker because increased productivity,increased profits and in tandem with reduced working hours would benefit all workers in a cooperative thus if socialism was the predominant economic system automation and AI research would have undergone much more exponential growth than in capitalism.Cases of full automation that is used to completely eliminate all workers in area or even one single workers job entirely would likely be done when said employee has retired or being fired for other reasons such as sloppiness and then dragging performance down with this being accepted by said workers because the proportional wage system would ensure that after a decade or two of employment most people could earn a sizeable retirement with with jobs in successful fast food restaurants such as Burger King,relay workers in Amazon,sweatshop workers that work for Apple and fashion designers,cashiers for WallMart would be the sort of jobs that don’t need college degrees and even high school diplomas but only basic language and numeracy skills could begin working as early as 12-14 years old meaning by the time they are in their early to mid twenties aged 22-24 they could have earned as much as $1,000,000-$33,072,000 meaning they could already by the time most people have finished college with hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt be more than able to buy their own luxury mansion and retire and after another ten years between the age of 32-34 them earning roughly $10,000,000-$66,048,000 ontop of that and retire early at the age of 32-34.If married to someone who earns the same they would combined earn $2,000,000 – $66,144,000 in ten years by the age 22-24 years old with in twenty years by age 32-34 they would both earn $4,000,000-$132,288,000.This means the average retirement age for most people in a socialist system would be between the ages of 22-34 years of age with it very rare for anyone to work past the age of 34 or up to 65.If possible one may at the ages 22-34 may take a few years or decade off to say raise a family and then return to work between 27-32 or have the husband do so and the mother do so later on or do so again by being able to afford au pairs etc and work for another 10-30 years and then by 65 retire with at least several hundred million dollars.Employment at cooperatives may follow a rotary system wherein they work for a few years or decades in the early teens and then take a few years off and then return when others have permenantly retired to work full time for a few decades to then earn a sizeable retirement in the range of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars.The fact that wages are shared equally amongst all workers means that each person would need to work only a few days a week and still make millions of dollars giving them ample time to spend with their children,friends and carry out any hobbies they have.If they die then they can leave behind to their children and grandchildren sizeable inherentences consisting of large sums of amounts of money that would measure in the ten of millions or hundred of millions of dollars or even just a few million or few hundred thousand thus giving them enough to retire early themselves or have a head start to then make more money or at least hand their own children at the age of 12-14 sizeable amounts of money that they will then be able to allow them to retire at 22-24 or become billionaires from the age of 32-65.In about five years by the age of 17-19 they could earn between $500,000 – $16,536,000 and take a few years off in their homes with if possible they could marry someone at the age of 22-24 also working for an equally successful companies that also earned $1,000,000-$33,072,000 by their early 20s and thus by combing their wages to between $2,000,000-$66,048,000 be able to retire early at the age of 22-24 and never have to work ever again.In a socialist system there would be very few people working past the age of 32 or even 22 even less working until 65.Most people in fact the vast majority of people roughly 90% would retire between the ages of 22-32 with this being the average retirement age with working until you are 65 being almost unheard of at all.In otherwards by not going to college and getting work in retail,fast food restaurants at the age of 12 or even younger they after working in multiple cooperatives at once for 10 years will have saved up enough to retire early at 22,start a family and not have to wory about student debt,mortgages or anything else nor will they have to save up for their kids to go to college and their kids will be the next generation of workers in the same high paying jobs once they reach 12 and so on.The government through taxation and funding even with a low tax of 1-10% would be able to give sizeable universal basic incomes and social welfare programmes.So yes the vast majority of people in a socialist system would on average work at least 5-10 years maybe even 1-2 years as well as work at most only three months of those years and then still be able to retire at the ages of 14-22 with several million or even several hundred million dollars in their bank account for retirement funds.However those made unemployed would likely start new business and join existing ones with availible posts since any universal basic income and social welfare would be a flat one as it would be unable to rise in proportion to anything thus discentivising people to stay unemployed as getting new jobs would mean again the harder they work and more profitable the business is the higher their wages which would be larger than a flat social welfare payment which would be a temporary measure to actually discentivise people to stay unemployed for more than a year or few months thus eliminating large numbers of people from being on social welfare with it only being for emergency situations such as a pandemic,national or global economic crash,when a business goes bankrupt,one is fired or is mentally and physically disabled thus leading to less taxpayers money being spent on paying lazy people who refuse to work and would discentivise immigrants leaching off a countries social welfare programme.Social welfare programmes would only exist only for emergency situations such as instances wherein one is unable to work due to getting sick,injured and also unemployed due to their business going bankrupt or a recession especially due to factors beyond human control such as a pandemic with due to the rise of wages proportional to to workload these would be sizeable ones to be able to last at least several years to a decade with the higher wages earned by even though in the lowest come bracket would be enough for people to save up at least several million dollars in their bank accounts that would allow them to weather any recession or mass employment caused by a pandemic for several years or a decade with if possible the money for social welfare programmes stored in a government account of treasury and through democratic process it can be relayed back to all workers in one single payment in other in a recession or mass unemployment event all taxes collected from all workers can be paid back to all workers in one go meaning that all the taxes a person had paid across their lifetime to fund social welfare programmes can be paid back to them in one go with each worker getting back all money they paid in taxes during a mass employment event or through democratic process this can be paid back when they retire as an extra bonus.How taxes are spent and used and initiatives to have all of ones paid taxes relayed back to them in retirement bonuses or at any time can be democratically decided upon by all workers because all laws,regulations etc are decided by the workforce not the state.A universal basic income would likely not exist due to the proportional pay rise negating it even due to the rise of AI and automation as it would be pointless and anyone out of labour would have after ten to twenty years earned a sizeable nest egg and retirement fund.Furthermore the concept of the wages rising in proportion to profits would negate the need for a federal minimum wage as the system would already pay enough well beyond even the highest minimum wage of say $15 an hour as the vast majority of workers for most businesses would be paid on average $51.50 – $1,590 an hour with the low end scale being $15-$30 an hour and since people are paid more for the more customers and more profits they would work harder to get higher wages rather than lobbying the government for federal minimum wages.Business would not go bankrupt as all profits are shared equally and CEOs do not exist which involves an unequal distribution of profits in a top down system with the lowest earnings of even small businesses and even struggling ones is usually always between $15 – $51.50 enough to get by and previous higher earnings meaning one could have saved up a substantial amount of money in their bank accounts to allow them to survive a recession or loss of profits.Thus the concept of workers in cooperatives and collectives wages rising in accordance to a companies profits would in fact incentivise people to keep working and not seek federal minimum wage,universal basic income and live off of welfare with the higher wages would allow for sizeable retirement funds,the ability for more people to retire early before 65 in their 50s,40s or even 30s and also even take short breaks from work for a year or two at a time especially to raise children or pursue personal interests and then return to work as they would have saved up enough money to stay out of work for a few years living off savings rather from welfare.It would also allow them to survive economically during a recession caused by a pandemic or economic crash and automation for at least several years or a decade with them able to start up competing cooperatives and seek money through Patreon and monitisation on YouTube,Onlyfans etc.It would therefore eliminate the need for federal minimum wages,universal basic incomes and social welfare.As a result they would likely be a smaller amount of people unemployed and on social welfare than in a capitalist system with universal basic income being lower say only a few hundred dollars – $100-$1,000 with this or anything higher being only used in times of economic crises such as a national or global recession or pandemic where people can’t work with unemployment during a recession or pandemic being cushioned by the fact that people would have since having higher wages would be saving more in their bank accounts thus meaning they could survive a year or two being forcibly unemployed due to circumstances beyond their control and would find ways such as monitisation on YouTube and Patreon donations or making amateur pornography on Onlyfans to survive these periods.Any government aid would be democratically decided upon with bailouts for lobbyists and corrupt corporations impossible since they have to be democratically decided on too.Furthermore private healthcare which wouldn’t exist in a socialist system would not drain people of their income meaning no one would go bankrupt as competitiveness between socialised business would make everyday goods and services affordable with healthcare pharmaceutical companies having lower price through competitors and price fixing set by the state via referendum and insurance companies obsolete.The only difference between a socialist system is that the actions of the state would be democratically controlled and business will be democratically controlled by all workers.For those who are conservative and capitalist and work for Amazon,Mcdonalds etc in these crappy jobs you do realise in a “socialist hellhole” or even under a Bernie Sanders adminstration you would practically wealthy enough to gain a modestly wealthy middle to upper class lifestyle; with a nice home,clothing,vehicles etc and modest if not high level retirement compared to being barely living and just scraping by in your beloved freedom loving capitalist paradise.Thus in a true market socialist system the world would have more people earning a six figure salary and more multi millionaires and billionaires than in a capitalist system especially in the third world that capitalists exploit for cheap labour due to it encouraging people to work harder due to all profits of multi million and billion dollar companies shared amongst its workers – this is what it means by wealth distribution where everyone involved in a business becomes richer for working harder by having profits shared amongst each other rather than the myth of everyone becoming poorer by having them taxed to death as pushed by capitalists and was shown in state capitalist Soviet Russia and Maoist China etc.It has nothing do with taxing the rich to death or making everyone poor by seizing property – it’s about rewarding hard work within business by having them share increasing profits so that each persons wages rises in proportion to the success of a business.The redistribution of wealth within a socialist economy applies only within the confines of each individual business and enterprises where profits are shared equally not society as a whole which can only happen within a capitalist system through social programmes and social welfare which can only exist through taxation of the wealthy elite in corporations due to the unequal distribution of wealth with each corporation.Seizing farmland and other private property occurs only in capitalism because in socialism the land and other private property is already owned collectively by all workers who work on the land themselves through cooperative farms,cooperative facteries etc and thus the state can’t intervene it can only regulate the property again democratically.As explained here socialism is bringing something under public control by turning them into cooperatives not the government seizing control of them while bringing something under state control through nationalisation and state owned corporations can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism not socialism.Taxing the wealthy to death and seizing private property such as farmland only occurs in capitalism because of the social stratification and unequal distribution of wealth due to the unequal amount of labour between employers and employees and flat wages in otherwards because CEOs and landowners get wealthy for doing absolutely nothing while all their workers are getting paid scraps for doing all of the hard work with it also it can only occur in capitalism because private property can only exist in capitalism in the first place.The flat wage system in capitalism allows CEOs and managers to seize control of the majority of profits for himself for doing nothing but sit in his office and lobby the government for eliminating socialist policies and thus results in workers becoming bitter about work and lobby for rises in the federal minimum wages and socialist policies to gain better wages and benefits for doing all the work in a business that is responsible for its success which is the exact opposite of what their bosses want thus creating conflict in the workplace and this is the exact opposite of socialism.Due to the proportional rise of wages federal minimum wages are made obsolete and working conditions are decided by workers with taxes decided democratically.In socialism taxes are usually spread across and equalised if they exist at all and are democratically decided on and considering the fact that shared wages rise in proportion to profits successful business and workers would be taxed less because the higher the profits the higher the amount sent to the government in proportion to the proportional wage increase in fact taxes would be smaller for virtually everyone.This means that taxes would be democratically decided upon by the workers and would likely be small across the board even for top earners since the top earners even if taxes a light tax such as 1-10% would be enough to fund any remaining government services and programmes even when applied to the top earners in a socislist economy with market socialism not needing federal minimum wages,universal basic income and a flat social welfare that would discintenvise people to stay unemployed and would likely only exist for temporary emergency situations say a pandemic.Furthermore since most government services and bodies etc such as healthcare,education etc would be worker run and thus socialised with zero government control it would mean more money could go to social welfare and programmes to deal with emergency situations and could involve the formation of an government treasury the amount of money present in a government treasury for this rising constantly due to the constant intake of taxes and also the fact that social welfare would be discentivised due to them being flat compared to proportional rising profits and government bodies and programmes would be worker run meaning almost all taxes would go into this public trust fund that increase exponentially over time due to the increase of socialised enterprises,workers and their profits overtime and would only be used to pay the unemployed during rare emergencies that leaves them in a position where they can’t work say a pandemic with if possibly them redistributed back to the public ie the government giving workers back all their money they paid in taxes over a long or set period of time after a set amount of time of it not being needed which in turn would cater more than enough to any emergency situation or unemployment as savings and retirement with again all facets of this again democratically decided upon.A person can have through democratic processes have all money they paid in taxes stored in a treasury and logged so that when they retire they can have an entire lifetimes worth of taxes paid back to them as an retirement bonus with this even initiated during pandemics and other instances of mass unemployment.Taxes through democratic process be stored in a treasury and emergency fund that is paid back in the form of an universal basic income and social welfare as a monthly or even weekly payment only in emergencies where one is in a position where they cannot work ie due to a pandemic,recession or bankruptcy with it decided to be means tested to be sent efficiently sent where it is needed the most ie those with lower incomes and lower amounts of money in bank accounts given larger amounts while those with higher incomes and more money in bank accounts given smaller amounts of money with this stopped once they are able to work.The payments would be flat payments thus encouraging people to return to work as soon as possible and prevent people getting lazy and living on it for any more than a year or few months with most people through the proportional wage system able to save large amounts of money to survive at least a few years or decade or more without work in a pandemic or recession etc with the again money paid back at retirement with the proportional wage system discentivising one living on social welfare and rendering universal basic income obsolete since theses even in emergencies would be flat payments.Thus economic safety nets such as universal basic income,social welfare programmes would flat ones that would discentivise people staying unemployed and would only exist to maintain economic and social cohesion in emergencies such as when a person is unable to work say when bankrupt,sick,physically disabled etc for individuals with for national instances out of the control of workers and the state such as pandemics similar to the Coronavirus and also global or even national recessions.This is what most conservatives and libertarians actually want low taxes even on the wealthy,social welfare discentivised by being a flat one,with funds in a treasury derived from taxes being only used in emergency situations such as a pandemic and also the option of them being after a set point in time paid back in full to all workers or at retirement with all aspects regarding taxes including the rates for all incomes brackets etc democratically decided by all citizens.Therefore workers can initiate laws that have all taxes they paid to the government in order to fund social programmes etc during their lifetime paid back to them in full at retirement as an extra bonus etc with this one of the perks as it is the workers themselves that control the creation and enforcement of taxes and regulations.It is society itself including the workers that are allowed to initiate,enact and repeal all laws,regulations and taxes with the government legally obliged to enforce them through democratic processes.Trade unions would be non existent because all working regulations would be democratically decided upon both within the confines of businesses and also federal government ones decided by democratic process.Lobbyists would be non existent because their existence would be negated by all legislation being democratically decided by the public and anti corruption laws present to make them illegal and obsolete.Bailouts would either be minimal or completely obsolete since like in a true non state capitalist economy the electorate would decide to allow to have them abolished and thus allow even the biggest corporations and banks to fail completely.Corruption would be almost non existant with it eliminating cronyism with the public through democracy pushing through laws to prevent cronyism and corruption with environmental regulation limiting pollution and eliminating corruption from fossil fuel cooperatives as all energy enterprises would be cooperatives including fossil fuel ones that would allow green energy companies to compete with each other without corruption in the government thus allowing for solar,wind,wave,algae and even geothermal cooperatives to gain an exponentially increasing market share as far back as 1978 in our alternate socialist parallel universe making them the predominant power sources by now with even fossil fuel cooperatives to ensure high profits and customers unable to resort to buying out scientists and politicians would have to go out of business or adapt and branch out into diamonds,biochar,algae and bacteria based oil and gas and carry out intensive research into increasing yields etc thus eliminating anthropogenic climate change and perpetual warfare in the Middle East as they would have carried out research into synthetic and algae alternatives and even electric vehicles negating the need to carry out the wars and coups in Afghanistan,Iraq,Venezuela,Bolivia.Exxon,shel,Cheverons etc since cooperatives would have go bust or branch out into wind,solar,algae,synthetic diamonds,synthetic oil and gas,nuclear etc thus solving global warming as far back as 1978.Thus in a “socialist hellhole” paralell universe where America and the rest of the world adopted socialism anthropogenic climate change would not be an issue because fossil fuel cooperatives through democratic process would be unable to buy out politicians and scientists with thus eliminating the threat of anthropogenic climate change and have prevented all imperilist wars from 2000 onwards or even before that.The government would through democratic legislation passed laws through democratic process that include carbon taxes and elimation of subsidies sent through to fossil fuels cooperatives could have passed those subsidies to green energy cooperatives and instigated research into green energy thus increasing the efficiency of solar power and battery technology and even algae and if possible bacteria based fossil fuels and funded carbon sequestration programmes.Having the populace have democratic control over regulation would have forced fossil fuel cooperatives to do research into algae,macro algae biomethane,bacteria based fossil fuels and carbon sequestration that converts excess carbon dioxide via biochar fertiliser,diamonds etc thus increasing their portfolios and profit margins and even branching out into wave,tidal,nuclear power,geothermal that would have been carbon negative or neutral to stay afloat in the face of new democratically decided regulations to outcompete and shut down solar and wind.This could have been done as far back as 1978 in a parallel universe where socialism is the predominant economic system around the world.If possible green energy cooperatives rather than have to compete with large competing fossil fuel cooperatives would by themselves and forming mergers that would allow them to form a wide portfolio of green energy types such as wave,wind,solar,geothermal,electric vehicles,algae,bacteria based fossil fuels,diamonds,biochar etc thus having a wide portfolio of energy systems and carbon sequestration programmes fuelling large amounts of profits while still slowing down the rate of anthropogenic climate change exponentially and the preventing the need for wars in the Middle East.This could have been instigated in a socialist system as far back as 1978 meaning by now we have solved antropogenic climate change and prevented the Iraq,Afghanistan,Syrian and other illegal wars and coups.This would have applied to all corporate scandles that involve the use of toxic or contaminated products as democratic legislation would prevent and force cooperatives to research alternatives to toxic compounds and thus all products would have to by law through democracy have products contain cheaper non toxic compounds and also abide by environmental regulations etc to remain profitable.Sweatshop conditions would in clothing and electronics factories be eliminated by democratic processes in each business have automation introduced to eliminate the most labour intensive conditions,institute laws to prevent children from working and ensure that factories are well ventilated etc and are spacious because the workers themselves would decide these regulations with those who in a capitalist system earn at least $186 – $365 a year would in socialism would be earning at least between $18,000 – $1,000,000 a year enough to bring them out of poverty and live exponentially better than in our current system.They like westerners could shop around and work for multiple cooperatives during the year.Workers would not have to work so long with automation picking up the slack and could have adult or at least adolescent children and family members working their and the male to work in different cooperatives to exponentially increase wage especially in less labour intensive jobs.Not as good as a Wall Mart worker but still exponentional better.With regards to healthcare democratic process would have eliminated insurance companies or at least have them regulated to the point that healthcare could be affordable with it instigating price fixing regulations through democratic processes for pharmaceutical cooperatives keeping healthcare affordable and allowing for patients to have acess to both universal healthcare and also cooperatives that provide pharmaceutical drugs and also insurance that would be regulated to the point they would be affordable with this coupled with the fact that the lowest income bracket of Americans would be between $100,000 – $3,307,200 or $33,072,000 the average American would go bankrupt of have to die from not being able to afford healthcare with them even able to afford those in current capitalist system.Mergers would occur much more often in a socialist system within a town,village,city,county,state or even country and worldwide as competing independant mom and pop business will once merged will gain all combined customers and as a result all of their profits will be combined and thus increase exponentially if more businesses combine together thus in turn meaning each workers wages will increase exponentially.The more business that merge the higher the amount of customers the new amalgamated business gains,more profits it gains exponentially thus meaning the wages of each employee locally,nationally and globally increases exponentially thus it would be in the interests of all workers in cooperatives whether they are small independent mom and pop cooperatives and even national ones and multinational ones will benefit more from mergers thus leading to a small number of providers of a service or product worldwide or in each country with monopolies likely forming though to keep prices low and increase competition antitrust laws to prevent monopolies would likely exist – democratically.This means if a giant international cooperative like Wall Mart moves into a city,town or village then its likely small mom and pop businesses would be more willing to have them in the area and merge with them as this will increase the profits of Wall Mart globally and the number of customers of the old mom and pop will increase exponentionally and customers of both shops would shop at Wall Mart thus increasing the wages of the mom and pop store workers but also that of all Wall Mart employees worldwide including sweat shop workers who in a socialist system would rather than being paid $365 a year they would be earning at least $100,000-$1,000,000.Even multiple small independent mom and pop cooperatives in the same town,city,country of across the world could merge together to become bigger and still have multiple outlets across a town,city and country or the world and the combined number customers of all outlets in the same city,town,country or across the world would exponentially increase profits and thus wages of each employee worldwide.Cooperatives can merge with those in the same town,city or country or even halfway across the world and despite not getting more customers in a specific retail outlet their profits and wages rise exponentially.If a low level cooperative especially mom and pop ones that doesn’t make much money,profits and has low wages for each employee wants to increase their profits and each persons wages then they can merge with other cooperatives in the same town,city and country or those halfway across the world to increase profits and wages exponentially.The more business that merge with each other the higher exponentially the profits and wages of each employee gets because they gain all of each businesses original and new customers that are them combined exponentionally and thus exponentially increases profits and thus exponentially increases wages for all workers.Cooperatives that merge together need not be of the same business type.Independant restaurants can merge with retail outlets and also hair salons and other different cooperatives can merge together giving more flexibility and variety than in capitalism.A low level independent salon can merge with mid level retail outlets as well as high level restaurant and the profits and wages of everyone in all of them goes up exponentially so therefore people work for retail outlets and salons can benefit from the success of restaurants etc and so on.Stores that sell different goods can merge with each other ie electronics stores can merge with clothing stores and those that sell sporting goods etc.Low level cooperatives that don’t have much profits and wages can merge with other low level cooperatives or even more successful cooperatives across the world including that are of different business types and despite that specific retail outlet not getting more customers their profits and thus the wages of all employees rises exponentially.This allows struggling mom and pop cooperatives to increase their wages and compete with large multinational ones or become large multinational ones rather than being shut down and going out of business despite having the same original retail outlet that had the same number of customers.Low level cooperatives with one small retail outlet when they combine with multiple cooperatives including multinational ones that have larger retail outlets still will have an exponential increase in profits and wages because they are gaining the customers,profits of larger ones.As stated low level cooperatives can merge with other low level or large multinational cooperatives not just in the same city or town or country but from other countries across the globe.Rather than going out of business or struggling to make ends and compete with large multinationals they can merge with other cooperatives and thus become just as powerful and wealthy as large multinationals.In a capitalist system independent mom and pop business in danger of being shut down by large multinationals like Wall Mart they can become cooperatives and merge with other independent business also converted into cooperatives including other ones in danger of being shut down by Wall Mart in other towns and cities across the country and world by selling things and providing servives Wall Mart cannot or better yet it can convince the owners and workers of individual big box stores of large multinationals that are already competitors to Wall Mart to become cooperatives and thus become just as powerful as Wall Mart.Otherwise they can merge with that individual store of Wall Mart by convincing the store owners and workers to turn it into a cooperative and the original outlet act as a secondary outlet and sell extra items.Thid can occur with other businesses.Unlike capitalism in socialism mergers are likely to occur and accepted by employees because everyone that is all workers benefits whereas in capitalism only the manager or CEO benefits from a merger or takeover wheras any remaining staff are still paid the same flat wage – they gain nothing out of the merger or takeover.The more outlets cooperatives has and the more outlets a business is selling manufactured goods nationwide and worldwide and more diversified its portfolio of goods and services is the higher market share it has it thus has much more customers,more sales and revenue nationwide and globally thus the more profits generated worldwide with although their being more workers to pay through the merger the the higher the wages of each workers rise with as stated people only have to work at least 5-10 years starting at the ages 12-14 to gain a sizeable retirement fund allowing one to retire early between the ages of 22-34 with potentially their retirement fund ranging in between millions and ten millions of dollars.Antitrust laws to prevent monopolies would likely exist meaning meaning you would still have a small number of cooperatives with outlets worldwide the difference is the wages of all workers from cashiers,relay workers etc would rise exponentially into either seven or eight figure salaries between $1,000,000-$10,000,000 a year.Regulations with regards to the workplace and the environment would be democratically instigated and enforced as it would be the workers and the rest of society that enforces them not the state who can be corrupted by lobbyists.As a result regulations would be lax but sensible ones to put in place carbon taxes,eliminate subsidies to fossil fuel cooperatives and pharmaceutical cooperatives with there being environmental laes to prevent pollution etc and of course eliminate discrimination in the workface.These regulations would be it in place and kept that ensure worker safety and safety against fire hazards,anti-discrimination regulations and regulations that prevent or pollution of the air,water etc thus preventing corruption removing these with regulations especially over regulation that stunt the growth of new and small business almost non existant.Regulations would also exist to keep the price of key commodities and industries under control preventing them becoming too expensive etc such as with keeping the healthcare industry affordable such as keeping the price of pharmaceuticals at constantly affordable prices and possible eliminate insurance companies or have them kept affordable.Over regulation that stunts the growth of new and small businesses would not exist because it would again be democratically created and decided on.Antitrust laws would prevent the rise of monopolies.Corruption,cronyism,monopolies and over regulation seen in capitalism would not exist as democratic process would allow the workforce to institute anti corruption laws,antitrust laws,eliminate bailouts would ensure that sensible regulations exist only and not those that stunt growth in the economy and those that stunt the development of new businesses.Overegulation that stunts the growth of new and small businesses and cronyism and corruption will always exist in capitalism in all of its forms because the actions of the government is not democratically controlled by the populace and thus can be corrupted by lobbyists.Regulation in state capitalist America is double sided.On the Rebuplican side the state through cronyism they eliminates environmental,worker and financial regulations including those on banks etc as well as cutting taxes on the wealthy etc and increase taxes on the poor to ensure big business it is in bed with can get wealthier by not having to deal with these regulations while at the same time the government puts in place regulations that stunt the setting up and growth of new competing business and also existing smaller business to eliminate competitors of its crony companies on the Corporate Democrats side with both the Republicans and Corporate Democrats bailing out big pharma,big oil,Wall Street etc and not their elecorate.As a result all actions of the state whether it is the cutting of regulations and the enforcement and introduction of new regulations are thus meant to only help their monopolistic corporate donor parents and neither side is interested in helping the average American – believe otherwise and you’re a fucking mentally retarded idiot.Believe this is a good thing and acceptable and you’re a piece of shit with no consciousness – all you care about is winning over them liberals like kindergartens regardless of the cost of human life.Believe magical libertarianism and anarcho capitalism will somehow prevail and be reinstated or anything that preserves capitalism and yet still eliminates corruption and cronyism and you are as delusional and mentally handicapped as a kindergartener.Therefore corruption,cronyism etc is the very founding principles of capitalism with anarcho capitalism even worse because the state cannot exist at to prevent corruption.Considering both the Republicans and Corporate Democrats enact regulations etc that in the end only AIs big businesses neither side care about their conservative or liberal voters only their donor parents.Socialism is thus more freer than capitalism and it less prone to corruption,cronyism and over regulation because all actions of the state especially with regards to taxes,regulations,bailouts etc are democratically decided by the workers themselves alongside the rest of the population and this means the workers themselves and the general voting public decide all taxes and business regulations making socialism more freer than free market capitalism this this eliminates corruption,cronyism and over regulation – the exact opposite of what people have been brainwashed into thinking..This equal pay that rises in proportion to hard work is the exact opposite of capitalism and state capitalism where only the CEO or state bureaucrat in charge makes more money when a business becomes more successful as everyone else has a flat wage in their contract meaning their is a disparity in wealth distribution not seen in socialism as the least hard working individual the CEO who sits in his office and does nothing but signs contracts,lobbies governments gains more money than all of the hardest working individuals put together that do all of the
grubby,labourious work making the least amount of money with the CEO doing everything they can to cut costs and wages of their employees such as pushing for automation,avail of tax and wage cuts and loopholes through moving to countries with lower taxes and wages including using third world sweatshops or lobbying and buying out politicians to lower or scrap federal minimum wages and shut down trade unions,cut taxes on the wealthy,eliminate trade unions and employee benefits and make things even worse for employees and make more profits for themselves thus this is why trade unions,people asking for pay raises,gender wage gaps,strikes and other conflicts occur in the workplace and people lobbying for better working conditions and benefits alongside corruption occurs only in capitalism – none of this would occur in true socialism as universal healthcare is allowed and employees are paid higher wages for being more hard working and productive and working conditions are democratically decided since all business are worker owned.The job of a CEO etc is to get as much money as possible from a business profits from doing the least amount of work themselves.The job of CEOs and managers is to extract as much of the businesses profits for their own personal gain in turn doing everything to screw over his employees and to do that he lobbies to lower taxes,lobbies to remove federal minimum wages,worker protections and also benefits and also eliminate employees through cost saving automation.They do the least amount of work and are in fact trying make this worse for his employees who they don’t give shits about.All managers and corporate CEOs do is sit in their office doing the least amount of work and do everything they can to extract as much or if not all 100% of the profits from his workers making him the least working individual in the business who exploits everyone else and gains the most increase in wages than everyone else who does all the work.The job of a CEO or manager is simply to find ways to extract as much of a business profits for himself for doing the least amount of work which includes pushing for automation that eliminates staff and thus the need to pay them,lobbying for cutting taxes on the wealthy,lobbying to get rid of worker and environmental regulations,getting rid of trade unions,using cheaper more environmentally destructive methods to deal with waste and extraction of raw materials etc,tax loopholes,getting tax cuts from the government,using secret illegal foreign bank accounts,moving factories to third world countries with lower wages for workers,outsourcing work for all jobs whether it is customer services/IT/sales etc to third world countries with again lower wages,eliminating trade unions and worker benefits and also quashing attempts to raise the federal or at least state minimum wage and any laws that eat into the profits.They will push for ways to lower the wages of each employee that is where the profits are used on.They find ways to lower wages of employees as much as possible due to wages being a drain on his profits and thus will find ways to get employees to work as hard as possible while still ensuring they are paid as little as possible or eliminate them altogether.Thus managers and CEOs are the people of each company and business that works the least but gains the most out of the profits generated and its their job to ensure that it is kept that way.This is how capitalism rewards laziness and discentivises those of us who actually works their asses off.This is why propaganda pushed by capitalists that raising taxes,minimum wages disincentivises CEOs and managers to work harder boggles the mind since these policies are meant to encourage and help workers work harder rather than be sloppy.CEOs make it their business to gain as much profit for himself for doing as little work as possible and so hires workers below him to do as much work as possible for the least amount of money.Socialist policies put forward by progressive politicians are supposed to reward those that work the most and hardest in a corporation and prevent the least hard working individuals get the bulk of the profits for doing absolutely nothing and this only can and only does occur in a capitalist system and can never occur in socialism.They do this by pushing for the formation of cooperatives,raising tax cuts on the wealthy CEOs,democratize the workplace by installing trade unions,raising the federal minimum wages etc.This is the exact opposite of what CEOs and managers want and it is this that creates conflict in the workplace and why you having people hating thror jobs and hating their bosses.The policies put forward by progressive politicians are to reward the actual workers in a business by taking profits from the CEO who does the least amount of work and transfer that money to the actual workers who are responsible for the success of a business and in turn try to make as similar to actual socialism where workers have complete control of the workforce and state within the confines of a capitalist economy.Hence the phrase paying your fair share cause if your making more money for doing nothing you should be paying more taxes than those that work the hardest who should be paying less taxes.This makes CEOs and managers as well as capitalists of the top 1% whiny little shits with the maturity level of kindergarteners because they expect to be paid more and taxed the least for doing absolutely nothing.The person who works the least in a business ie a CEO or manager should be paid the least or at least be taxed the most and those who work the most should be paid more and taxed the least – thinking otherwise is kindergarten level nonsense.In a sane world CEOs should be taxed the most between 70-90% or at least earn the least amount of profits at least 10% while the workers should be earning the highest share of profits not the other way around.CEOs and managers only care about the state of the business from his perspective and not his employees because if it loses profits and goes out of business its his lost income his employees can find work somewhere else he simply doesn’t care at all about them in fact he wants their wages to drop so he can extract more of for himself.Having his goods produced in sweatshops in third world countries is not done out of the kindness of his heart to lift them out of poverty it’s because they cost less to him than using European or American workers.If it was done out of the kindness of his heart then he would be paying them the same as workers in America and Europe and they would be paid a federal minimum wage of $15 an hour – the very thing they are against.This is why liberals berate sweatshops because these workers are barely being lifted out of poverty at all and just being exploited for cheap labour.As detailed in a socialist system the CEO would not exist but sweat shop workers that make smartphones,clothing etc in Asia,Africa,China etc would be making between $18,000-$1,000,000 a year at least 100-1,000 times more than they make in our current system which is roughly $180-$365 a year in our current system and in their countries they would be making enough to make ends meet and could afford good housing,electricity etc while in a capitalist system most are still living in slums etc.This may not be as much as WallMart workers but enough to lift themselves out of poverty and live comfortably rather than in abject poverty and climb the social ladder and at the same time find new work in other companies.These people who work in sweatshops making smartphones and clothing would like westerners would shop around and work for several cooperatives a year as much as 275 cooperatives thus exponentially increasing their wages to as much as $1,000,000 – $33,000,000 a year with this even applying to the people that mine gold,coltan,blood diamonds and rare earths in third world countries would be making this much.In fact they would be making a living on par with most Middle class people in Europe and America.Then of course they would have a democratic say on working conditions such as rotas,working hours and also conditions in the factory.Furthermore by having democratising processes present it allows for working conditions to be improved such as working hours and also allow for air conditions snd other basic facets to be present.Even dangerous work in mining of raw elements in third world countries would be eliminated by having automation introduced.In fact automation has been sufficiently advanced enough to have alleviated most of not all labour in sweatshops that construct laptops,smartphones,clothing etc as well as eliminate most labour in mining for gold,tantalum etc since at least 2000-2010 right about the time smartphones became a thing and about the time the demand for sweatshop labour especially for fashion has increased with some of it being feasible since about 2000.With the correct commercial investment it could have been possible for at least 50-90% of the work done in sweatshops and mines for the production of smartphones and clothing to have reduced working hours and increased productivity significantly between 2000-2010.The common excuse is that this sweatshop work in factories and mining is better than what’s available to them which is bullshit because western corporations are not providing alternatives as well.If capitalists think we should have better alternatives to sweatshops in third world countries then why are you not helping themselves create better alternatives to sweatshops through creating markets,help them create their own businesses and corporations where they can compete with you by selling goods and services on local and international markets and spread actual freedom and supplying them with 21st century technology in agriculture etc to increase productivity and eliminate labour so that they can create enough to not go hungry and also sell it on international markets.You can also lobby the governments of these countries to open up business and markets.If the reason for the people living in squalor and are dying needlessly because of corrupt governments then why are the American governments backed by corporations with their hearts of gold are not carrying out wars and coups to overthrow these governments – I’ll give you a clue it’s because their is no oil and simply no cost benefit analysis.The fact that you are not doing this shows you really don’t give two shits about the poor and only are using them for cheap labour and preventing them from developing their own markets and businesses is a big no no as it creates competition which has to be shut down and this makes multinational corporations no different than the likes of Mao Zedong,Vladimir Lenin.Josef Stalin who exploited workers for cheap labour in state run farms etc.There are no new corporations being created in these countries because these corporations would act as competition that would eat into the profits of Nike and other fast fashion companies.Furthermore if new native corporations are created by westerner groups or by are allowed to be set up by natives in the developing world themselves and westerners gave poor farmers in developing countries with sweatshops access to 21st century technology from the west to increase productivity and remove labour in agriculture this would cause farmers and others to become wealthy through hard work and this would incite jealously and in turn rebellion from sweatshop workers who are being exploited for cheap labour to go on strikes or lobby the government,push for democratic candidates and form trade unions to demand higher wages and better working conditions and this would be crushed out by CEOs and governments they are in bed with.It is in the best interests of western multinationals to keep the developing world poor and under the control of them to ensure they can have a constantly supply of cheap labour at their disposal and any attempts to raise the quality of living if the developing world is against the interests of corporations because doing so would cause upheaval,social unrest and rebellion and an end to cheap labour.The World Bank and IMF at the behest of multinationals seize valuable resources of a developing country and then put countries into so much debt to gain control of those resources they are unable to repay it for decades or forever thus making the countries be forced into cheap labour forever.This is why left leaning celebrities are always hounding the World Bank etc to cancel the debt in third countries and conservatives never do this.There is a balance point wherein western multinationals have to raise the standard of living just enough to give the illusion of doing something and at the same time prevent insurrection.They have to keep wages low to increase their profits and at the same time be just enough to be better than all of the alternatives and having these countries allowed to set up their own alternatives or have increase in minimum wage would put them out business.They cannot allow the developing world in Africa,China and Asia develop their own capitalist economies and their own corporations and the developing world cannot be allowed to be upgraded to 21st century technology in terms of agriculture etc through charity and economic development plans on par with the western world because to do so would cause insurrection and cause revolts and an end to cheap labour.Conservatives may harp on about liberals stunting the development of fossil fuel power plants etc to bring people out of poverty but the reality is this if corporations and the western world governments actually decided decades ago and not just today to bring the millions of people in countries they exploit for cheap labour of poverty through developing their infrastructure,native corporations,energy grids and agriculture which they could have as far back as 1978 then there wont be any more poor workers to exploit for cheap labour because people due to this increased standard of living would demand higher wages and better working conditions for making smartphones and clothing and they would either go on strike or find work somewhere else that pays better meaning you’ll have no more smartphones and clothing produced in third world countries because everyone would be working for native corporations or on farms that nat much better and this would cause the makers of smartphones and clothing go.bankrupt.The very corrupt governments that are stunting private enterprises in third world countries and stunting their agricultural and energy development are the same corrupt governments that western multinationals are in bed and have made deals with with and are ensuring that wages for sweatshop workers and their working conditions are constantly terrible.Think about this for a second – if the developing world such as all of Africa,Asia etc that are currently being exploited for cheap labour in sweatshops was suddenly lifted out of poverty either as far back as 1978 or today by having 21st century agricultural technologies and techniques donated to them by western corporations and governments and were producing enough to feed themselves and export to other countries and they had their own versions of IKEA,Wall Mart,Nike etc and were brought to the same technological and infrastructure as well as wealth as Western Europe and America and most people in retail,restaurants,farms,manufacturing etc would be making anywhere between $86,000 – $1,000,000 a year similar to Americans and Europeans do you really think that any of them that work in sweatshops making clothing and smartphones for less than $1 a day would continue to work for less than $1 a day for western multinationals?No they wouldnt because their neighbours who work in farms,retail etc could be earning more than enough to be on par with Middle to Upper class Americans and Europeans that those working in sweatshops etc for western multinationals who earn less than $1 a day would be having strikes for better wages and better working conditions and these people would be abandoning sweatshops for better paying paying jobs in farms,restaurants etc and you would have no clothing and smartphones produced for the western world or the wages would have to rise and to keep them profitable the companies would have to raise prices to the point that they would be unattainable to the average person and this would cause sales and profits to drop with the only way to keep customers is to sell their products at a reduced price to the point they would make razor thin profits or they would have to be sold at a loss making them bankrupt and Apple etc would go bankrupt.The fact corporations do everything they can to shut down labour unions and shut down increases in wages in sweatshops and carry out coups against democratically elected politicians who actually gave shit and wanted to change things for the better shows it has nothing to do with lifting people out of poverty and everything to with exploiting the third world for cheap labour – and if workers and unions are successful in improving working conditions and getting better wages then the corporation will move to another country where wages are lower to then exploit others leaving said country now with millions of people unemployed showing its about corporations wanting to get a quick buck and exploit cheap labour and nothing to do about lifting people out of poverty.This shows that it has nothing to do with lifting people out of poverty and being a selfish greedy asshole.Countries that do elect democratically elected leaders who want to improve the working conditions have said leader overthrown by western governments in an illegal coup and replaced by someone else who will return things to normal or will be assassinated or smeared as a “socialist” and so as a result are even then by this corruption inherent in governments compounded by western multinationals are forced by this to then lower their minimum wages and lower the standard of working conditions to compete for the attention of corporations and benevalot administrations that do push through better working conditions they are overthrown through assassinations and illegal coups.In otherwards to compete for the attention of western multinationals especially when reforms to improve working conditions are successful in a country other countries governments will compete with each other to lower the minimum wage and to even lower levels and even worse working conditions especially when bribed.Eventually it’s going to come to the point that there is not enough countries to exploit for cheap labour and sweatshops production of smartphones and clothing would cease forever and you’ll have no more cheap smartphones etc anymore.Capitalism thrives on their always being a system of have and have nots and it needs the upper classes to subjugate the rest of society for cheap labour to give them the life of ultra luxury they have.Governments are not helping third world countries develop their own corporations and are not helping them gain the 21st century technology they need to increase agricultural productivity and eliminate labour because if they did then that would make them richer and this would cause those who work in sweatshops to then choose to become farmers and lead revolts and insurrection against their crappy working conditions this would then lead to clothing and electronics factories to shut down and rich lazy CEOs would no longer be able to make money off of cheap exploitive labour and this would cause multinationals to go bankrupt by having to pay more to their workers and charge more for their products or they would have to shut down completely.Thus capitalism to survive their must always be a small group of people who live like kings and a large group of people who work their asses off and live in abject poverty and work their asses to ensure that small minority work like months.This is how it was in state capitalist Maoist China,Soviet Russia and modern day America.Eliminating poverty is thus the exact opposite of what capitalism and the private enterprises and multinationals needs and can only thrive on poverty as it needs poverty to function.Someone always has to do the dirty work for a pittance in order to allow a capitalist society to function and have the wealthy elites live a lifestyle of luxury and cater to the needs of the middle class lifestyle of western society and unfortunately not everyone wants to do the dirty work and there is not enough for this to be sustainable.Poverty is not something that can be solved by capitalism or is part of capitalisms survival plan rather it is caused by capitalism and is enhanced by capitalism for it to survive.In capitalism for one side of the word to live like kings or even a middle class existence another side the majority in the developing world must live in abject poverty and be kept in abject poverty to act as cheap exploitive labour – in capitalism someone always has to the dirty work no one else wants to do – this is exploitation.Considering that not eliminating poverty in third world countries leads to people dying to preventable diseases such as malaria,starvation etc this qualifies as imposing living conditions living conditions that seek to “bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”, – which is genocide so the death toll of preventable diseases etc adds to the death troll of capitalism and also both their corrupt governments and that of western multinationals which gets you a few hundred million years in “that place”.Although it may have eliminated poverty to a degree in the west and developing world but not every one can be a multi millionaires or billionaires because no one ever became a millionaire or billionaire through hard work – they got there by exploiting cheap labour of others and to make millionaires and billionaires you always need exploitation of cheap labour especially sweatshop labour meaning there always has to have to be master and slave relationship between the rich and poor going on and this continues in a positive feedback loop.If everyone in the developed world or even the developing world want to be billionaires through new enterprises they would have to outsource their work to third world countries and their is not only not enough people in the third world to exploit there is not enough poor people worldwide to exploit for cheap labour to allow for everyone in the world to become a millionaire or billionaire and this is where the logic of libertarians and anarcho capitalists hits a brick wall and the only solution to this problem of making everyone millionaires and billionaires is through mass adoption of AI and automation and this eventually leads to mass unemployment of people worldwide including CEOS themselves leading you to square one and on track to communism..Americans and Europeans sure as hell won’t work for the starvation wages as seen in the third world with to do this all of Africa and Asian will have to be kept poor through the examples I’ve shown..Eventually all of the developing world will be demanding higher wages and you will have nowhere to exploit for cheap labour and their will be no choice to automate – which could have been done as far back as 1980 – 2000 about 20 – 40 years ago.Its quite possible that intensive research and investment on part of clothes and electronics manufacturers and mining could have automated all work done by sweatshop workers in third world countries so that they could have been fully automated or to the point that it could have eliminated 50-90% of the most intensive labour as far back as 2000 or even 1980 and increased productivity and eliminated labour costs.Dosent matter anymore most if not all sweatshop workers in clothing and electronics manufacturing and the mining of rare earths for electronics can be completely eliminated by automation,biosynth technology with existing technology and certainly by 2029 with this leading all of these people now completely unemployed and dependant on social welfare like the billions of people worldwide.When AI and automation are sufficiently advanced then multinationals will move out leaving them completely poor and back to square one.No trickle down economists does not work its Orwellian nonsense as its about ensuring all or most profits go to those at the top and as little goes to employees.Anyone who believes trickle down economics works is an idiot.We have 50 years of hard scientific data from countless experts including the IMF of all places that shows that tax breaks and cuts on the wealthy only goes towards them amassing more wealth and none of it going towards anyone below them especially in the case of sweat shop workers in the third world.CEOs have the sole aim of treating workers as bad as possible by eliminating federal minimum wages,cutting benefits or getting rid of them altogether by pushing for automation.Its a simple fact of capitalist economics that the highest paid individuals do the least important and least amount of work while those who do the most important work and most amount of work make the least amount of money.As people are paid the same flat wages it causes them to become sloppy,cranky and bored with their work especially when the jobs are boring and repetitive that involve the same tasks done over and over again as even though they may work harder they get no extra wages that stay the same while their bosses wages and earnings consistently go up as time goes on – why should one put in that little extra effort in if they not going to get anything extra and in fact that little bit extra profit goes towards their boss which leaves most people dissatisfied with their jobs and have a hatred of their employers who consistently get richer than them even though they work less with them also doing everything they can to cut their wages and benefits.There is only one reason anyone works at all as an employee in a capitalist system because if they don’t then they can’t pay bills and then they die – hence the phrase wage slave.This is where the anti-capitalist stigma of millennials arises from and why Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez is so popular amongst them because a small minority of the worlds people are becoming absurdly wealthy for doing absolutely nothing while the majority of the worlds people who work their asses for them are getting poor or screwed over for doing the entire workload that their wealthy bosses reap all the benefits from who use cronyism etc to stunt the social mobility of lower classes – this is what class struggles is and this is pretty much been the source of at least 90-99% of all conflicts worldwide either directly or indirectly.This is what Marxist literature and philosophy are about its about conflict between the workers who work their asses off maintaining business and get very little democratic say in their business operations etc as well as being paid a pittance and the bourgeoisie CEOs who just sit on their ass all day and make all the decisions directly or indirectly by lobbying the government and bribing them and control the lives of workers the corrupt governments bought out by them.Its also been at the sole root cause of all conflict throughout human history as throughout human history their had been always been in every civilisation a small group of people getting absurdly wealthy off the labour of large groups of people.No successful civilisation can function when you have small groups of people getting wealthy off the back of slaves and a labour class that does all the work for them while getting absolutely nothing and every single civilisation in human history that has done this has eventually collapsed in on itself like a deck of cards spectacularly and with great rebellion and loss of life.Name one instance of this type of social structure being successful.This happened in all ancient civilisations,Medievil Europe,France etc before the French Revolution,America prior to the American Revolution and Civil War,Tsarist Russia and Pre Maoist China and modern day America.Look what happened to those civilisations.If you don’t understand this then you have the mental capacity of kindergartens and IQs in double digit territory making you mentally handicapped.The world currently has roughly 2,755 billionaires which is about 0.000034873417722% of the worlds population.No one ever become a millionaire or billionaire through hard work and labour.All of them got rich off the labour of other people.They may at first be responsible for coming up with an idea for a product and service but thats about it.Their workers below them are the ones who do 90-95% of the work that’s gets done in a business and get 5-10% of the wealth generated by corporations and business.Thats where the phrase I’m not paying you to sit around all day come from.The reason CEOs are pushing for automation and also do everything to shut down minimum wage increase and labour unions is not out of the kindness of their heart but to ensure they get more money for doing less work and that their workers get paid less for doing more work this is basic common sense and show’s ultimately that wealthy people do not care about their employees and are doing everything to get as rich as possible for as little work as possible.The anti capitalist stigma has nothing to with globalism.Socialist policies brought about by socialists like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez are to democratise the workplace by bringing control of business under the control of the workers either fully or partially with regards to pay,working hours and working conditions and introducing policies to increase the minimum wage and increase the wages and living standards of workers.The policies of progressives and socialists are there to punish those who work the least and reap the most and reward those who are responsible for the success of a business.Socialists etc want the same wide variety of competing goods and services and innovation as in capitalism but they also want people who are actually doing the majority of the work to get paid fairly and want those who are managers and CEOs who sit on their asses in offices all day long to get taxed heavily or get a lower amount of the share of profits and of course they want basic human rights like healthcare and a democratic say in regulations especially with regards to the environment and how the government functions with regards to eliminating corruption and cronyism which is exactly what most libertarians disagree otherwise otherwise and you a fucking idiot.Ones value of work should be determined by how much work they do not their ranking in corporations and one had to reavalulate what the value of labour is.If you were working your ass off in a labourious job and got paid a pittance while someone else above you namely your boss got paid exponentially more for doing absolutely nothing but sitting on their ass all day in an office would tolerant that for a single second?Probably not – which is why most people who spout the hard labour reward system are the laziest fucks on the planet who have never worked a single day in their entire lives and probably never will and are living off of huge trust funds from mammy and daddy and also from Patreon,Monitisation and also PragerU and Turning Point USA.It also has to do with the fact that wealthy capitalists and crony governments around the world including America are allowed to do whatever they want including environmental destruction and commiting war crimes, and illegal imperialist wars without consequences,get away scott free and spit in the face of the rule of law due to a lack of democratic processes and safeguards.Ithe anti-capitalism stigma also has to do with the inherent corruption and cronyism especially involving Wall Street,big oil,big pharma and the military industrial complex etc.

Capitalism explained:
This is what exactly happened to feudalism the very economic system capitalism replaced.You had the majority of population namely the peasants and serfs and servants doing all of the hard work and getting only a fraction of the wealth or nothing at all and had zero social mobility yet all of the wealth was transported vertically to the higher classes such as lords,church and monarchs who did literally nothing to earn that wealth similar to Marxs labour theory of value and similar to CEOs etc.Then when the Black Death plague occurred the entire structure collapsed in on itself and you had revolts and political change caused by the economic and political upheavals that followed the demographic and population shift which was also caused by economic factors caused large amounts of peasants dying who were the people responsible for doing all of the hard work ie agriculture etc thus leading to the collapse of the upper classes and further exacerbating poverty due to a skyrocking increase in the price of bread,chicken,beef etc due to so many farmers dying off and not being able to produce enough to feed everyone with deaths in the upper classes led to a further weakening of their power structures and the same time you had the knights constantly being shipped off to fight imperialist theocratic wars up to that point who basically didn’t see much of a point in doing that anymore.Some peasants and farmers become wealthy suddenly by default through having large amounts of closely and distantly releated family members dying and inheriting large sums of money via inheriting the combined wealth of multiple close and distant relatives at once – although each inheritances although small individually when combined together it made them very wealthy almost on par with the upper classes while at the same time the inequalities laid bare led to them and others demanding higher wages and demanding the right to own their own private lands and private propert rights with the upper classes weakened due to large amounts of their own population dying.Because so many of a persons relatives died the inherited each relatives wealth that although was small amounts individually it when combined made peasants who were dirt poor now exceedingly wealthy that was how severe the Black Death was and how much of an effect on society it had with this new wealthy present class now demanded private property rights and the chance to become wealthy not just from inheritance but through hard work done by themselves with them unlike the upper classes who earned their wealth through inheritance also they never worked a single day of their lives and thus the new wealthy presents now at an equal footing due to this wanted to gain more wealth not just through inheritance but through their labour and hard work.Furthermore the lower population that occurred especially in other rural communities had other sets of peasants who did not get wealthy through inheritances due to them not having relatives or them not dying but because the large amounts of deaths in their communities led to an labour shortage and thus as a result an exponential increase in wages with the prices of the land owned by dead landowners and surrounding land also lowering exponentially due to the former landowners dying off and the now more increasing importance of that land to be used for agriculture to lower prices of food thus allowing them to get wealthy by selling their labour and their land they owned already or through it handed down from their dead landowners etc thus leading this other group to finally see the inequities of the previous feudalistic system.Like the other peasents they wanted to get wealthy through hard work and private property rights.Prior to the Black Death overpopulation was a problem in Europe but this was due to primitive agricultural technologies and techniques that were only able to feed a fraction of today’s population of Europe with cities overcrowded and unsanitary with due to its population prior to the Black Death labour was cheap due to a large population of peasents and thus wages were low with after the plague wages rose because of the lower amount of workers and peasents this higher wages made the smaller number of peasents despite being a smaller number significantly more powerful in terms of political power.A combination of wages rising and prices of land falling created an environment where peasents could now rise to the top or at least a substantial footing with the nobility.Prior to the Black Death overpopulation was a problem in Europe but this was due to primitive agricultural technologies and techniques that were only able to feed a fraction of today’s population of Europe with cities overcrowded and unsanitary with due to its population prior to the Black Death labour was cheap due to a large population of peasents and thus wages were low with after the plague wages rose because of the lower amount of workers meant the same amount of money was concentrated on a smaller number of people and also because labour was valued due to scarcity with this higher wages made the smaller number of peasents despite being a smaller number were significantly more powerful in terms of political power.At the same that peasents become wealthier due to increased wages and inheriting the combined wealth of multiple relatives the price of land became much cheaper.A combination of wages rising due to a shortage of labour and an exponential decrease in the price of land led to these now wealthy peasents from getting higher wages buying up large tracts of land they could become wealthy on through private property rights via agriculture which was now in high demand and a lucrative business due to the sharp rises in food demanded more productivity that would lower prices and increase profits for those who engaged in farming.Once their wages rose and the prices of land dropped exponentially they realised that they could buy up large tracts of this now cheap land with their be found wealth and then become even wealthier by growing food on it and especially since food was in high demand due to so many farmers dying off.Prior to the Black Death all land was handed down to lords by the monarchy rather than being bought and thus were a quasi form of state run farms.Thirty-two percent of arable land was held by the lord of the manor.The farmers of the manor were required to work for a specified number of days per year on the lord’s land or to pay rent to the lord on the land they farmed.This was not private farming it was a system of nepotism where farms could not be bought they were handed to them by the monarchy and then passed down to one generation to the next with if all members of a family line died then the monarchy would choose who it would be handed to usually another Lord.The lords didn’t actually own the land it was part of the monarchies land it was simply divided between them based on decisions by the state with thus it wasn’t technically private farms but rather state run system where the actual workers were tenants rather than hired staff who paid rent in the form their labour.In the Middle Ages,a lord was a man who held land directly from the king.They were simply people who gained income from taxes and rents they took from the people that lived on the land on their land.The land was all technically owned by the king who then divided it up between lords who then in turn charged rent to the peasents who grew crops in the and paid rent for living on the land with gain some of the profits from the sold crops.Technically it wasn’t private farming it was a quasi state owned system similar to the large state owned farms of Soviet Russia and Maoist China without the profit incentive to increase productivity with after the plague wage increase due to a shortage of labour and the improvements in other workers as well as some becoming wealthy through inheritances and the need to produce more food would cause peasents to demand higher wages and private property rights to earn wealth from their labour rather than simply earnung a pittance.The population of Europe was roughly 78,700,000 people that were confined primarily to overcrowded cities with agricultural productivity being at least for wheat being 2:1(that is,for every seed planted,two seeds were harvested,one for next year’s seed,and one for food) and in a good season 7:1 compared to its current population of 748,584,375 today with agricultural productivity today being at least 40:1 constantly every year due to genetic engineering and creation of new variants of crops and the ability to readily import large amounts of food from other countries across the world.Medievil Europe prior to the Black Death suffered from frequent deadly famines due to poor weather,low productivity due to primitive agricultural methods,crops who due to genetics did not create enough to feed the population and this outdated state run system that all combined together didn’t create enough to sustain the population at the time.Had the Black Death never arrived in Europe then famines would have been more frequent and the deaths would have affected only the poor and not the wealthy etc in the way the plague did thus not encouraging the same political change and revolution as the plague.The worst of these was the Great Famine of 1315-1317 with these famines always the result of sudden changes in the weather and overpopulation caused by primative agricultural systems and practices.At the same time others who saw this demanded better working conditions and wages from the landowners they worked for.After the Black Death peasants demanded private property rights and it is this along side better farming techniques and developing more producte strains of crops that has incrementally overtime since them increased out productivity.Life expectancy for peasents actually rose after the plague due to the peasants becoming wealthy,being able to afford more food thus being more well fed and less likely to suffer from malnutrition due to the increased productivity of agricultural produce which then in turn made them even more wealthy by for those who used the land to set up private farms outside of the farms being owned by landowners and the monarchy.The existence of private farms rather than those owned by the state and landowners in the form of lords led to increased productivity and increased wealth for the peasents who operated them.This led to the rest of the peasants becoming just as wealthy as they’re counterparts and just as much a threat.This inequality was especially evident when the state continued after these wage increases decided to put in place draconian and unfair,harsh labour and economic laws and regulations to freeze wages to keep them in power,prevent the peasants getting too wealthy,prevent them getting private property rights that they would want to get more more and the ability to own private property,get wealthy as well as bailing out the wealthy landowners thus installing measures to keep the peasants poor and the upper classes wealthy and led people to demand better wages and the rights to own their own land and private property rights.The lower classes demanded the right to earn higher wages and get wealthy for doing the vast majority of work that was necessary to maintain society and that which maintained the wealthy upper classes.The upper classes in face of the increasing wealth and rise in social status of the peasants feared that this new wealthy peasant class would overthrow their power structures who they needed to keep poor in order to have slaves etc to work in the farms and maintain their power structures ie the divine right of kings and the Church maintaining it’s economic and political power over the poor by keeping them working on farms etc to be paid low prices decided foolishly to put in place more regulations to keep their outdated political structures in place and bailed out the wealthy landlords etc but this then led to riots,rebellions and eventually the downfall of the feudalist infrastructure through revolutions. through revolutions.The new wealthy peasants were a threat to the feudalist system who were revolting against an unfair and outdated economic system – hence the phrase the peasants are revolting.The Church with countless peasants dying could not give an explanation but that was an act of God and had to deal with most of its clergy men dying of the disease themselves and had to be replaced with a new younger generation of priests inexperienced and rushed through to fil in the gaps left by their predecessors death and so were ill equipped and had to deal with the fact that most peasents were losing faith in the Church and God because most people who saw they’re loved ones dying were devout god fearing individuals who couldnt deal with the fact that the God they worshipped and acted devoutly without sin to appease and to be rewarded in the afterlife was now punishing them for no apparent reason which made them question the basis of their faith which led to the Church losing its power as they could not give a sufficient reason as to this and this led to revolts against the Church that would eventually lead to the breaking up of Christianity into its various denominations with this also evident in fact that they would routinely burn down homes and villages comprised of mainly Jewish people despite the fact that the Pope denounced these attacks.Thus the Black Death caused a schism in the relationships between the Pope and hierarchies of the Church and its followers across Europe that would eventually lead to the Reformation and the birth of Protestantism etc and all denominations of the Catholic Church.Furtheromre like the monarchy the Church was not ready to deal with peasents who were now losing faith in God and were willing to revolt and were now getting wealthy and wanting to get better wages and working conditions.The Church itself also feared a revolt of the peasents.Allowing the peasents to get rich and have private property rights would cause a dominio effect that would encourage them to get more powerful through overthrowing the monarchy in favour of democracies or even a bourgeoisie run state where it was no longer the class of wealthy elite monarchy in power but rather a class of wealthy elite capitalists in power or a democratically run government.Further regulations and cronyism to keep peasants poor and the rich elites in power led to rebellion and revolution by the peasants demanding better wages,working conditions and private property rights and the chance of social mobility.The years and decades after the Black Death were of constant rebellions and revolutions throughout Europe and parts of Asia involving the newly wealthy peasents wanting to gain an equal footing in terms of economic,political and democratic power and control over thetheir futures rathersrather than having a wealthy elite run their lives.This led in effect to the death of feudalism and the birth of capitalism at the hands of a pandemic.All major revolts and revolutions after the plague across Europe,Asia and America up until 2020 were always at a base level had to do with the fact that you had large levels of inequality due to small groups of people hoarding all of the wealth for doing nothing and a large amount of prep ple who are doing all work and getting a pittance.Prior to the Black Death the peasents did carry out riots and revolts but they were kept in place by the fact that they had no political or economic power to carry out much of any revolutions as the monarchy was able to keep them in power through the use of landholds and military.However with the military busy fighting imperialist wars in the Middle East and becoming desensitised with carrying out imperialist wars that left them maimed and dying both from the wars and plagued now left them unwilling to take orders from the monarchy alongside the fact that the Black Death was wiping out large amounts of the population on both sides of the class divisons it opened up new possibilities for the peasents and revealed to them the true inequality they had faced.The knights in their desensitised state were simply no match for the newly wealthy peasents class.Even though the population of peasents had declined exponentially there were still a formidable force for the now desensitised knights.Sound familiar?Hence the term 21st century feudalism because in reality capitalism was in essence from its inception exactly the same as feudalism in terms of especially of it having the same hierarchical structures with it consisting of the same cronyism,corruption and lack of social mobility.Had the plague never struck they may have been riots here and even today feudalism would still have existed today in the 21st century in Europe and possibly America with if possible there would have been consistent famines throughout Europe and there would be capitalism present..The effect that the Black Death bubonic plagues of 1346 to 1353 had on the fall of feudalism mirrors the effect of the Coronavirus pandemic and its accompanying genocide effects on late stage capitalism and the fall of the capitalist system that will eventually lead to minarcho technocratism and eventually communism.Just as The Black Death led to the end of feudalism by laying bare its inequalities and leading to revolutions,the Coronavirus pandemic will lead to the end of capitalism by laying bare its inequalities and leading to revolutions.Thinking the Coronavirus pandemic and genocide will have absolutely no effect on society coupled with the advent of AI,automation are going to have no effect on capitalism and have it last forever are idiots.As stated perfectly by a character in Thomas Pynchon 2013 novel Bleeding Edge states “late capitalism is a pyramid scheme on a global scale…getting the suckers to believe it’s all gonna go on forever.”

It is especially evident by the fact the nets worth of all top billionaires such as Jeff Bezos,Bill Gates,Elon Musk etc have become evenly more absurdly wealthy during the Coronavirus pandemic by not leaving their homes while most workers are being screwed over for doing all the work – this the definition of surplus value of ones labour in Marxs labour theory of value.Marxs labour theory of value states that CEOs and heads of businesses in a capitalist system gain profits by ensuring that they do the least amount of work and to do this they hire peope below them in hierarchical structures who do the majority of their work if not all of their work while the employees each only are paid a flat wage that is a minuscule fraction of the companies profits while the income of the CEO rises in proportion to the profits of the company while the income of the employees stays the same regardless of the success of the business and are thus doing while the CEO does the least amount of work.His job is sit in his office,sign business deals and find ways to extract more wealth from the profits at the expense of his workers which includes lobbying the government through whatever means possible such as bribes,lobbyists,corruption,cronyism to shutdown increases in the federal minimum wage,shutdown trade unions,shut down tax increases on the wealthy,shut down costly regulations including safety/health/worker/environmental regulations,automate the workplace,outsource labour to where it is exponentially cheaper.In essence his job is to extract as much of the profits of a business for himself for doing as little work as possible while making his employees work as hard as possible for as little money as possible and eliminate any attempts of his workers at gaining any sort of democratic control of his business through eliminating increases in the minimum wage and shutting down trade unions and eliminating regulations especially worker and environmental regulations.This is the exact opposite of what his workers want which is the formation of trade unions and strengthening them,increasing federal minimum wages and enforcing worker/environmental/health/safety regulations.This is what creates conflict in the workplace and why you have people hating their jobs because you have the hard working employees working their asses off for a pittance and their bosses are sitting in their asses all day doing nothing and living it up in their expensive homes and mansions – this is Marxist theory 101.This why you have people hating capitalism and if you don’t understand that you’re an idiot and you’ve never worked a single day of your life.The surplus value is the amount of money that is extracted from each worker that is part of the profits of the business that is sent upwards to the manager or CEO – in otherwards it’s the amount of money that each worker would actually earn from their labour that they would otherwise earn as their equal share of profits in cooperatives.It is the money the CEO extracts from them got doing literally nothing that is the value of the work done by employees.CEOs and managers do the least amount of work and are paid the most while those below them do the majority of work and paid very little.The money they would earn in cooperatives is the actual value of their labour with in capitalism it is part of their share that is extracted by their bosses that would normally earn in socialism and is thus the true value of their work.The CEO works the least and does everything to screw over his workforce and to extract as much profit from them while again doing the least amount of work.This is the exact opposite of what the American Dream is which is you know you work hard and eventually get rich.This is what causes conflict in the workplace in the form of people hating their jobs and why you have people like Alexandria Ocazio Cortez and Bernie Sanders and progressives being popular amongst the left and workers unions and the working class with policies such as raising the minimum wage and taxing the wealthy being popular because these and trade unions are meant to punish lazy as fuck CEOs who got wealthy off the back of the labour of their workers by taking money from the least working individuals the lazy CEOs and use that money to pay for benefits for their workers who are the ones actually responsible for the success of the business who do all of the work the millions of actual hard working Americans who do the grubby work that you are venerating in the first place not the lazy CEOs – if you do not understand that you’re a fucking idiot,suffering from cognitive dissonance,have kindergartener level understanding of economics and most likely people who don’t understand this have never worked a single day of their lives except getting a dream job sitting on your ass all “working” as a propagandist on Faux News,OANN,Reason Tv,Turning Point USA and PragerU and as a vlogger on YouTube that does not qualify as hard work.Your a lazy piece of shit who would have to be dragged kicking and screaming if made to work even one day in the real world in actual jobs that require you get of your lazy asses and not exactly representations of the working class – you in the same jobs as those “hard working Americans” you venerate don’t much.This is the purpose of capitalism whether it is libertarianism,laizze faire,anarcho capitalism,fascism,state capitalism or any of its forms is to ensure that a small number of wealthy elite exists in the form of the government in the form of the state capitalism or in CEOs of giant multinational corporations in the form of laissez faire capitalism etc and that a large number of poor working class exists just like feudalism to do all of their work,it was never about “freedom” or eliminating poverty,poverty is now greater then it ever has been in the last century with most of the worlds top earning billionaires doing the least amount of work less than all of their employees combined and all efforts since the Cold War was to quash all efforts of actually improving quality of workers conditions and democratising the work place by disseminating propaganda and to keep their sheeple brainwashed and themselves in power.This why the only people pushing for capitalism at this late stage of its life cycle are the very wealthy,the propaganda machines and brainwashed sheeple.In contrast socialism ensures that everyone become equally wealthy in proportion to their business profits and their hard work by sharing profits amongst all employees and workers and keeping the states control of society under control and extremely limited by democratic processes – they may be less billionaires but their would be more multi-millionaires as well as those living on six figure salary between $100,000 – $1,000,000 with the vast majority of people currently living on less than $1 a day and those currently scraping by on pay checks to pay check on minimum wage in America etc would be again earning five to six figure salaries thus ensuring everyone has a decent standard of living on par with that currently enjoyed by lawyers,pilots etc and other high paying jobs with it also ensuring the gap between rich and poor in every country and globally would not be as wide as it is now and extreme poverty would be non existent with most of not all people in America and the third world not be surviving on charity or scraping by on pay check to pay check but would be financially secure to survive economic shocks,financial emergencies with the prices of most essentials including healthcare and education being regulated to the point that they would be affordable.At least 50-65% of the global population would be earning six figure or even seven to eight figure salaries between $100,000-$10,000,000 while 30-45% would be multi millionaires earning $20,000,000 – $33,307,000 while less than 1-5% may be living in poverty rather than out capitalist system where more than 50% about half the worlds population more than 3,000,000,000 people are living in abject poverty on less than $1 a day and a small minority hoarding more wealth than more than half the population.There may be less billionaires or they may not exist at all but there would be way more multi millionaires and people earning six figure salaries thus at least leading to more people to be more well off,less likely to go bankrupt,be more economically secure during a recession as well as having larger retirement funds for their retirement years and lead to significantly less poverty and a thinner gap between rich and poor both globally and in each country.Furthermore they would be earning this by doing exponentially less work.Socialism therefore encourages people to work harder and more than in capitalism as by doing so they ensure that their wages rises every year.Socialism is thus a fair system that ensures fairness of outcome based on ones contribution and labour input and ensures that a large amount of people become wealthy by ensuring profits within each business etc is shared equally between each emoployee thus making everyone richer and not just a select few.Socialism is thus the only economic system that can eliminate poverty as it ensures higher wages for people who work harder rather than having only a small group of CEOs and politicians get wealthy while the vast majority of workers do the vast majority of work and get scraps.Due to wages being shared amongst all workers and it rising for all workers due to increased profits rather than a flat one it means the wealth of all workers rises proportionally meaning it can be very easy for large groups of people to become very wealthy very quickly rather than a small number of people becoming wealthy and their workers taking longer due to the flat wage system wherein they have to save a set amount and spend the majority on bills of all types.Capitalism claims to have brought millions out of poverty over the last century and it may take until the middle or late 21st century to eliminate it forever thus taking at least 200 years.Socialism could have done that in a fraction of the time in only a decade or two had it been adopted at the start of the 20th century by encouraging mergers and ones wages rising exponentionally higher than the cost of bills and having the wealth distribution being less uneven meaning the gap between wealth groups being smaller.Furthermore democratic process would have eliminated corruption,cronyism and over regulation etc that stunts economic development.Considering the lowest income brackets would be $100,000 – $3,307,200 this would ensure enough money to eliminate poverty globally very quickly.Capitalism ensures that a small group of people get absurdly wealthy for doing nothing and extracting the surplus value of their workers meaning it ensures that only a few people get wealthy and a large number of people are left scraping by.Furthermore the military industrial complex wouldn’t likely exist as research would have been done into solar and that at least extracting methane in the Earths oceans and native sources as well as algae biodiesel and that from bacteria and of course geothermal and other renewables.It wouldn’t be perfect but it would be a hella lot better than what it is now.Corruption,cronyism and over regulation only exist in capitalism due to democracy removed by the state given sole power over regulations thus leaving it open to corruption from lobbyists and it open to cronyism through state capitalism.Socialism via having all actions of the state democratically decided eliminated these as all regulations would be lax but reasonable ones to ensure workers are protected and that environmental pollution is punished with bailouts decided by the public and also anti-corruption laws are put in place that prevent cronyism and state being bought out and giving favouritism to any private corporations.Communism is where everyone has the same high gold standard of living without having to work.Its also why it boggles the mind why conservatives that work in crappy 9-5 jobs and are not CEOs and managers always vote against their best interest by voting for Bush,Trump when in fact they should be voting for Bernie Sanders and favouring socialism or at least democratic socialism – this is where the term sheeple comes from because people who vote for Republicans and corporate Democrats are idiots with the mental capacity of kindergarteners and are kept that way who vote against their own self interests and are thus sheep led to slaughter or at least led into subservience at the behest of oligarchs and their corporate donors rather than being encouraged into carrying out independent thinking for themselves.This would not happen in a pure socialist society.If your an independent thinker you’d be socialists making six figure salaries or millions of dollars roughly 5-100 times more than you do now by doing the exact same job and same amount of work you are already doing and thus earning the value of your work.The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States,the set of ideals in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success,as well as an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers – this not possible in a capitalist system only socialism therefore if the American Dream were true then America and in fact the rest of the world would be socialist and poverty would have been eliminated decades ago.If you hate the government interfering in how your business is run and you want to get rich from working hard then your a socialist not a capitalist.Thus it is socialism not capitalism that rewards hard work and cooperation.Capitalism can exist in a mixed economy with co-ops,collectives,libertarianism and state capitalism where the state controls and regulates the economy to various degrees.Anarcho capitalism is nonsense as the state needs to exist to enforce laws and regulate business.Decades of effective brainwashing carried out by an effective propaganda machine on the part of the wealthy elite in Washington,mass media etc has thus made millions of Americans vote against their own self interest by voting for both the Republicans and Corporate Democrats in as well eliminating the ability of Americans to effectively think for themselves resulting in even people in the 30s,40s and even older have the mental capacity if kindergarteners that spout the same tired propaganda from the Cold War and same debunked nonsense from both sides,without even doing a simple five to ten minute Wikipedia search and too lazy to even read Karl Marx and ensure that a wealthy elite on both sides have maintained power over the populace and that geniune attempts to change the status quo is quashed.This the sign of an economically and politically illiterate society with the mental capacity of kindergarteners who have no right to be taking the moral highground on maturity.Essentialy conservatives have effectively dragged society down into their little regressive kindergarten state.In the context of socialism,public ownership implies that the surplus product generated by publicly owned assets accrues to all of society in the form of a social dividend,as opposed to a distinct class of private capital owners.There is a wide variety of organizational forms for state-run industry,ranging from specialized technocratic management to direct workers’ self-management.In traditional conceptions of non-market socialism,public ownership is a tool to consolidate the means of production as a precursor to the establishment of economic planning for the allocation of resources between organizations, as required by government or by the state.Put simply all enterprises,services,businesses rather than being privately run or run by the state are run directly and completely by the workers themselves with the states only control being setting down laws and regulations similar to how it does in capitalist systems with it by definition having no legal power to run any sector of the economy except for certain areas such as healthcare etc through nationalisation and still the workers are allowed democratic say in its functionality and sharing of wages but the state cannot run actual businesses.Democratic socialism like socialism involves coo-ops and democratically run private enterprises and the spontaneous power of the free market system to determine prices,success of businesses meaning the governments role is only in providing and regulating essential services such as healthcare,education,federal minimum wage etc but private enterprises are still allowed to function and flourish but with regulations ensuring that they are democratically run with workers having a say in the functioning of them or through a set number of employees on their boards.Furthermore other socialist policies may exist such as the proportional rise of wages wherein each employee and the CEO themselves is guaranteed a set percentage of the companies profits or all profits are shared equally meaning the more successful a business is and the higher it’s profits the higher the wages of each employee is every week,month,year etc forcing them to work harder.Put simply essential services like healthcare and education are nationalised and run and funded by the government while private enterprises and the mechanism of the free market systems wherein the random nature of it controls prices,stock markets,boom and bust cycles are allowed to flourish and determine the cost of everyday items and the success or decline of business and private enterprise with the only “control” is the formation of co-operatives and also that each private enterprise being democratically run by its workers through various means such as having a set number/percentage of workers on the board of directors say 20-50% allowing decisions that the business makes with regards to hiring and firing,working conditions as well as setting of wages and new products and pitches in other words each private business is democratically run by its workers with the state having almost no control over the everday goings on the business and enterprise except setting federal minimum wages,ensuring affordable universal nationalised healthcare,setting taxes and enacting environmental and other regulations.Private enterprises are allowed to exist but they are required to have set amount of workers present on board of directors say 20-50% to have a democratic say in how they are run.The control of the government over private enterprises is just as limited in free market capitalism making no different than neoliberalism and the capitalism of Donald Trump etc as the state can only do the same things as it can in other forms of capitalism such as set down regulations with the key differences being it is mandatory for healthcare and education to government run and all private enterprises must have a set amount of workers on their board of directors roughly 20-50% to ensure that workers have a say in how they are run.The same by laws of business such as boom and bust cycles,invisible hand of the market determining the failure and success of business and supply and demand etc seen in neoliberalism and free market capitalism are allowed to exist.Due to the presence of private enterprises which is not allowed in socialism,democratic socialism as espoused by Bernie Sanders etc could be considered a form of capitalism not socialism.Therefore due to the ability for private business to exist democratic socialism is actually a form of mixed economy capitalism not a form of socialism this makes the propaganda done by Faux News mind boggling.It might as well be called democratic capitalism.It could be a form of state capitalism due to the government gaining control of the economy but that could be a stretch of imagination.State socialism is a political and economic ideology within the socialist movement advocating state owenership of the means of production either as a temporary measure or as a characteristic of socialism in the transition from the capitalist mode of production to the socialist mode of production to fully fledged communism.As a classification within the socialist movement,state socialism is held in contrast with libertarian socialism which rejects the view that socialism can be constructed by using existing state institutions or by governmental policies.By contrast,proponents of state socialism claim that the state—through practical considerations of governing—must play at least a temporary part in building socialism.It is possible to conceive of a democratic socialist state that owns the means of production and is internally organized in a participatory,cooperative fashion,thereby achieving both social ownership of productive property and workplace democracy.As a political ideology,state socialism is one of the major dividing lines in the broader socialist movement. It is often contrasted with non-state or anti-state forms of socialism such as those that advocate direct self-management adhocracy and direct cooperative ownership and management of the means of production.Political philosophies contrasted to state socialism include libertarian socialist philosophies such as anarchism,De Leonism,economic democracy,free-market socialism,libertarian Marxism and syndicalism.These forms of socialism are opposed to hierarchical technocratic socialism,scientific management and state-directed economic planning.The modern concept of state socialism,when used in erroneously in reference to Soviet-style economic and political systems,emerged from a deviation in Marxist theory starting with Vladimir Lenin.In Marxist theory,socialism is projected to emerge in the most developed capitalist economies where capitalism suffers the greatest amount of internal contradictions and class conflict.On the other hand,state socialism became a revolutionary theory for the poorest,often quasi-feudal,countries of the world.In such systems,the state apparatus is used as an instrument of capital accumulation,forcibly extracting surplus from the working class and peasantry for the purposes of modernizing and industrializing poor countries.Such systems are described as state capitalism because the state engages in capital accumulation,mostly as part of the primitive accumulation of capital (see also the Soviet theory of the primitive socialist accumulation).The difference is that the state acts as a public entity and engages in this activity in order to achieve socialism by re-investing the accumulated capital into the society,whether be in more healthcare,education,employment or consumer goods,whereas in state capitalist societies the surplus extracted from the working class is spent in whatever needs the state owners of the means of production wants.State socialism was traditionally advocated as a means for achieving public ownership of the means of production through nationalisation of industry.This was intended to be a transitional phase in the process of building a socialist economy with less government control in otherwards state socialism is intended to being the transitionary stage from capitalism to non state socialism and eventually communism with democratic socialism possibly being an intermediary stage between capitalism and state socialism.The goals of nationalisation were to dispossess large capitalists and consolidate industry so that profit would go toward public finance rather than private fortune.Nationalisation would be the first step in a long-term process of socialising production,introducing employee management and reorganizing production to directly produce for use rather than profit.However when an industry is nationalised such as healthcare,energy,mining it is not always leads to socialist policies as both socialism and nationalisation are completely different things.Most socialists dont advocate state socialism they usually advocate democratic socialism,libertarian socialism and actual socialism.State socialism can be described as the mirror image of state capitalism where the state acts like a giant coop the opposite of a giant corporation in state where there is no profit motive and the economy is planned and democratic process are non existent.Private corporations do not exist.This is the exact opposite of actual socialism that is espoused by 99% of socialists including democratic socialism and it’s also completely different to state capitalism.State socialism like real socialism and democratic socialism has never existed only state capitalism has existed in so called state socialist countries.State socialism has never existed due to the presence of private industry and enterprises in Soviet Russia,Cuba,Maoist China.As a term,state socialism is often used interchangeably with state capitalism in reference to the economic systems of Marxist–Leninist states such as the Soviet Union to highlight the role of state planning in these economies,with the critics of said system referring to it more commonly as state capitalism.Some academics maintain that workers in the Soviet Union and other Marxist–Leninist states had genuine control over the means of production through institutions such as trade unions but trade unions do not guarantee complete control as in socialism as unlike in socialism where one has direct democratic control,trade unions only offer indirect control and are also present in capitalism in the first place due to the undemocratic control in the workplace.Even in private enterprises laws regarding worker conditions were decided by the state with the existence of trade unions allowing for each individual business to be managed and controlled indirectly.Trade unions involve negotiating with managers and CEOs for better working conditions etc which do not exist in cooperatives meaning they can only exist due to the presence of private corporations,state controlled enterprises and are thus not a feature of socialism meaning they can only exist in capitalism and its various subtypes including state capitalism they cannot exist in socialism due to socialism’s democratic nature and non hierarchical structures as all employees get a democratic say in the management of their enterprises and the economy by direct democracy in controlling the state.Thus the presence of trade unions in Maoist China and Soviet Russia means these countries were state capitalist and not socialist and communist.Therefore trade unions can only exist in capitalism.Democratic and libertarian socialists claim that state socialism  has only a limited number of socialist characteristics.State socialism could be considered an oxymoron due to the level of state control in the economy not present in other socialist systems thus contradicting its definition and the level of government control in co-ops that goes against the non hierarchical structures of them and thus like anarchism-capitalism cannot exit or has ever existed.Since co-ops can exist in state capitalism thus any socialist type structures like co-ops in Soviet Russia and Maoist China were part of the mixed economy structure allowed in capitalist state capitalism.Furthermore state socialism uses planned economies rather that command economies as state capitalism

A planned economy is a type of economic system where investment,production and the allocation of capital goods takes place according to economy-wide economic plans and production plans.A planned economy may use decentralised,participatory or Soviet-type forms of economic planning.The level of centralization or decentralization in decision-making and participation depends on the specific type of planning mechanism employed.In planned economies the state can or more often cannot own the means of production thus allowing coops to exist.Planned economies like command economies can occur in state capitalism alongside all other forms of capitalism alongside various types of socialism.This can occur democratically in non market and market socialism and relaxed forms of state capitalism,mixed economies,state socialism where the states control of the economy is relaxed such as in Finland,Norway,Sweden,Denmark and modern day Vietnam,China,South Korea.Modern day South Korea,Denmark,Finland,Norway are planned economies.Decisions in a planned economy are never absolute and thus allows for democratic input,variables and also flexibility in the result of decisions with the planning and outcomes never controlled and imposed by law giving coop and private enterprises the freedom to decide what is produced,how much is produced and to a degree prices etc.In otherwards it involves participation from private enterprises,the state and coops and even citizens themselves working together with the government to plan out economic outcomes primarily to prevent boom and bust cycles,depressions,recessions,economic shocks etc to keep the economic growth of a country soaring exponentionally but stable so that if recessions etc do occur they can be predicted with any shocks that do occur being cushioned by forward planning that leads to recessions being gradual rather than sudden and allows for countermeasures to them to developed beforehand thus cushioning their blow or even eliminated altogether.Planned ecomies are where the public through private corporations,coops,democratic processes work alongside the state to plan the economic outcomes of the coming years or decades as states through democratic processes to prevent recessions and economic shocks.This can occur in all types of socialism and variants of capitalism and is what people like Bernie Sanders etc and socialists of all types advocate.Decisions are never absolute and democratic process allow for flexibility and leeway and changed to be made with it eliminating the state having complete control as unlike command economy as stated private enterprises and citizens are allowed input into how they are enforced.Command economies are where the state has absolute control of the economy and can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism and is what is found in Soviet Russia,Maoist China,Castro Cuba,North Korea.Growth in both command and planned economies may be slow at first,but it is both incremental and exponentional and so if a global or localised recession hits then planned economies will continue to grow while other non planned economies collapse with the planned economies GDP eventually surpassing other non planned economies as unplanned economies will crash into a bust cycle while a planned economies GDP etc will continue to rise unhindered surpassing the unplanned economies GDP.At first growth may be slow and incremental for both the private and state sector but overtime it becomes exponentially faster but stable every year with the fact that boom and bust cycles are avoided ensures that growth for all people involved in both the state and private sectors becoming richer overtime exponentionally as growth in GDP and wages and earnings constantly going up on forever.After at most 5-10 years the growth for even the lowest income brackets are exponentional and continue forever whereas a completely deregulated economy will have severe crashes and recessions every decade or even few years and the hardest hit are always the lower classes as in capitalism economies as the rich get away untarnished and bailed out and the poor and even middle classes are always left picking up the pieces.Even if the income brackets of the rich and poor are still wide in command and planned economies the income and thus the living standards of the poorest individuals are still exponentially better than before and they are able to lift themselves out of poverty and live a high standard of living on par with with what was previously the upper class with this wealth increasing exponentially every year.As stated this is because their incomes and wealth in accordance with the exponential growth also increases exponentially meaning after 5-10 years they will be earning anywhere between 10-1,000 times more than before and this will continue rising exponentially forever with no chance of a recession.The same goes for the wealthy.So both the poor and wealthy have their incomes rise exponentially every year forever after a slow 5-10 year growth period even if income brackets are still wide.After at least a decade the poorest of the poor who formerly earned five figure salaries or even less on minimum wage will be earning at least six figure or even seven figure salaries every year for doing no extra work and thus will be getting exponentially better so even though a wide gap between rich and poor exists the poor are still getting exponentially wealthier every year and they are earning possibly even millions or tens of millions every year.Even if a wealth gap exists it becomes narrower overtime and if it doesn’t narrow and is still wide the lowest income bracket can be as high as six figure salaries between $100,000 – $ 900,000 a year.Even if a drop in the economy occurs then it will not be as severe as an unregulated economy thus still preventing chaos and allow planned economies to continue to rise and preventing huge losses and negates bailouts and cronyism.This is because countermeasure would have been developed such as a lock box containing collected taxes and other countermeasures to ensure that a planned economies recession will end much quicker than that of in planned economies.Furthermore they will have saved enough in nest eggs to have enough to weather the storm until a recovery in the economy.Planned economies are more desireable and effective than command economies as they allow for democratic input from the private sector,coops and more importantly the general public to control the planning thus it is not really centralised planning as in command economies but democratic planning as it allows for variability,flexibility and limits state control while at the same elimining boom and bust cycles and stable exponentional growth.Planned economies are suited to certain economies such as those in resource rich countries especially in areas such as Europe,America and to an extent Asia who due to climate and other factors can become self sufficient in term of agriculture enough to feed themselves and also export large amounts of crops and also have other resources such as raw elements,fossil fuels etc to increase GDP.Command economies are suited primarily to Asia and Russia where the climate and lack of sufficient arable land limits their expansion of agriculture to the point that they can only produce enough to be barely self sufficient and thus it is needed to ensure economic growth is stable to prevent boom and bust cycles that can cause famines due to inflation and increases in the price of food.It is primarily the availability of arable land,climate etc that determines the expansion of agriculture and its ability to survive economic shocks and the scarcity or abundance of raw elements and even oil etc that can determine if a country can be free market capitalism,planned economies or command economies.If a country is not suited for large scale agriculture to make them self sufficient and export food due to the lack of available arable land as well as climate etc that forces them to be a net importer of food then command economies have to be adopted to ensure that the rate of economic growth is sustainable and does not result in boom and bust cycles which if not adopted leads to boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation which can then result in consistent famines caused by skyrocketing food prices.If a country is not able to expand its agricultural output and be self sufficient and be a net exporter then it has no choice to adopt command economies to keep the price of food stable and at affordable prices and ensure stable exponential growth and prevent hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles that would cause the price of food to skyrocket and also prevent their ability at importing food is stable and thus would cause consistent famine.This is especially relevant because said countries usually have to be net importers of food and hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles would negatively affect their ability to import food.Food shortages did occur in Russia and China but they would have much much worse and had higher death tolls had private farmers did not exist and had they adopted completely unregulated free market economies as the boom and bust cycles would have caused hyperinflation and other economic problems similar to the Scissor Crises that would lead to consistent famine year long every year due to fluctuations in the price of grain of meat.These food shortages and famines were always caused by the climactic conditions,lack of arable land and presence of pests thus making it extremely difficult for the country to produce enough to feed its population and export enough.The state had to control the economy to prevent consistent famines.Command economies in these countries were adopted to prevent boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation to thus thus prevent skyrocketing food prices in otherwards they are applied to countries that can’t expand agriculture in order to keep the price of food low and affordable and keep their ability to import food at a sustainable rate.The countries both Russia and China due to the lack of arable land and climate was therefore prone to famines and food shortages by there very nature and thus Mao,Stalin and Lenin had to install command economies and at the same time allow for private farmers to exist alongside private retailers to prevent hyperinflation that would have left people too poor to buy food thus causing more severe famines and higher death tolls every year.Command economies were also installed to ensure they could afford the ability to import food from other countries by having stable,exponential growth preventing boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation that would negatively affect their ability to import food.If boom and bust cycles occur then they will not be able to import food food and for countries like China and Russia that rely heavily on food imports due to climatic and environmental factors being unable to import food this would lead to consistant and severe famines with high death tolls.China,Cuba and Russia etc were and also still today are net importers of food and even to this day in the 21st century still regulate the economy especially agriculture through command economies due to the fact that they are still unable to adopt an unregulated free market economy it’s because they are still net importers of food and have very little arable land and are prone to pests and unpredictable climates with if they did today adopted a unregulated free market capitalist economy the economy would nosedive into hyperinflation etc followed by boom and bust cycles and the price of food would skyrocket and they would be plunged into consistent famines year after year.If a country is a net importer of food then its largely because they have very little arable land to grow crops to sustain themselves,have unpredictable climates and are prone to hurricanes,floods and droughts etc that can devastate entire farms that can result in frequent crop failures that thus means they have no choice to import large amounts of food and also no choice to adopt command economies because the command economies prevent boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation that prevent skyrocketing food prices and also ensures they can afford into import food.Command economies must be adopted to keep prices of food stable both due to the low ability from native based farms and also from the need to import large amounts of farms.Without command economies their ability to import food would negatively affected to the point that it would become expensive or impossible to import food from other countries thus leading to mass starvation and famine.The factors that determine this are a countries population,its climate,its size and the amount of arable land especially the percentage of its land that is arable.There are the largest and most populated countries in the world but they have the least amount of arable land and worst weather suited for agriculture that is unpredictable and always has frequent droughts etc.Therefore countries that adopted command economies had to out of economic survival because of their inability to have large scale agriculture.It is a countries availability of arable land,predictable climate and thus in turn its rate of agricultural productivity and expansion and thus ability to feed itself and also export food based on the amount of arable land and predictability of climate that determines what type of economy it can adopt whether it is a command economy,planned economy or various types of free market systems and whether it is an net importer or net exporter of food.The amount of agricultural land under state control or private control depends on different factors of each command economy country such as population demographics of rural areas and cities,amount of arable land and of course climate etc.Just because state farms need private farms does not automatically insinuate that state run farms are inherently inefficient and that private farms are more productive than the profit motive it may be that in certain countries state run farms are better suited towards meeting the need of large densely urban populations while private farms are suited to rural areas to produce just a little bit extra to feed rural people that need that little bit extra on the side to prevent them starving..Again population dynamics and demographics will determine how much state control is agriculture and how much is in the private sector.The level of agricultural productivity will also determine this.Sometimes in certain countries,certain climatic conditions and certain economic circumstances the state can in fact produce higher yields on state run farms than private farms.The private farms in certain conditions and command economies produce extra crops due to the profit motive with them used to produce for those most prone to famines and also for some exports with as stated the state sometimes producing more.This can affect the ratio of private of state ratio of farmland in a country forced to use a command economy.This can apply to other sectors of the economy and vary from country to country and also vary from adminstration to administration and also to changing geopolitical and economic factors and of course climate and improvements agricultural productivity.If the profit motive is a contributing factor to agricultural productivity then state run farms and collectivised farms can produce just as much as private farms depending on the amount of money each person is paid from the profits generated.If the state is generous and pays each worker a sizeable portion of profits then it can expect higher yields with if collectivised farms are democratic and allow profits to be shared thus it can expect higher yields.If collectivised farms are forced,undemocratic and if profits are seized by the state then its likely that yields will be low.Capitalism can just as equally though private corporations can reduce productivity if they pay their workers very little and treat them like shit.If a country through different economic circumstance and improved mechanisation,improved varieties of crops ie similar to the Green Revolution may change the ratio of private farms to state farms with in some countries meaning more private control of agriculture or more state control of agriculture with the types of crops grown also affecting this – complicating things even further.Other countries with command economies such as Cuba etc also are not suited for large scale agriculture and thus have to adopt command economies.Furthermore if a country is able to increase its agricultural productivity exponentially through genetic engineering,new varieties and also chemical fertilisers,improved mechanisation and also aquaponics then perhaps it can relax command economies,adopt planned economies and even adopt free market economies but it still needs to regulate the agricultural sector or at least support it financially to prevent hyperinflation,food shortages and famine.Therefore the adoption of a command economy or planned economy is wholy dependent on agricultural output because the economy needs to be planned in order to prevent famines.Hence why countries that are able to sustain themselves in terms of agricultural capacity do not need command or planned economies.If they are able to sustain themselves then they don’t need them but they can adopt at least planned economies and regulations to prevent economic shocks.Therefore it was the ability for countries such as Soviet Russia,China etc to become self sufficient in agriculture that allowed then to adopt free market principles.This is noted by the 1991 economic crash and exponential lose in agricultural productivity in Russia that resulted from Boris Yeltsins reforms and is why it can now only after government intervention in 2000 that resulted in exponentially increasing yields of grain etc that they were able to successfully embrace free market economics meaning countries can only embrace free market economics once it has become able to be self sufficient in terms of agricultural productivity and thus able to feed itself and become a net exporter of agricultural foods.Same goes for China and all other communist countries with the exponential increase under Mao and Khruschev etc being the leading cause for the liberalisation of the economy.The dominance of state control in Maoist China and Soviet Russia were done partly due to need to prevent famines through planned and command economies with them less authoritarian through having democratic institutions put into place.Thus a country can only embrace free market capitalism with limited regulations only until it has gained the ability to become self sufficient in terms of agriculture productivity with conversely the more exponentially higher agricultural productivity becomes the less market orientated it becomes and thus more it moves towards post scarcity economics.This is called the agricultural gateway theory.Once a country is no longer a net importer of food it can then allow itself to become a net exporter and thus allow deregulation in the rest of the economy.However to ensure this is sustainable regulation must exist in agriculture,forestry and even conservation to ensure that stable land is not denuded and that it is sustainable which our current free market lacks with regards especially with the Amazon where lack of regulation or poorly enforced regulation is leading to unsustainable agricultural practices which is leading to deforestation,desertification thus leading to the point that Brazil will no longer be able to be a net exporter of food and thus will no longer be able to adopt a free market economy and thus will be forced to adopt a planned or even command economy with this applying to all countries where agriculture is a cause of deforestation and also Europe and America etc eventually if aquaponics etc is not adopted within the next decade.This is why government regulations to protect the Amazon rainforest etc is in the best interests of supporters of the free market system especially conservatives in Brazil because its prevent the country needing a command economy why idiots like Bolsanaro are shooting themselves in the foot by cutting environmental regulations that protect the Amazon rainforests.This could also apply to regulations to punish polluters of all ecosystems and those that emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere abd swutch to renewables.It is supporters of the free markets best interests to have strong regulations with regards to environmental protection.This is why anarcho capitalists are fucking idiots and people who are capitalists who want environmental regulations cut are shooting themselves in the foot because these regulations exist to prevent countries South America,Asia and even the god old United States because the more degraded and scarce a resource a resource becomes through mismagemeng and lack of regulation the more likely it is that you’ll have to eventually adopt command ecomies similar to the Soviet Republic and Maoist China the very thing you are against and hate.In otherwards supporters of the free market system who deride environmental regulations as tyrannical “socialism” are idiots because they are meant to prevent the economy becoming a Soviet style command economy that they deride so much.Regulations put down by the government exist to prevent more government regulations and more government control of the economy.This is why China,Russia etc only began to open there markets to the west by 2000 onwards because they by then gained the ability to feed themselves and thus were able to shift from a command economy to a planned economy.Adopting it before it can do so would lead to hyperinflation,famine and mass starvation etc.All countries namely state capitalist economies were before the revolutions of the 20th century had different economic and political systems prior to the revolutions of the 20th century.Russia prior to Lenin was a monarchy system which at first had a feaduilst structure but then had developed capitalism by the mid to late 1800s with serfdom abolished by 1861.There is a common misconception amongst capitalists that serfdom was part of so called communist or socialist Russia,China etc but in reality it was a practice of the Medievil world and feudalism.Serfdom was a condition of debt bondage and indentured servitude with similarities to and differences from slavery,which developed during the Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages Europe and lasted in some countries until the mid-19th century.Unlike slaves serfs could not be bought, sold, or traded individually though they could, depending on the area, be sold together with land.The kholops in Russia, by contrast, could be traded like regular slaves, could be abused with no rights over their own bodies, could not leave the land they were bound to, and could marry only with their lords permission.Serfs who occupied a plot of land were required to work for the lord of the manor who owned that land.In return, they were entitled to protection, justice, and the right to cultivate certain fields within the manor to maintain their own subsistence.Serfs were often required not only to work on the lord’s fields, but also in his mines and forests and to labour to maintain roads.The manor formed the basic unit of feudal society, and the lord of the manor and the villeins, and to a certain extent the serfs, were bound legally: by taxation in the case of the former, and economically and socially in the latter.Capitalists erroneously believe that the workforce of state capitalist Soviet Russia were serfs and working under slavery serfdom but they were not.They worked for collectives,private enterprises and state owned corporations all of which paid them money of varying amounts.By the time all of the major revolutions of Mao Zedong,Vladimir Lenin and Josef Stalin and Che Guevera and Fidel Castro occurred serfdom had been completely abolished worldwide with the rise of capitalism in the 1800s that they wished to overturn.A common joke is that socialist policies by progressives is an advocation of serfdom and that it is a return to forced labour camps of Soviet Russia – this is bullshit.People in Soviet Russia,Maoist China worked and were paid money for that labour.If they didn’t work,they went broke and died just like regular capitalism.Therefore these were not slaves they were by legal definitions workers just like modern day workers for Amazon,Wall Mart etc.Cuba prior to Che and Castro was capitalist but with the level of democracy waxing and waning and the last president before the Cuban Revolution being Fulgencio Batista Zaldívar a military dictator propped up by the American Government which probably spurred Che Guevara and Castro to have their revolution.China before Mao had private farming and private merchants with the Chinese modern government existing only as far back as 1912 with prior to that it was governed by heredity monarchical regimes for most of its history with private enterprises,private farms and thus quasi capitalist systems existing under the few remaining dynasties with it before alternating between various fitms of feudalism etc.It was the victim of imperialism from Britain,Japan and other forces.During these capitalist regimes prior to the revolutions their were wide gaps between rich and poor and inequality etc that thus after reading the writings of Karl Marx led to these revolutions to occur.The amount of private enterprises and thus amount of private control of the economy versus the amount of state enterprises and state control of economy can also vary under different countries due to their different geopolitical and environmental factors.It can also vary under different administrations and different economic conditions.China is a perfect example of this as the amount of private enterprises under adminstrations after Mao increased under Mao and the rise of private enterprises under Guevera and Castro also increased at first.Increased agricultural production through better mechanisation,new varieties etc can possibly allow for more privatisation in agriculture and indeed other sectors of the country.Adopting a completetly unregulated free market approach or even an economy without command or planned economies similar to most of Europe or what libertarians want in America would in both modern day Russia,Cuba ,North and South Korea and China would cause boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation etc and cause the price of food to skyrocket thus leading to consistent famines due to skyrocking food prices year after year with high death tolls and would negatively impact their ability to import food exponentially by this boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation thus making famines and food shortages even worse meaning they would be unable to feed themselves through crops they grow themselves through hyperinflation and at the same this would make it next to impossible to import food thus leading to exponentially higher death tolls – in otherwards you would have the Great Famine of 1959-1961 occurring every year in both modern day Russia and China killing tens of millions potentially 55,000,000 people every one-three years plunging two first world nations and economic superpowers into third world country status on par with the most poverty and famine stricken countries in Africa all in the name preserving ”freedom”.AI such as b etc can carry out simulations to show that this is exactly what would happen with economic think thanks both on the left and the right can also do these simulations and studies.Venezuealas economic crash was caused by a lack of government regulation and lack of government control of the economy and the hyperinflation and skyrocking food prices are exactly what happens when you have economic crashes caused by lack of government regulation and thus results in skyrocking food prices.At that rate the population of China would drop to literally zero in about 75 years with for Russia it would drop to zero in 15 years.Then you can add an extra 1,500,000,000 to the death toll of capitalism but least on the bright side at least you’ll have eliminated two competitors for the world economic and political superpower and possibly pushed off solving global warming for a while.Then you’ll probably just find some excuse to blame on socialism or them liberals like you always do.The same would occur in South and North Korea and Cuba If they adopted a completely deregulated free market economy.There are certain times and indeed certain countries when the government for the sake of the economy and lives of its citizens has to intervene and regulate the economy otherwise it collapses in on its self.Its just a simple economic and political fact that some countries due to geopolitical and environmental factors simply cannot adopt unregulated free market capitalism they need command economies in order to prevent boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and in turn famines because the whole purpose of command economies and government regulations is to prevent hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles.Not all economies are the same – each country has completely different factors that differentiates them from each other and they have to adopt different levels of government control and regulation in order to prevent boom and bust cycles.Some countries even in modern times have no choice but to adopt command economies and stringent government regulations otherwise they would result in hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles and the price of food and other commodities would skyrocket and you would have mass famines and millions of people dying.Therefore adoption of command economies always has to do with necessity over choice.These countries have only recently been able to increase agricultural productivity in Cuba,China and Russia since the 1950s for several reasons – improved weather predictions through satillites allowing them to better plan the planting of crops,improved machinery,improvements in agricultural production through the Green Revolution and creating drought resistant varieties of crops – the same reasons for much of the rest of the world but they are still net importers of food.This why elections and installing new governments in these countries always has agriculture at its forefront policies and elections and why climate change is an even bigger threat to them and why they are especially China is taking climate change more seriously and why China is the largest producer of solar power in the world because anthropogenic climate change is so important to them because their weather is already unpredictable and not suited to agriculture and so as heatwaves,droughts and floods etc become worse abf common it will affect them worse than even America because they entire economy is built upon agriculture and if crop yields collapse,their command economy collapses,food prices will rise and you will have billions of people dying of starvation.Az climate change gets worse they may have to enforce tighter command economies to prevent hyperinflation etc..So yes Cuba,Russia,China,Korea etc have always been command economies even before Mao,Lenin,Che etc had their revolutions,were command economies during them and were economies after them right up to 2022.Before the revolutions command economies may have existed to a lighter more relaxed form or planned economies may have existed or neither could have existed as shown by the GDP of these countries being stagnant for centuries beforhand thus leading to a large amount of private capitalists larger levels of poverty caused by deregulation and also boom and bust cycles but they then installed more stringent command economies.Thus all so called “communism” or “socialist” countries that were really state capitalism has to enact command economies.The issue is what administration is in power.If a benevalont adminstration is in power coupled with democratic institutions and safeguards then civil liberties are preserved but if a dictator is in charge then civil liberties are quashed therefore it is important for the electorate to choose the correct leader in elections.A country that requires a planned or command economy due to geopolitical and agricultural factors need not necessarily need autocratic rule where only one political party exists with command economies possible in countries with two or more differing political parties.Therefore just because a country due to geopolitical forces needs a planned or command economy that does not automatically mean one has to have dictatorships it can have democracies installed with fair and just heads of state.It just so happens that countries that have commmand economies have dictatorships in charge usually those that get their through coups or being installed by another country.Dictators are very rarely democratically elected those that are elected become dictators by utilising loopholes in the constitution where not enough democratic and constitutional safeguards exist to prevent them gaining too much power that thus allows them to become dictators.Having democratic constitutions,safeguards and processes installed in countries that require command and planned economies are needed to prevent them descending into dictatorships much like the rest of the world.It can allow command economies to exist while at the same time limiting state control over civil liberties.South Korea is a prime example of how a command or planned economy can retain civil liberties through their being a choice of different political parties and candidates and also at the same time have freedom of private enterprise and also having a centralised planned economy and eliminate poverty at the same time.South Korea despite its flaws is way better than modern day Russia and China and certainly way better than North Korea.Russia may have eliminated poverty substantially but it still a problem and why Putin has decided to reinstall command economies similar to Soviet Russia.The level of private enterprises,cooperatives and state run enterprises can also vary depending on the countries geopolitical and economic situation.This shows that it’s possible to have planned and command economies in more liberal democratic countries.All leaders elected in these countries can’t do much in terms of economic reform other than increase or decrease taxes to the wealthy or lower classes,manage healthcare – they can however do reforms in term of laws relating to the age of consent,environmental laws and those that restrict or enhance civil liberties such as making certain movies,music and also websites illegal and thus censored.A one size fits all approach does not work that is why recessions etc are usually localised to one or few countries because of each countries different economic and geopolitical factors which almost always has deregulation at its root cause,very few recessions and depressions are global and those that are global are usually the result of deregulation on Wall Street.It also why you have different country leaders of different countries with different economic systems and geopolitical factors meeting with each other and making complex economic deals with each other because if everyone had the same economic system and geopolitical factors then its likely we would not have countries making economic deals with other not and you would not have international trade.Most idiot capitalists seem to think that managing a country is either between the state gaining control of everything or private enterprises gaining everything and if the government just stepped aside and allowed the free market were allowed to have complete control then everything would work itself out this is kindergarten level crap.Some countries can only grow certain crops or export certain commodities and each ones different geopolitical and environmental conditions need different economic policies especially when it comes to agriculture.Even a single currency needs each country adopt different economic policies even if a central bank exists otherwise you could adopt a large complex economic policy that would have to take into account each and every countries different economic factors.The adoption of the Euro is a prime example of how different economies make it impossible to have a universal economic system or policies without problems even as an universal currency is adopted as evidenced by the Greek crises.Anyone with even the most basic understanding of economics knows this – if you don’t you’re a fucking idiot with a kindergarten level understanding of economics.Almost everytime a country suffers boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation,severe depressions,skyrocketing food prices etc it is almost always caused by massive deregulation in the economy that leads to corruption and cronyism and unethical behaviour that then leads to hyperinflation and the average people losing the ability to feed themselves and then the corrupt assholee who caused the problem in the first place to be bailed out with taxpayers money.China and Russia are two of those countries and always have been and can never adopt an unregulated free market economy or even a lax regulated economy or even one similar to America due to its geopolitical situation.Both were command and planned economies in the 20th century,before the 20th century and both still are command and planned economies in the 21st century and its for the same reason its limited ability to expand agriculture and the fact that it has to be a net importer of food and it has to rely on private farmers.Not even America can utilise a completely deregulated or lax economy as seen by the economic crashes of 1929 and 2007.America needs government regulation to prevent boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation as seen by the 1929 and 2007 recessions and they especially need stringent regulations with regards to Wall Street because recessions in Wall Street and in turn America can lead to global recessions that affect the entire world that can affect the ability for countries to import and export goods and crops thus causing food crises etc.Wall street and thus America needs specific stringent regulations it can never adopt a completely deregulated economy because if it did then you have a recession and since Wall Street is so intertwined with the global economy a recession on Wall Street leads to a global recession and this has been proven over and over again.Thats what happened in 1929 and 2007 and it will happen again and again if capitalist idiots get their way.Deregulating Wall Street caused the 1929 Great Depression and 2007/2008 Great Recession which affected the entire world because Wall Street is so interlinked to the global economy.Other key cities as part of the global economy such as London need to just as regulated again to prevent global recession.Regulations and command economies are to ensure ethical behaviour and prevent boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation,unethical behaviour etc if these things occur then regulations do not exist.This is basic kindergarten level stuff.Vietnam and most of Asia are the same.Only a few countries can have lax regulated capitalism or even that of the United States.Complete deregulation never works its simply impossible.You always end up with corruption,boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and widening gaps between the rich and poor.Deregulation is never meant to help small business it its always meant to help only large monopolistic corporations such as Amazon,Wall Street,big oil and big pharma to boost their profits at the expense of the environment and also to allow big corporations to do whatever they want to crush smaller and new business through any means possible as most deregulation is designed to do just that it is to allow regulations against monopolies etc such as antitrust laws to be removed to allow big monopolies crush out all competitors especially smaller businesses and stay in power.The purpose of deregulation is to allow large monopolistic corporations and the 1% the ability to do whatever they want,whenever they want to whomever they want to get even richer at the expense of the environment,the poor,small businesses,their workers and the economy.It is never about freedom of civil liberties and freedom of small business or the freedom of the individual.In fact deregulation in fact is the exact opposite of protection of civil liberties as seen with Facebook,YouTube,SOPA etc.It gives corporations the ability to thrash the planet,exploit their workers and the third world as much as possible to make as much money as possible and allow them to infringe on the rights of the individual by spying on the public and carrying out censorship – the exact opposite of what libertarians want and what is written in the constitution you like to shove down people’s throats.In a completely deregulated or evening libertarian society environmental destruction would be constant and cancer etc rates would skyrocket and workers would be screwed over much worse than when they are now and corporations could spy on and infringe on constitutional rights espoused in the constitution.Hypocrisy much?It is never about allowing the free market give corporations the ability to act ethically because the whole purpose of regulations is to ensure corporations act ethically by acting as a deterrent to preventing them carrying out unethical behaviour in the first place as it punishes them through legal means if they do.Regulations are meant to prevent corporations carrying out unethical behaviour that leads to death and environmental pollution so scrapping them to allow the free market decide and regulate ethical behaviour this is bullshit because the purpose of regulations is to prevent them carrying out unethical behaviour in the first place.The only reason corporations want to scrap regulations is to allow them to do whatever they want,whenever to whomever they want like jack up prices of medicine,thrash and pollute the environment as well as destroy the economy and allow people to do just so they are the only ones benefit and get richer while everyone else gets screwed over and gets poor and the economy and environment gets thrashed .If you don’t understand that you’re a fucking idiot.I should not have to explain basic shit to adults.”Freedom” is an Orwellian term as it does not give freedom to the individual but rather freedom of corporations infringing on the rights of the individual.This is why libertarians and anarcho capitalists and the followers of Ayn Rand are dangerous psychopaths who should never let near them White House and a Congress and never be taken seriously at all.Blaming 1929,1991 in Russia,2007 and Venezuela etc on socialism,communism or government becoming too powerful is kindergarten level logic.Any regulation especially over regulation that is put in place is usually those at the behest of big businesses that are in bed with the government through cronyism to crush out smaller businesses meaning both sides the Republicans and Corporate Democrats are tied to big oil and big pharma to crush out all competitors especially small new business.if you still believe the bullshit spread by Faux News etc you’re an idiot.Deregulation is what caused the Great Depression of 1929 and also the 2007 Great Recession and in both cases Wall Street etc who caused these were bailed out and the rest of us was left to suffer and pick up the crumbs with the 2020 bailouts being a sequel to this.Deregulation also caused the Venezuelan economic crash and the 1991 Russian crash.Deregulation always results in boom and bust cycles,corruption,hyperinflation,skyrocking food prices,bread lines and food shortages as well as famine and large numbers people getting unemployed and dependent on social welfare aka others peoples money,as well as going hungry or starving to death.It always results in increases in the level of poverty,always hurts those already poor and always benefits only the top 1%.Another in our long line of examples of this the 80’s and 90’s in New Zealand there was a problem, they couldn’t build homes fast enough to keep up with demand.The problem essentially was that to build a home you needed to be a master builder,which was a regulatory qualification that was very hard to get.There just weren’t enough master builders to build all the homes.So the government deregulated the housing industry to allow for more builders to enter the market without requiring them to go through the process of qualifying as a master builder and also scrapped other building codes etc with regards to those that cut quality control standards that saved both time and money.This worked,the homes got built but unfortunately the obvious drawbacks was it led to all of the homes being shoddily built and within a decade those houses started to leak through roofs and the electrical wiring became dangerous because they weren’t built properly.Kiwis subsequently lost millions on poorly built homes, many of which either required costly repairs or in some cases had to be torn down.The deregulation was a complete disaster and Kiwis are still in the same position, not enough houses and rising prices.The Congo Free State was an entire country privately owned by and a personal union by Leopoldo II of Belgium;it was not a part of, nor did it belong to, the Kingdom of Belgium of which he was the constitutional monarch.Leopold was able to seize the region by convincing other European states at the Berlin Conference on Africa that he was involved in humanitarian and philanthropic work and would not tax trade.Through the International Association of the Congo he was able to lay claim to most of the Congo Basin.On 29 May 1885, after the closure of the Berlin Conference, the king announced that he planned to name his possessions “the Congo Free State”, an appellation which was not yet used at the Berlin Conference and which officially replaced “International Association of the Congo” on 1 August 1885.The Congo Free State operated as a separate nation from Belgium, in a personal in Union with its King. It was privately controlled by Leopold II, although he never personally visited the state.This experiment of a single person running an entire country like a private corporation as per the machinations of libertarianism and anarcho capitalism resulted in a feudalist like system,extreme inequality and led to slavery,widespread sickness and famine,mutilation and torture of the natives and also the deaths of about 10,000,000 dead natives.In China and India during the economic boom the 2000s in order to speed up the building of homes for the country regulations were scrapped entirely and this lead to hundreds of new apartment blocks and even entire towns and cities built.Problem is those buildings and even entire cities are either completely abandoned or are crumbling and are mostly collapsing under their own weight due to being shoddy construction.There are entire cities in China and India that are now collapsing under their own weight or are being demolished and are simply completely unsafe for anyone to live in.Most ghost cities have had their buildings bought but there are still large towns and cities that are filled with buildings that due to simple exposure to the elements that otherwise not affect them if they were built properly are falling apart and some just falling apart under their own weight due to deregulation and shoddy construction.Some of these were mansions and villas that although they look like being constructed of stone,bricks and concrete they upon closer inspection are made of cardboard,sand and other shoddy material that would be illegal in the rest of the world with actual regulations put in place caused them to collapse under their own weight and the elements and would make actual slums and shanty towns look like luxury housing in comparison.Luckliey due to the economic boom and imbalances these bulidings were abandoned due to most chines and Indians being too por but in some cases some were occupied like apartments and schools and people died when they collapsed.There has been since 2000 been dozens of buildings in China and India collapsing under their own weight and killing people or havd to be demolished because they were built due to shoody constructuons due to lack of building regulations with some being demolished because they were deemed unsafe as they were built during this period of deregulation and only undergoing safety inspections after regulations were put back into place.There are entire ghost towns in China that are simply collapsing under their own weight even though they have only been built as recently as 2012-2018 between 4-10 years ago.This has wasted billions of dollars including taxpayers money.Environmental deregulation is why both India and China were during the early 2000s suffered extreme water and air pollution and to degree still does because environmental regulations were scrapped as the government wanted infrastructure and buildings etc to be built as quickly as possible.It is only when environmental regulations were put back in place alongside building regulations that things improved.Thus deregulation caused massive pollution and massive amounts of unsafe buildings being built and the reintroduction of government regulations solved and reversed the problem.Grenfell Tower in London is an another instance.The building was built in 1974 with its interior and exterior designed made in a way as to specifically limit the spread of a fire and it having stringent health and safety regulations especially with regards to fire safety that over the 1990s and 200s were gradually scrapped.If a fire occurred its design limited the spread of fires across a floor and to floors above and below with the fires safety measures including sprinklers and routine inspections acting as a backup.This means if a fire occurred its would take a very long time for it to spread to another apartment or it could be completely contained within the apartment long enough so that firefighters could arrive and put out the fire in time.Stringeng fire safety protocols were also present such as sprinklers etc.These facets is what the architects took into account and implemented into the buildings architecture.Overtime this was ignored,going to an extensive four hour or so oversight of the fire safety measures was then reduced to a quick 45 minute walkthrough of the building.Then in order to make a people built specifically for the poor was by the local council fitted with cladding that made it looked prettier when viewed from wealthier neighbours.The cladding used and installed by local council was the cheapest you could get but it was unlike all other cladding extremely flammable meaning once it caught fire it could spread across the entire building.How this was able to get past regulations in its construction if they existed at all was a mystery.Something so unsafe should not exist the only way for that cladding to have been constructed and manufactured and put up for sale is if regulations did not exist in its manufacturing because any sensible regulations would have prevented the cladding from being constructed and put on the market.Thats what happened in 2017 – after years of residents lobbying to get rid of the cladding they thought was a dangerous fire hazard and to reinstate newer and better fire protection sydtems and regulations which were ignored for years a small fire occurred in a kitchen.Normally as stated the exterior and interior design was designed so it was difficult for fires to spread.This would mean if a fire occurred in flat then it would be contained to that flat through it design and sprinkler systems and other measures.The building was designed so that of a fire occurred it would spread very slowely,slow enough that it would it would be long enough for firefighters to arrive and put it out and more importantly slow enough that people in the building including the flat where it occurred could escape.However the out of date sprinkler systems were either absent or simply not working by this point something that could be detected with a proper safety audit and the flammable cladding caused the fire to spread.One of the pieces of cladding in the exterior caught fire and went up in flames,then it spread to cladding below,above and beside it with the claddings extreme flammable natire allowed the fire to quickly spread through most of the building very quickly within minutes too quick for people to move out of the building and more importantly too quickly for firefighters to arrive.By the time firefighters arrived the fire had spread to most of the building was responsible for killing 72 people.The lack of effective sprinklers coupled with the cladding caused a fire which in normal situations would have taken hours to spread caused the building to light up like match within minutes.Therefore the cladding and lack of fire safety regulations caused the fire and associated deaths.The government is credited to have said in public which had been recorded in newspapers etc they were congratulating themselves and celebrated before 2017 for having removed the “albatross of Overegulation” and killed off the ”health and safety culture” in the economy and in particular London.Had more expensive but less flammable cladding being used then its likely a fire in an apartment would not have spread to the rest of the building thus allowing firefighters to have put it out and also allowed people to have escaped.This pattern of fires occuring buildings due to cheaper dangerous flammable materials being used had happened over and over again throughout the last 20 years across Great Britain and the rest of the world.The Grenfell Fire Wikipedia page has a list of several similar fires caused by them having faulty sprinklers and also using highly flammable cheaper materials in their construction,cladding etc across the world.Deregulation is why you have a corrupt healthcare system in America that constitutes as genocide killing thousands of people every year.The question I pose to libertarians, conservatives and more importantly anarcho capitalists is this – when has deregulation ever not resulted in massive environmental damage and massive death tolls and boom and bust cycles,corruption,hyperinflation and millions of people getting poor etc?China?India?Thatcherite Britain?Grenfell?New Zealand?Post Soviet Russia?Venezuela?Syria?Congo free state?1929?2007?.Name one instance in human history where this was successful.The definition of insanity is believing the same thing over and over again despite all of the evidence contradicting it over and over again..Libertarians and anarcho capitalists entire argument that deregulation leads to ethical behaviour through competition is a crock of shit.The problem with people like libertarians and anarchs capitalists is they fully embrace a political/economic philosophy without any thought given to how it works in reality – because it cannot function in reality as its it’s a wet dream supported by people with the mental capacity of kindergarteners.It’s far easier to pontificate over high minded ideals rather than actually checking the facts.It also always results in massive pollution and also people getting injured and even killed by shoddy products and construction etc.If you don’t understand that your a fucking idiot with double digits IQs of at least 40-60 that means your clinically retarded and have a kindergarten level of understanding of reality and economics.Regulations are meant to prevent hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles occuring in the first placeIt is also meant to prevent corruption as well the very thing libertarians etc hate the most..The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.The definition of insanity is believing the same thing thing over and over again despite all of the dvisence contradicting it..Economies that have sensible regulations especially through democratic means always leads to exponentional decreases in poverty,millions of people lifted out of poverty and stable,exponentional growth and increases in wages for everyone both the poor and wealthy.Democrarically decided regulations are the only way to enforce regulations that are sensible and don’t stunt the growth of small businesses as it allows workers and citizens themselves to democratically decide worker,environmental and fiscal regulations.Overegulation that is regulation that stunts the growth of small and business and protects large business are almost always pushed by governments in bed with large corporate monopolies such as Wall Mart,Amazon,Exxon at the behest of large monopolies to keep their monopolies intact because over regulation is designed specifically to crush out small and newly emerging business and keep monopolies in power.The purpose of regulation is to prevent corporations carrying out unethical behaviour such as corruption,cronyism and that which results in human deaths and environmental destruction ie pollution and also buildings collapsing in on themselves and so on in the first place as they know they will get punished if they do so and not later on.A world without regulations is like a world without laws.Regulations are like laws they are they are to act as a deterrent to prevent people carrying out unethical behaviour and punish people who do carry these out.Without regulations you would have people doing whatever the fuck they wanted without consequences and society would collapse in on itself.Laws are like regulations they act as deterrents so people know they will be punished if do something unethical.People especially anarcho capitalists who believe in complete deregulation are like those with the mindset of those want a world without laws meaning they would be okay with a world where murder,molestation of prebuscent minors etc would be allowed to occur without consequences.A world without regulations is like a world without laws.Without laws pedophiles would molest children,people would murder other people and steal etc and commit genocide,war crimes etc without consequences.People in a lawless world without the state would do anything they wanted and not get punished just like people in an unregulated economy would whatever the fuck they want and not get punished..People who don’t regulations are like people who don’t want laws and don’t want people who carry out genocide,illegal wars,molestation of prepubescent minors etc to be punished.I should not have to explain basic shit to adults.The term “freedom” is Orwellian nonsense and propaganda it is only about the freedom of large corporations to do what they want to get richer at the expense of their employees,the economy and the environment and overthrow other countries democratically elected leaders to get access to their natural resources mainly oil and also cheap labour that are paid pittance below the minimum wage of most developing countries.Once a monopoly appears and forms in a sector of the economy then it is extremely difficult for competitors to form or grow in the form of small businesses because they push to government install regulations that make it difficult for competitors to arise and eliminate those that make it easier to shut down competitors.I should have to explain basic shit to adults here.The word “ Freedom” when used by governments means only one thing – allowing the corporations they are in bed with to invade your country and get rich of your countries natural resources no matter how much the taxpayer pays to do so or no matter how many human lives of our disposable citizens need to be killed and when used by giant corporations what it really means we want the government to make it easier to shut down or eliminate all of our competitors especially small independent ones and new ones that may become a threat,caused the economy to crash that pushes poor people etc further into poverty and allows us to get richer and make it easier to exploit our workers more and trash the environment more all for a quick buck.If you still do not understand that despite all the evidence contradicting it you are quite possibly the dumbest piece of shit I’ve encountered and probably have IQs ranging in the double digits range of at least 40-60 making you by all technical standards mentally retarded.This is why it boggles the mind why people especially conservatives in low to middle classes always vote against their own self interest by voting for either corporate democrats and rebuplicans and not progressives.This is why you always have people from Europe looking in on conservative Americans as the rednecked idiots they well and truly are.Republicans sure as hell don’t give a shit about their voters and corporate democrats may to a degree may care but corruption and inherent lack of democratic control may restrict them from doing anything positive.For an ideology that seems to be all about not wanting to not have the state telling them what to do you have a tendency to be electing far-right facist authoritarian dictators who do exactly that.Furthermore you deride leftists of having a track record of authoritarian governments in so called “socialist” and “communism” and like “democracy” but your ideology has elected conservative and corporate democrat politicians that do nothing but quash out democracy by overthrowing democratically elected leaders all the time and you do everything to quash out progressives like Bernie Samders,Alexia Ocazio Cortez whose good is to actually democratise society.Its the role of people like Bernie Sanders etc to put through legislation to eliminate poverty and corruption and increase the wages of lower class workers.Sensible regulation should be those that punish CEOs of especially big corporations but benefit their workers including making trade unions etc mandatory alongside regulations that stunt the overgrowth of big monopolies(while still keeping their workers well paid and working) but at the same time promote the growth of small businesses with only sensible worker and environmental regulations with small businesses regulated the least and taxed the least and large business taxed the most and regulated the most to promote the growth of small companies as competitors to big businesses.Anyone who disagrees with this is mentally handicapped and has the maturity and economic literacy of a kindergartener.I should to explain basic shit to adults.The level of government intervention can be limited to only necessary intervention without infringing on the rights of its citizens but this is dependent on the government in charge.The level of state infringement on civil liberties has varied under each administration since after Maos death on a case by case basis – what level of intervention it has is based on the individuals in charge with some more liberal than others while others more willing to impose censorship and carry out executions while others may only send a person to prison another will have them executed.The different degrees of restrictions depends on each administrations..Like Soviet Russia the level of control the government had over civil liberties varied under each adminstration but was never as bad as Mao with all successive adminstrations after him seeing him as a stain on their history with the relaxing of this grip being caused by the rise of tellocomunications and factors similar to Soviet Russia.Like Soviet Russia celebration of Mao was done to ensure state loyalty and allow remaining supporters to do so without inciting riots in the streets.So yes if modern day China and Russia otr even that of Soviet Russia and Maoist China adopted a completely unregulated economy then tens of millions of people would starve to death due to hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles leading to skyrocking food prices adding more the death toll of capitalism.The same would occur in modern day Cuba,South and North Korea and other countries that rely on command economies.Economic think tanks,economists,vloggers such as Richard D Wolff,DemocraticMarxist01 etc and even AI such as Hecate etc can confirm this by carrying out studies and simulations.Hell even the Presidents of China,Russia,Cuba and North and South Korea etc can confirm that this is the reason that they enforce command and planned economies.If you are believer of unrestrained and unregulated free market capitalism including anarcho capitalism and that this should be applied everywhere including Russia and China you’re an economic idiot and a genocidal piece of shit who thinks killing off an extra 1,500,000,000 people is an acceptable loss for “freedom”.Once that happens you’ll find some way to blame it on socialism or liberals – like you always do for all of the worlds problems and take almost zero responsibility for causing the death of about another a billion people like the little children you really are.So if any of the economic idiots at Faux News,OANN,Turning Point USA and Reason Tv and all right wing vloggers on YouTube ever took control of America or indeed any country in the planet especially China,Cuba and Russia or even the world and installed a completely deregulated free market economies or lax economies you would be directly responsible for the deaths of at least a billion or more people and you would double or even triple poverty worldwide by spreading FREEDOM and economic illiteracy – and then you’ll blame it on liberals,socialism,communism and the government as usual..This is why every country that America carries out coups in to get at their oil – I mean spreading freedom always ends up with actual tyrannical dictators that lead to massive deregulation and then massive hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles etc and food shortages and famines as the result of skyrocketing food prices.Again food shortages and famines have always plagued China and Russia even before they adopted state capitalism in the 20th century under Mao,Stalin and Lenin and still do to this day in the 21st century and they have always been net importers of food and have had to resort to command economies to lessen the intensity of food shortages.Food shortages and famine have plagued Korea,Cuba.Russia and China since ancient times when agriculture first became a thing,were a problem before Mao,Lenin and Stalin came to power and were a problem during the 20th century and continue to be a problem in modern times of the 21st century.This is because of unpredictable weather,lack of available arable land,pests and other factors outside of the states control.The only way to prevent this is by importing food,setting up and maintaining private farmers and implementing command economies these are three things you need to do in order to prevent famines in countries not suited for agriculture.This is why in Ancient China was dependant on forming trade routes with the rest of Asia,Europe and America because they needed international markets to import food and sell goods from China to get money to buy that food.The Silk Road was of great importance to China as it allowed them to acces to markets that provided enough food to feed themselves through imports and enough money to pay for those imports through exports.This is why Chinas economy boomed during the Medievil Ages but faltered and led to consistant famines after they closed their markets to the rest of the world after the Medievil Ages.After China began to close its markets to the west it fell into consistent famines due to the fact they were unable to feed its population due to lack of food imports etc.Its also why during Mao and all adminstrations after him of the Communist Party began to gradually open their markets to the western world etc especially in the 21st century it has little to do with freer markets and has everything to do to meet the needs of feeding a growing population.Increased GDP for exports and increased wages from new jobs via new multinationals meant increased money for food imports.Mao knew this and was hesitant at first but went along to prevent more famines why you have pictures of Mao and Richard Nixon eating Chinese food with chopsticks because opening up relations and markets to the west especially America was key to preventing famines because they needed to be friendly with other countries to export food etc and other products and then be able to pay for imported food.Mao didn’t like being friendly with western leaders especially the Americans but he had to export and import food to prevent famines and America was a key market to sell rice etc especially when Chinese food was becoming popular in the west especially on America and you had many new Chinese restaurants and markets towns and sections popping up in key cities and towns across America during the Cold War.Those restaurants needed rice alongside rice being sold in cities across the west.China had to compete against both India and Indonesia and of course Vietnam like today for exporting rice to the western markets.It was this motivation that now makes China the largest producer and exporter.It was exotic especially and ironically when it was dangerous to visit China in person so that’s why you have Mao opening up relations with the United States.Chinese restaurants were already present in America by the early 1900s before Mao rose to power and they were gaining popularity throughout the 20th century and growing in number and so Mao had to increase rice production to meet this demand and also make deals with his enemies.Since Americans couldn’t visit China as it was too dangerous and underdeveloped they wanted Chinese food and to outcompete Indonesia etc as the top exporter of rice in the world to meet the growing demand for rice he had to increase productivity so part of he reason for the Great Leap Forward was to meet the growing demand of rice in western countries and the growing popularity of Chinese food and increase in Chinese restaurants.The same goes for Stalin,Lenin and to a degree Guevara,Castro.Mao hated the west especially Richard Nixon but had to open up relations because it was only to prevent more famines and ensure that China’s GDP economy would rise exponentially.The Great Leap Forward was meant to boost steel and rice production so as to outcompete Europe and the rest of Asia for these and then sell them on international markets to then boost its GDP so as to allow it to import more food to feed its growing population.After his death successive administrations began to open up markets to the west for the same reason.It was nothing to do about letting corporations develop the economy and upgrade its infrastructure it was capable of doing that by itself it had everything to with having to feed its growing population.China is and always has been heavily reliant on international markets and trade because of the need to import large amounts of food and the need to export large amounts of its goods to pay for those food imports.To see the different effects of a command economy and planned economy one may only have to look at Vietnam,North Korea and South Korea.Vietnam before and during the Vietnam War was state capitalist as the economy was a command economy with North and South divided between the extent of state influence in it meaning they were both state capitalist but the state had different degrees of control of the economy leading to be completely centrally planned state capitalist command economies with the state controlling farms and other businesses combined with coops and the other having some state control but more leaning towards planned economy state capitalism with since 1986 reforms making it a planned market socialism which is quasi state capitalist due to the increasing dominance of the private sector despite the fact the state still has control of the economy.North and South Korea are both state capitalism the difference is the type of economic planning they use with North Korea using command economies and South Korea using democratic planned economies with this due to the climates of each country or their availability of arable land.Both North and South Vietnam are and were centrally planned state capitalist countries especially at the time of the Vietnam War with the degree of state control allowing for a different amount of the two countries to be managed in different degrees by the private capitalists.North Vietnam had at the time of Vietnam War more state control of the economy such as owning farms,business and cooperatives but small instances of private land ownerships and businesses existing making it neither communist or socialist but state capitalist while South Vietnam was also state capitalism but the government didn’t have as much control over the economy with this allowing for more in country trade and entrepreneurship as well as more international trade with the rest of the world as South Vietnam up to,during and after the Vietnam War was engaging in international trade with most of Asia and the rest of the world including America,Canada,Japan,Thailand making it at the time extremely wealthy in comparison to the north.Northern Vietnams government control extended over the South after the Vietnam war when they merged into one country with this power gradually waning during the last few decades.Both North and South Korea are both state capitalist the difference is South Korea utilises planned economies that have more democratic input over command economies in North Korea.This likely due to different factors of both countries such as climate,Vietnam is still state capitalist but the government has less of a grip over the the economy with it planning it in more liberalised ways allowing private enterprises to exist alongside cooperatives.The same applies to North and South Korea both are centrally planned state capitalist economies with state run,privately owned enterprises and cooperatives mainly family run ones with the extent of government determining the extent of economic freedom these private enterprises have with North Korea having tighter government control and South Korea having less government control.North Korea does have private enterprises that are dynastic family owned ones handed down from one generation to the next and have close ties to the government similar to state capitalist America..Thus North Korea through command economies has more poverty and limited ability for people to become wealthy capitalists except for a few family run corporate conglomerates passed from one generation to the next that are privately held business not state owned ones with South Korea having less governmental control of the economy but does have significant amounts of state owned corporations with planned economies used and is thus has more economic freedom for all citizens and is considered erroneously as a pure free market economy.This shows the difference in outcome when using planned economies instead of command economies.Both are state capitalism because they both have private enterprises,cooperatives and state run enterprises and also state control of the economy but the difference is is that North Korea has more state control of the economy despite allowing private enterprises to exist with South Korea having cooperatives,private enterprises and state control of economy the difference is that South Korea has democratic input from entrepreneurs and the public.Governments in both countries own state owned corporations and also have close relationships with private enterprises similar to the United States of America.North Korea has a command economy but South Korea a planned economy leadinv to different economic outcomes the reasons may be due to the person in charge of the country but it could also be due to agricultural and climatic factors limiting their agricultural expansion.We can thus see the difference between command economies and planned economies in modern day North and South Korea as planned economies are thus more desiresble from a democratic perspective than command economies.Command economies can work and be more successful in terms of civil liberties and outcome than North Korea etc as the extent of government control is determined more by the adminstrations in power rather than the practice itself it can work and be successful in terms of economic growth and civil liberties depending on the adminstration in control.North Korea shows what a purely authoritarian government brings about when it adopts a command economy.Command and planned economies don’t necessarily lead to authoritarian governments as seen with post Stalin and post Lenin Russia under Khrushchev.North Korea is a authoritarian country because of the people who seized power.The North Korean famine of 1994-1998 was largely the result of floods,droughts and factors outside of the control of the government however the mismanagement of the government exacerbated etc similar to Maoist China but unlike Maoist China.North Korea like China has to adopt command economies due to its lack of arable land.North Korea’s sparse agricultural resources restrict agricultural production.Climate, terrain, and soil conditions are not particularly favorable for farming, with a relatively short cropping season.Only about 17% of the total landmass, or approximately 20,000 km2, is arable, of which 14,000 km2 is well suited for cereal cultivation; the major portion of the country is rugged mountain terrain.The weather varies markedly according to elevation, and lack of precipitation, along with infertile soil, makes land at elevations higher than 400 meters unsuitable for purposes other than grazing.Precipitation is geographically and seasonally irregular, and in most parts of the country as much as half the annual rainfall occurs in the three summer months.This pattern favors the cultivation of paddy rice in warmer regions that are outfitted with irrigation and flood control networks.Rice yields are 5.3 tonnes per hectare, close to international norms. Only about 20% of North Korea’s mountainous terrain is arable land. Much of the land is only frost-free for six months, and only one crop can be grown on it per year.The country has never been self-sufficient in food, and many experts considered it unrealistic to try to be.You could convert all availible arable land in North Korea into private farms and it still wouldn’t be able to feed itself and would still be a net importer of food and still need command or planned economies..Due to North Korea’s terrain, farming is mainly concentrated among the flatlands of the four western coastal provinces.This allows for a longer growing season, leveled land, substantial rainfall, and well-irrigated soil which permits the high cultivation of crops.These flatlands which are the majority of arable land is situated are continously at threat of drought as well as floods on a consistent basis.Along with the western coastal provinces, fertile land also runs through the eastern seaboard provinces.However, interior provinces such as Chagang and Royanggang are too mountainous, dry, and cold to support farming.The 1994-1998 famine was caused due to not just an inflexible but necessary command economy but also numerous factors such as a series of floods and droughts that damaged crop yields and arable land that exacerbated it but also the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Maoist Chima that were unable to support it with guarenteed markets and thus a loss of GDP but also a loss of food imports and aid from these countries which were now gone with Russia unable to help due it facing its own economic depression and food shortages caused by deregulation and skyrocketing food prices.China itself was also facing its own problems.In the 1980s, the Soviet Union embarked on political and economic reforms.It began to demand that North Korea repay the Soviet Union for all of the past and current aid which it sent to North Korea – amounts which North Korea could not repay. By 1991, the Soviet Union dissolved ending all aid and trade concessions, such as cheap oil.Without Soviet aid, the flow of imports to the North Korean agricultural sector ended, and the government proved to be too inflexible to respond.Energy imports fell by 75%.The economy went into a downward spiral, with imports and exports falling in tandem.Without help from these countries, North Korea was unable to respond adequately to the coming famine. For a time,China filled in the gap left by the Soviet Union’s collapse and propped up North Korea’s food supply with significant aid.By 1993, China was supplying North Korea with 77 percent of its fuel imports and 68 percent of its food imports.Thus, North Korea replaced its dependence on the Soviet Union with dependence on China.In 1993, China faced its own grain shortfalls and need for hard currency, and it sharply cut aid to North Korea.The economic decline and failed policies provided the context for the famine, but the floods of the mid-1990s were the immediate cause.The floods in July and August 1995 were described by experts and record keepers as being “of biblical proportions” by independent observers and were of levels not seen in over 70 years.It was a once in a lifetime natural disaster the last time a flood that bad occurred and was recorded was in the 1920s before anyone alive ag the point was alive.They were estimated to affect as much as 30 percent of the country.Had the floods not occurred or were of normal standards then it would have led to food shortages and not famine with the command economy able to control it.The major issues created by the floods were not only the destruction of crop lands and harvests, but also the loss of emergency grain reserves, because many of them were stored underground.According to the United Nations, the floods of 1994 and 1995 destroyed around 1.5 million tons of grain reserves,and the Centres fir Disease Control and Prevention stated that 1.2 million tons (or 12%) of grain production was lost in the 1995 flood.There were further major floods in 1996 and a drought in 1997.North Korea lost an estimated 85% of its power generation capacity due to flood damage to infrastructure such as hydropower plants, coal mines, and supply and transport facilities.UN officials reported that the power shortage from 1995 to 1997 was not due to a shortage of oil, because only two out of a total of two dozen power stations were dependent on heavy fuel oil for power generation, and these were supplied by KEDO (the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organisation).About 70% of power generated in the DPRK came from hydropower sources, and the serious winter-spring droughts of 1996 and 1997 (and a breakdown on one of the Yalu River large hydro turbines) created major shortages throughout the country at that time, severely cutting back railway transportation (which was almost entirely dependent on electric power), which in turn resulted in coal supply shortages to the coal-fueled power stations which supplied the remaining 20% of power in the country.Flooded coal mines required electricity to operate pumps, and the shortage of coal worsened the shortage of electricity.Agriculture reliant on electrically-powered irrigation systems, artificial fertilizers and pesticides was hit particularly hard by the economic collapse.Most North Koreans had experienced nutritional deprivation long before the mid-1990s.The country had once been fed with a centrally planned economic system that overproduced foodhad long ago reached the limits of its productive capacity, and could not respond effectively to exogenous shocks.This means that a contributing factor was that there was not enough arable land in the country to feed its population and the weather did not favour expanding it any further therefore it was reliant on food imports and still is today.Overpopulation is therefore a contributing factor as to why it cannot sustain itself in terms of agriculture there is just not enough arable land and favourable climatic conditions to allow it to feed itself with a growing population through conventional agriculture.North Korea’s vulnerability to the floods and famine was exacerbated by the failure of the public distribution system.The regime refused to pursue policies that would have allowed food imports and distribution without discrimination to all regions of the country.During the famine, the urban working class of the cities and towns of the eastern provinces of the country was hit particularly hard.The distribution of food reflected basic principles of stratification of the state socialist system.The countries command economy that it had no choice to adopt was not suited to severe droughts and floods of that scale something that had last occurred before North Korea had become state capitalist and had adopted command economies alongside having no support from China and Russia etc.International economic sanctions were also a contributing factor.That is not to say that Kim Jong il and Kim Jong un can get away Scot free had a more benovalent person been in charge or democratic safeguards existed then its likely the famine would not have been so bad and distribution of food would have been better.Furthermore had the weather not been so bad it would had led to less deaths.The combined factors of severe floods and an authoritarian government led to each other’s worst attributes exacerbating each other.North Korea had to have a command economy but that doesn’t excuse the actions of Kim Jong il with if someone else in power within a command economy could have limited the death toll to a fraction of it.He was after all living in a large palace,took most of the food including international aid for himself and was diverting money,energy and resources into nuclear weapons and even the military.All of these factors combined together led to one of the worst famines in recent history and certainly one of the worst in the country’s history.Had the Soviet Union and China still had stable economic growth and had Russia’s economy not been deregulated by Boris Yeltsin then it could have afforded food aid and could have exported more food to North Korea with China’s own problems had not occurred then they too could have exported food.South Korea also has the same problem with agriculture only 22% of its land is arable and like North Korea is mostly mountains with it having to adopt either a command or planned economy and unlike North Korea adopted a planned economy and as a result has more economic freedom and more freedom in terms of civil liberties compared to its northern sister country.It is also because it had more open markets with the rest of the world is less prone to famines due to it importing large amounts of food every year.Both South and North Korea thus show how you can have different economic outcomes if adopting command or planned economies.Its possible South Korea could adopt a command economy and still have a good track record in terms of civil liberties and growth in private sector.North Korea even if the Kim Jong-un dynasty was ousted and you had multiple political parties and Simone with more democratic views etc who installed democratic laws etc thus still would mean it would have to keep its command economy or planned economy.If either country adopted a deregulated free market economy this would led to hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles and mass starvation due to skyrocking food prices.In otherwards any adminstration couple with sufficient regulation and oversight by international committees and watchdogs etc such as United Nations and even sufficient internal government regulations and regulartory bodies can result in command economies with exponentially growing GDP for both the state and private sector every year and also limited government control over civil liberties as seen to an extent in post-Stalinist and post-Leninist Soviet Russia.Soviet Russia after the deaths of both Stalin and Lenin under Khrushchev etc show that a well intentioned government or even one where political factors force them to be well intentioned can have command economies work that do not have severe restrictions on civil liberties.Khrushchev is a prime example of how it is the administration not the concept of command economies that determines that command economies can work without eliminating civil liberties.Had he been allowed to stay in power longer he may have improved even further.Unregulated free market capitalism with zero regulation and government control can only result in perpetual cycles of boom and bust cycles with the rich being bailed out and the poor etc surviving on scraps and will result in corporations carrying out more environmental pollution,corruption.The only way to become an economic superpower and stay one forever is for to have either a planned or command economy ideally a planned economy whose economy growth exponentionally rises forever due to regulations in the economy while everyone’s crashes due to boom and busts cycles through deregulation.While planned or command economies GDP rises forever exponentionally every year an unregulated economy crashes every few years in boom and bust cycles.The purpose of planned and command economies is to ensure that growth of GDP,wages and earnings in both the state and private sectors goes constantly upwards forever in an exponentially increasing manner with regulation done to prevent imbalances in the economy with regulation created that stunts the development of small businesses only done to preserve corporate monopolies that are essential to the survival of the economy such as the military industrial complex,fossil fuel companies and pharmaceutical companies etc.This is part of the reason why China was one of only few countries unaffected by the 2007/2008 global recession because it had a planned economy which prevented its economy collapsing while deregulation caused the economic crash in America that spread to the rest of the world.China did see a sharp drop but this was largely due to a decrease in exports that was caused by other countries being unable to afford them to import goods from China but this was repaired within less than a year due to government stimulus programmes and regulations it was one of the first countries to emerge from the crises.Its planned economy is why it’s aimed to surpass America as the worlds economic superpower by 2030.Removal of government regulations has shown over and over again to create unsustainable growth severe crashes and localised and global recessions as seen by the 1929 and 2008 recession and to a degree 2020.In a socialist systems and to an extent more democratic forms of capitalism outside of state capitalism government regulations as part of planned economies are meant to encourage growth especially for smaller business with the state only able to overegulate the economy in capitalism especially state capitalism with other more “freer” forms of capitalism even open to overegulation.Thus it prevents the extreme boom and bust cycles that is caused by unregulated free market capitalism in order to prevent widespread social chaos ensuring stabilised economic growth while other countries economies collapse.That is why government regulation in the economy in the form of forward planning exists in the first place and why libertarianism and anarcho capitalism cannot exist and why none of these problems occur in socialism.Forward thinking and planning that results in slow but stable economic growth always outranks quick profits and growth because over the long term it ensures economic and social stability.Both private industry and public coops etc can utilise and exist in planned economies regulated by direct democracy,self regulation and limited state control.Indicative planning is a form of economic planning in planned economies implemented by a state in an effort to solve the problem of imperfect information in market economies by coordination of private and public investment through forecasts and output targets.The resulting plans aim to supply economically valuable information as a public good that the market by itself cannot disseminate,or where forward markets are nonexistent.However,indicative planning takes only endogenous market uncertainty into account,plans the economy accordingly,and does not look into exogenous uncertainty like technology, foreign trade, etc.Indicative plans serve to complement and enhance the market,as opposed to replace the market mechanism,hence they are adopted in market-based and mixed economies and were most widely practiced in France and Japan before the 1980s.When utilizing indicative planning, the state employs “influence,subsidies,grants and taxes to affect the economy,but does not compel”.Indicative planning is contrasted with mandatory planning,where a state (or other economic unit) sets quotas and mandatory output requirements.Planning by inducement is often referred to as indicative planning.Planning by inducement is democratic planning.It means planning by manipulating the market.There is no compulsion but persuasion.There is freedom of enterprise,freedom of consumption and freedom of production.But these freedoms are subject to state control and regulation.People are induced to act in a certain way through various monetary and fiscal measures.Thus,planning by inducement is able to achieve the same results as are likely to be achieved in planning by direction but with less sacrifice of individual liberty.Planned economies contrast with command economies in that a planned economy is “an economic system in which the government and society at large through democratic processes controls and regulates production,distribution, prices, etc.” whereas a command economy necessarily has substantial state ownership of industry while also having this type of regulation.In command economies,such as in state capitalism important allocation decisions are made by government authorities and are imposed by law with no flexibility and input from the public.This is done via the state having complete control of all enterprises and the entire economy only found in absolute or majority state capitalism such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cuba.A command economy is a system where the government,rather than the free market and public democratisation determines what goods should be produced,how much should be produced,and the price at which the goods are offered for sale.It also determines investments and incomes and is done as an extreme measure to prevent depressions etc.Planned economies can occur in state capitalism and all types of capitalism but not communism and can occur in all subtypes of socialism.Command ecomies can occur in capitalism namely state capitalism and only some subtypes of socialism with it impossible in communism due to communism requiring the abolition of the state.Usually it occurs primarily in state capitalism as the state has complete authority with it less successful in all subtypes of socialism because of the inherent democratic processes of socialism that allows the states control to be subverted.In socialism it is less likely to occur or be less successful because it can only be initiated by public referendums with democracrstic process also allow the workforce to control the nature of the price fixes,regulations etc and also get rid of it completely thus still limiting state control.It can occur in socialism but due to the democratic nature of socialism command ecomies can removed through democratic process by the workforce and public.There are many types of command economies such as state capitalist command economies where the state has complete control of the economic controls and regulations that can only occur in state capitalism,free market command economies where private enterprises are allowed to control the command economies that can occur in all subtypes of capitalism,democratic command economies where both private enterprises and all citizens are allowed to control it again in all types of capitalist systems and socialised command economies where workers are allowed to control them and can only occur in socialised systems.State capitalist command economies are more effective as command economies as they allow the government complete control of price fixing while socialised command economies,democratic command economies democratises the command economy as the workers,CEOs and electorate in both cooperatives and private enterprises in socialist economies and free market economies can democratically control the nature of the price fixes etc with this leaving the command economy more open to recessions and boom and bust cycles thus rendering it an ineffective form of command economies.For a command economy to effective it must work within the confines of capitalism where the government has complete undemocratic control of the economy especially state capitalism as even democratic command economies etc that can occur in less regulated capitalist economies etc can be manipulated through democracy and even corruption and bribes from CEOs to be more favourable to big corporations or workers thus making them completely ineffective.Therefore tyrants and indeed governments would favour state capitalist command economies as it allows them complete control of all aspects of it.If a tyrant wanted to have complete undemocratic control of the economy then it must adopt a state capitalist economy.Democratic governments and socialist governments would have less successful command economies as the ability for private entrepreneurs and workers to vote and decide the aspects of it would thus create imbalances and they would favour relaxed regulations that would then be more likely to cause imbalances in the economy which would negate the whole purpose of it.Command economies can not occur in communism because in communism the government doesn’t exist.Government control through a command economy is much stronger in state capitalism than in socialism because of the democratic processes inherent in socialism that prevent the state from gaining complete control of the country.It cannot occur in communism because communism requires the complete abolition of the state in the first place.Modern day North Korea and North Vietnam during the Vietnam War can be classed as a command economy while South Vietnam during the Vietnam War and modern day Vietnam and modern day South Korea can be classed as a planned economy.This shows in the case especially of modern day South and North Korea and Vietnam war era North and South Vietnam the difference in economic outcomes and freedoms for the average citizen you get from the two different types of economic planning types.A true form of any type of socialism and communism has thus never existed.There seems to be this concept amongst the idiotic politically and economically illiterate conservative capitalists that communism and socialism is when the government “does stuff”.Therefore it’s labelled socialist or communist whenever it does remotely anything.America could be considered socialist or communist because the government invades other countries for oil – I mean liberates other countries spreading “freedom”.If that were true then by all technical definitions there are no capitalist countries around the world their is only socialism or communism because all countries around the world have government run healthcare,social welfare programmes and the government “doing stuff” which is why they are elected in the first place meaning socialism and communism has lifted millions out of poverty not capitalism.So by conservative logic a country is considered socialist and communist when the government does stuff,therefore when the American government invades – no wait liberates other countries for oil etc then it is doing stuff and is thus considered considered socialist.By conservative logic America is thus a socialist nation and always has been a socialist nation every since the beginning of the Cold War.This is the sort of nonsense Rednecked Trumpists and people in Reason Tv,OANN,Faux News etc with IQs in the range of double digits of at least 40-60 believe.By this logic there would be no point in electing politicians because they do stuff or governments would be elected and then do nothing at all.A truly capitalist world by this logic is where the government either doesn’t exist or exists but does absolutely nothing.This is the sort of logic you have to deal with when dealing with conservatives.This is kindergarten level logic,dangerous kindergarten level nonsense and the exact opposite of both communism and socialism and can only occur under capitalism.Its nothing more than Cold War era propaganda bullshit that was spouted as far back as the 1950s.It was propaganda back then and its still propaganda 70 years later.The state can only do stuff without democratic authorisation within the confines of a capitalist economy because in a socialist systems all actions of the government must be democratically decided upon and in communism the state doesn’t exist in the first place – get that through your thick skulls.Furthermore “socialism” now come to describe governments whose country has large reserves of oil and gas we want our fossil fuel corporations to seize for themselves to get rich off but they won’t give it to us instead they are using the profits to lift millions of their own people out of poverty – the big selfish meanies.When a country has large reserves of oil and the government wants to use that oil to fund social welfare programmes to lift millions of people out of poverty and not give it to American oil corporations then its likely your going to have an illegal coup and the leader of that country is going to be called a “socialist dictator” despite being leaders of countries that are predominantly capitalist who are democratically elected.Therefore state authoritarianism is therefore a conservative phenotype and especially one of far right capitalist economies not left wing ideologies or economic systems.The whole purpose of socialism and communism is to in fact eliminate government control of the economy and society by democratising and cutting down on the governments role in society,democratise the workplace and eventually eliminate its presence.Socialism is where all actions of the state whether it is bailouts,taxes,regulations etc are democratically decided by the workforce and populace to eliminate over regulation,unfair taxes and corruption and to bring all operations in all business under direct control of its workers.All business can only be cooperatives or collectives there can be no state owned corporations.Therefore the purpose of socialism is to democratise society thus eliminating corruption,cronyism and over regulation.Any state control of society is in socialism kept under control via democratic processes.Communism is where the state no longer exists and is thus cannot influence society at all.State control of the economy and society itself and any instances of the government inducing any undue action or tyrannical authoritarian control of society can only occur within the confines of a capitalist economy not within communism or socialism.You see Orwellian refers to behaviour carried out by people with the mental capacity of kindergarteners.Democratic socialism is not socialism because private enterprises and state control are allowed to exist and its oxymoronic since socialism is already democratic in nature – thus democratic socialism is just as much a real thing as the oxymoronic state socialism and if it is real then its a form of capitalism not socialism since private enterprises and government control exists.It could be called democratic capitalism.Therefore Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocazio Cortez are capitalists not socialists or communists.In all so called socialist or communist countries all businesses were  state owned where the state had control of them and all operations with very little if any worker control and the state owning any business or controlling any aspect of the economy can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism.Even in private enterprises laws regarding worker conditions were decided by the state with the existence of trade unions allowing for each individual business to be managed and controlled indirectly.Some academics maintain that workers in the Soviet Union and other Marxist–Leninist states had genuine control over the means of production through institutions such as trade unions,trade unions do not guarantee complete control as in socialism as unlike in socialism where one has direct democratic control but trade unions only offer indirect control and are also present in capitalism in the first place due to the undemocratic control in the workplace.Trade unions involve negotiating with managers and CEOs for better working conditions etc which do not exist in cooperatives meaning they can only exist due to the presence of private corporations,state controlled enterprises and are thus not a feature of socialism meaning they can only exist in capitalism and its various subtypes including state capitalism they cannot exist in socialism due to socialism’s democratic nature and non hierarchical structures as all employees get a democratic say in the management of their enterprises and the economy by direct democracy in controlling the state.Thus the presence of trade unions in Maoist China and Soviet Russia means these countries were state capitalist and not socialist and communist.Therefore trade unions are a feature of capitalism not socialism.Cooperatives and collectives did exist in Maoist China Soviet Russia etc and other so called “socialist” hellholes but they were consisted of a minority of the enterprises alongside private enterprises – as stated for a country to considered socialist 100% of all enterprises must be either cooperatives or collectives with no private or state run enterprises.In these countries cooperatives and collectives consisted between 5-20% of all enterprises,private enterprises consisting of 5-20% with state run enterprises consisting of a majority of at least 60-90%.Most if not all scholars state that in all of these “socialist” hellholes such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia the majority of the workers real meaningful control over the workplace but rather the state did with them all having visible private enterprises.Furthermore the actions of the state were not democratically decided upon as all taxes,regulations and laws were decided by the state without democratic input.A command economy was used which is undemocratic in nature and thus not socialism.This is not how socialism works this is how state capitalism workers.Democratic control was only relegated to the small number of cooperatives that existed in otherwards democratic control by workers was only confined to cooperatives and how they ran and not within the confines of state run corporations and of course not within the confines of private corporations with all actions of the state being authoritarian undemocratic control meaning the workers or population could not vote on any taxes,regulations etc.It was not communism due to the presence of private enterprises,state control and money.The use of the term collectivised and working together with in terms of propaganda and also state run industries such as farms and factories in Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc was likely used to brainwash people especially the ignorant or used in the context of working together against other state run enterprises,cooperatives and private enterprises with if possible the term collectivised used in the context of collectivised working rather than collectively run and operated wherein they were still operated by state run buerocrats in place of a CEO but the work was collectivised but the profits were not shared equally between all workers as in cooperatives rather they were paid according to their time spent each week etc similar to how large private farmers in modern times pay immigrants and other labourers etc fixed prices to harvest crops etc rather than sharing profits.The use of the terms working together etc was propaganda to I still morale and increase state loyalty and productivity like how modern day private corporations organise corporate get togethers,meeting,seminars,retreates and events to promote teamwork and improve worker morale you know those cheesy events,seminary’s etc that use slogans like “theres no I in Team” to improve productivity and about working together for the common good within ones corporation with it the same collectivised mentality propaganda in oother state propaganda in corporate America etc is exactly the same groupthink collectivised mentality propaganda as in Soviet Russia and Maoist China.This further reiterates the similarity between state capitalism that indeed state loyalty and corporate loyalty with it possible that these modern corporate propaganda and morale improving seminars etc having their ancestoral basis in the same propaganda techniques from Stalinist/Leninist Russia and Maoist China.Thus it riterates the groupthink mentality of state capitalism as both state propaganda in Soviet Russia and Maoist China and corporate propagands in corporate America espouses the complete elimination of free will and loyalty to corporatised entities.If profits were shared then its likely that were not cooperatives as they were state run industries possibly state run and managed cooperatives but not true cooperatives as the workers had no real meaningful control of them with any rises in wages overtime likely done by the state installed buerocrats in charge of them giving pay rises overtime as the economy and their profits grew to maintain state loyalty by increasing their wages and thus increasing their standard of living and give the illusion of communism or socialism.This is how state capitalism works because since socialism is to have a workers revolution where the economy,all enterprises and society itself be brought under the control of all workers so how exactly does having the state control of all enterprises and society equate to a workers revolution?Hence the phrase it wasn’t real socialism.

Communism explained:
Communism is where the state,money,human labour and class structures dissapears completely since AI,automation and other technologies as predicted by Marx are capable of eliminating scarcity,poverty,human labour and class structures with to a lesser degree minarcho technocraticism doing so with the state relegated to mainly setting laws through democratic processes.Due to the rise of AI,automation and other emerging technologies all citizens are allowed acces to the same universal gold standard of living due to abundance,elimination of both money and scarcity etc with the states existence eliminated entirely or relegated to merely enforcing laws etc though this complete elimination has to yet to be shown as feasible.Money no longer exists because AI,automation and emerging technologies have eliminated scarcity of all essential resources and the need for human labour.People are no longer required to work in order to meet basic needs such as food,shelter etc or for that matter even luxuries with any remaining work done being voluntary and done for intrinsic satisfaction such as in the arts and media with these being mainly those that involve the arts,media and creativity etc with any jobs that are labourious having significantly shorter working hours due to automation etc.People are thus free to pursue their own intrinsic desires so long as they do not physically harm or kill others etc and infringe on their fringe.Because of advances in AI,automation and other technologies that eliminate scarcity and human labour money does not exist and government is no longer necessary to manage the economy with it managed by AI and democratic processes involving the general public.People would still have the same wide variety of goods and services but without the profit motive and human labour as AI and automation would replace human labour with the creation,manufacturing and distribution of manufactured goods not utilising cooperative business,state run enterprises and private enterprises which are replaced by open source computer networks where the public designs manufactured goods and uploads them to these networks for the rest of society.The distribution of manufactured goods and agricultural products are through computer networks and systems run by AI similar to the entirety of this website.Any remaining work is work that is done is done voluntarily for its intrinsic value.Marx was unlike most thinkers of his time well aware of the rise of automation and its effect on causing technological unemployment on a massive scale while at the same time increasing productivity and to a degree he was prescient at the rise of AI but would be astounded by the true nature of it and potential it had on society.Communism involves the complete withering away of the state into oblivion and abolishment of money as espoused by Marx in his books and writings The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital.Anyone who read these books would know this if you don’t you’re an idiot and a troll.The state does not exist in communism and if does it is likely state capitalism pretending to be communism.Why would the withering away of the state lead to the state controlling everything?This is why countries labelled communist are not communist because they involved the state centrally planning the economy through a command economy which can only occur in state capitalism not communism – why would Marx describe communism the end goal of society as involving the withering away of the state and yet “communist” states had the state control everything.Hence the phrase it wasn’t real communism.Communism can only exist with the state alongside private property,private business and money abolished completely there can only be mixed economies involving mixtures of socialism and capitalism there cannot mixed communist economies or communist countries with the existence of a state.How many times do I have to stress it to get it through your thick skull a country cannot be communist when the state and money exists because the whole definition,end goal and point of communism is the complete elimination of the states and money’s existence in the first place?Even cooperatives and collectives cannot exist in communism as these can only exist in socialism,state capitalism and mixed economies.Communism requires the complete abolition of the state,money,coops and private property and enterprises but all so called communist countries had visible private businesses,money and had the state in complete control of the economy which is the exact opposite of the communism.Having coops,government parties,money,private enterprises is not communism.Communism does not involve profit because money does not exist.This is not how communism works – this how state capitalism works.All attempts at “communism” or more correctly state capitalism especially in the 20th century were failures because technology had not yet reached a sufficient level of technological advancement to allow for it to occur with regards to providing abundance and eliminating human labour and the need for money especially with regards to automation,AI and genetic engineering with this no longer an issue.The recent major leaps and bounds in VR technology,automation,CRISPR,genetic engineering,Artificial Inteligence and other exponential growths in technologies since the start of the 21st century especially since 2012-2019 means that it is now feasible for communism to be feasible or at least the next stepping stone minarcho technocratism is feasible is feasible by 2029-2045.Hence the phrase it wasn’t real communism or socialism because the technological advancements necessary to make it a reality didn’t exist in the 20th Century and only until 2012-2019.All previous attempts that were really state capitalism were premature attempts by at least a century as now we have the technology to eliminate most if not all human labour worldwide and eliminate scarcity of food,energy and come 2045 housing and rare luxuries and thus eliminate state control of society and the economy or at least relegate it to limited roles controlled by democracy.That is why private enterprises were necessary to exist in Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc they were needed to pick up the slack where the state could not to increase productivity and eliminate scarcity and produce abundance despite the threat of famine etc due to droughts etc and also create new money in the economy to be eventually end up in the hands of state owned corporations thus making them state capitalist and not communist and socialist since private enterprises cannot exist in either socialism or communism because automation and AI etc were not advanced enough to carry the weight of the economy and eliminate human labour and scarcity.Marx knew that a successful revolution by the proletariat would only occur and could only be feasible when technology would be advanced enough to eliminate all human labour and occupations completely and when it was advanced enough to eliminate scarcity of food etc which again has only been possible since 2012 and will be fully possible by 2029-2045 or at least the next step towards communism.I estimate about 95 – 99% of the technological and scientific advances to bring about his classless,moneyless post scarcity society have only occurred since 2012-2023 in roughly the last 10 years.The remaining 1-5% technological advances that remain to occur will occur in between 2023 – 2029.Lenin,Stalin,Castro,Guevera and Mao to certain degree were aware of this fact as well and thus adopted command economies and state capitalism other than actual socialism and communism and even publicly admitted it that they had to adopt state capitalism because it technically wasn’t feasible at that point due to the lack of technological development as private enterprises were needed to pick up the slack and create abundance in areas where abundance was needed with the transition to a planned economy etc and opening up of markets and wide investment and research into AI and automation starting about 1970 is evidence of them realising their role in realising Marxs true dream.The reason Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc were state capitalist and neither socialist or communist was because the technological advances in automation,AI and genetic engineering etc were not advanced enough to replace human labour and eliminate scarcity of food etc.Marx also knew that any revolution didn’t need violent upheaval or mass genocide just for the necessary pieces to fall into place his revolution of the proletariat would come in the form of political upheaval and rebellion and protest that would involve them putting in place democratically elected leaders instituting these economic reforms.He would have been appalled at the genocide etc of Stalin,Lenin,Guevara and Mao.He was for political upheaval rebelling against corrupt governments abd protests by the proletariat but was against illegal coups and mass slaughter as carried out by Stalin,Lenin,Guevara and Mao.Communists therefore advocate the complete withering away of the state into oblivion while at the same time withering away of private enterprises into oblivion with the acquisition of goods etc done through AI,automation and cloud networks.That is what the phrase the end goal of socialism or communists is communism means.It is to bring about a classless society where the state no longer exists and where people no longer have to work in order to gain access to the basics and luxuries of life and one is allowed to seek personal spiritual enlightenment and freedom with work not done by AI and automation being voluntary.It also includes cloud computing giving a wide variety of products.If the state does exist then it’s not communism therefore Maoist China,Soviet Russia and Cuba under Castro and Guevera were not communist.

This why the communist party still exists in several countries today and why they still have planned economies and still claim not to have realised full communism because the advances necessary for it have only been realised only recently..Marx was well aware of the effects of automation on society more so than most of his peers and wrote of the effect that automation was having on the ability of capitalists to increase productivity,lower labour costs and produce abundance but at the same time it meant that only the capitalist bourgeoisie class who did the least amount of work bennifited as the poor and the working class laid off by this automation were left with no jobs and no money to buy this surplus produce.It wasn’t feasible to give every a high standard of living due to the constraints of markets and money itself because the technology did not exist to create an abundance of high luxury of high standard of living and so because of working in the constraints of a market economy namely state capitalism it led to having to go the cheapest way to provide equality by choosing the piss cheap option.To provide everyone the same high standard of living would be too expensive and thus the cheapest to option which was piss cheap had to be chosen and thus comes the idea that communism makes everyone equally poor – this is especially when dealing with large populations because of the concept that we live a scarcity based of money and capitalism and not post scarcity communism.They had to be resource efficient and choose the cheapest option because they had to adopt command economies to prevent hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles and prevent famines.It was only after agricultural productivity increased were they able to adopt planned economies that were more flexible and allowing more private enterprises to exist and the amount of GDP was sufficient enough to adopt more expensive building materials.This explains why living standards in Soviet Russia and Maoist China etc was consistently bad for a while at the start but got much better as time went again because command economies ensured that the rise in wages and GDP was exponential overtime and that boom and bust cycles were prevented.At first the living standards of the population was of a low standards but as time went by both GDP and wages got better after the first decade of so with poverty reduction also following this trend.There seems to be an idea that living conditions were slways bad in Soviet Russia and Maoist China but that’s propaganda pushed by the fact by living conditions during the Lenin and Stalinist period and at the border of 1917 and Czarist Russia which was dirt poor because of capitalism under the Tsar.GDP stagnated first decades of not centuries under Czarist Russia and after the October 1917 revolution utilisation of command economies meant that wages and GDP rose incrementally at first but this soon became exponentially better.The same goes for China under Mao etc.Russia at the time of 1917 when Lenin carried out the October Revolution was and had been stagnant economically for centuries as Czarist Russia coupled with a capitalist system and all geopolitical factors such as climate and lack of available arable land was even as late as 1917 was on the same economic,political and technological level as Medievil Europe and so for the entirety of the 20th century was a newly emerging capitalist economy so that is part of he reason why living conditions were so bad – they were starting from scratch from a Medievil feudal society after overthrowing the monarchy so it would take at least a century by 2017 for things to become improved the fact that they jumped rim Medievil level society to 21st century superpower in just over a century is an achievement itself.The Czarist monarchy operated a feudalist system which had kept Russia in a feudalist state comparable to Europe in 1300s with their being some capitalist enterprises but these were similar to those in Medievil Europe.Lenins October Revolution was more like a revolution against the corrupt monarchy as it was capitalism.This is why Anastasia Nikolaevna alongside her entire family including Tsar Nicolas II and the legendary Giorgori Rasputin were the first people to be executed.The rest of the world had at least several centuries head start.China prior to Mao was pretty much the same having being under control of monarchies for over 2,000 years until 1912 with their being a brief period of a capitalist economy under democratic leadership from 1912-1949.However the country soon collapsed as a series of warlords took control of each region and fought against each other for dominance – although the country was undergoing industrialisation and also economic groeth GDP peaked in the late 1930s and then was on a sharp decline due to corruption due to a lack of a command economy China was under the control of the Kuomintang being a capitalist party that failed to develop the economy and only created a corrupt class of capitalists with each region under the control of warlords that fought against each with the Japanese’s seizing large parts of the country.A lack of a command economy caused China to feel the full brunt of the 1929 Great Depression unlike Soviet Russia command economy was left unscathed with corruption also rife in this brief period that caused the wealthy elite to gey wealthy at the expense of the poor.Its these two facets – a lack of a command economy leading to China suffering the Grest Depression unlike Rissia whose command left it unscathed and the corruption IV the capitalist class that led to Mao seizibf power of China.Vietnam and Cambodia were both under the control of European colonialism and were like China and Russia both held back by several centuries until the middle of the the 20th century.Same goes for Cuba it was under facist,authoritarian government until 1953.You have to take into account the fact that most “communist” countries of the 20th century prior to their revolutions had been held back technologically,economically and politically by capitalists,colonialism and feudalism for several centuries longer than the rest of the world so they were at during the 20th century were emerging countries and economies that had been held back technologically,economically,politically for centuries by colonialism from Europe etc and also Medievil style feudalism thus meaning by the start of the 20th century before these revolutions took place they were centuries behind the rest of the world economically,politically and economically due to colonialism etc outside of the control of Mao,Lenin who had to bring the countries several centuries forward while the rest of the world especially America and Europe had already had at least several centuries head start to bring themselves out of colonialism and Medievil style feudalism meaning the rest of world such as Europe,America and other parts of the world were automatically several centuries ahead technologically,politically and economically by default with Soviet Russia and Maoist China having the arduous task of lifting the hundreds of millions of people in them several centuries ahead within a century.The only to do that exponentially and without the threat of famine,boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation impeding that is through command economies especially those used in Soviet Russia etc.All “communist” countries of the 20th century were dirt poor and living in squalor as late as 1950-1980 because until 1917 in Russia and even as late as 1949 in China they were under the control of colonialism,corrupt capitalist classes and feudalistic monarchies as late as the mid 20th century which had been long been abolished centuries beforehand in the rest of the world.For example feudalism was abolished in Europe in the 1400s but Russia and China were under the control of dynastic monarchies that had a system of feudalism similar to Medievil Europe where you had a king/Emperor/Czar and bellow him had the religious class,lords,nobels and on the lowest level the peasants who lived in squalor exactly the same as Medievil Europe up until the 1400s with them just as technologically and economically advanced as Medievil Europe in the 1300s and most other countries in the world.Feudalism in Russia and China held them back several centuries by keeping them technologically and economically impaired.Russia was under the control of Tsar Nicholas II as part of the Czar monarchy which had held the country back to the point that they were practically living in the Medievil ages.Even though he advocated modernization based on foreign loans and close ties with France, but resisted giving the new parliament the Duma major roles.Social progress was undermined by Nicholas’s commitment to autocratic rule and a class structure that was pretty much the same as feudalism in the Medievil Ages.Capitalist structures did exist in Czarist Russia but they were heavily tied to the monarchy to the point that it benefited only a few elites.China was under the control of a monarchy similar to the Czar until the 1912 with the Qing dynasty being the last dynasty of the country.Although there was a brief existdncd of capitalism in the country from 1912-1949 again it was largely corrupt and bennited only a small industrialists and when the Great Depression occurred in 1929 it lead to like America mass unemployent ensued and the hardest hit were the peasant class.Both countries had peasant classes which had long since disappeared in the rest of the world and both were still using horses to plough fields and used animal manure as fertilisers something which the rest of the world hashad disposed of in favour of chemical fertilisers and mechinised tractors since the 1700s.The rest of society was still technologically behind the rest of the world.Vietnam,Cambodia etc were the victim of colonialism up until the mid 20th century something which the rest of the world had escaped centuries earlier.America had been emancipated from colonialism since the 1700s but up until the middle of the 20th century countries like Cambodia,Vietnam etc were under colonial rule of France,Britain and other wealthy countries with again the same top down hierchial structures and peasants at the bottom living in the same squalor and having the same economy and technology of the 1600s.Cambodia and Vietnam etc were prior to the arrival of the communist parties up until the middle of the 20th century were still under control of the French and British through colonialism something that the rest of the world had been emancipated from since the 1700s and bring under the control of colonists is what held them back from the rest of the world by several centuries who kept in a peasant Medievil like state or at least one similar to America prior to its emancipation from the British in 1776.Therefore Cambodia etc were several centuries behind the rest of the world because colonialism kept them back similar to how Hong Kong was held back until 1997 and other similar countries like India were held back until 1947 and thus until the mid to late 20th century were centuries behind the rest of the world technologically,socially,economically and politically before emancipation.India is an example of how colonialism.Colonialism keeps societies held back by enforcing outdated political structures in place based on racial grounds and stunts economic,political and technological growth much like feudalism.Therefore Vietnam and Cambodia like India were under colonial rule up until the mid 20th century as late as the 1940s -1950s and so were living in squalor up hntil then.Before Mao,Lenin etc had their revolutions in these countries the countries were 200-500 years behind the rest of the world due to outdated socio-political structures that had dissapeared from the rest of the world.It took time at least several decades for the command economies effect to finally kick in.China,Vietnam and Russia were still under control of feudalism and colonialism as late as 1917-1949 about 200-500 years after the rest of the world and so were 200-500 years behind the rest of the world technologically,economically and politically so the rest of the world were at least 200-500 years ahead of them technologically,economically and politically etc.Peasents existed in Soviet Russia and Maoist China etc during the 20th Century way up until the 1950s when Khruschev came to power but peasants did not exist in the rest of world for at least 500 years by that point because the Medievil Ages wherein peasants existed ended for the rest of the world 500 years ago.Furthermore their farms both collectivised ones and even private farms that existed during and before the Lenin and Stalin administrations relied heavily on horses to plough fields etc way up until the 1950s when Khruschev came to power but horse drawn ploughs did not exist in the rest the world as they had given up on them and replaced them with machinery that could be more efficient and increase productivity with reduced labour input for humans as far back as the 1700s.Soviet Russia and Maoist China until the 1950s and even 1960s were still using horse drawn ploughs you plough fields and everything else with the rest of the world having abandoned horse drawn ploughs as far as the 1700s in favour for machinery either stem powered or gasoline powered ones that could do the work much better.They also used manure instead of chemical fertiliser.Furthermore their farms both collectivised ones and even private farms that existed during and before the Lenin and Stalin administrations still relied heavily on horses to plough fields etc until around the 1950-1960 but the rest of world had given up on horses replaced them with machinery that could be more efficient and increase productivity with reduced labour input for humans as far back as the 1700s.Therefore farmers etc in Russia and China up until 1950s and 1960s had to deal the with the fact that they were still relying on horses instead of gasoline powered machinery and had no chemical fertilisers and machinery to improve productivity.Chemical fertilisers did not exist only manure.The fact under Mao,Lenin and Stalin prior to the Great Famine of 1959-1961 and the last famine Russia in 1947 agricultural productivity was rising at a stable exponential rate despite not using chemical fertilisers and still relying on horse drawn ploughs was an amazing achievement itself.This was not only restricted to agriculture as in all facets of society Soviet Russia and China before 1917-1949 were technologically behind the rest of the world by centuries.All aspects of society such as factories,farms,electricity,,housing and infrastructure in China and Russia etc were technologically centuries behind the rest of the world because they were held back by feudalism.Think of the Amish how they today who reject modern technology,electricity and still as of 2022 plough fields with horses and most do not use pesticides and chemical fertilisers and now think of entire countries that live like the Amish such as China,Russia,Vietnam and Cambodia etc not by choice but due to necessity and are in countries that constantly prone to drought and famine and that was pretty much what it was like at the time that that Lenin,Mao etc first took control of their countries.Even the Amish today use fertilisers,pesticides abd tractors etc only a handful still use horse drawn ploughs and are completely organic.It was the Green Revolution,better mechanisation for that point adoption of mechanisation and also utilisation of chemical fertilisers that is why famines ended in the 1947 for Russia and 1961 in China.After the Great Famine 1959-1961 and last famine of 1947 Mao and Khruschev adopted mechanised ploughs and chemical fertilisers and new varieties of seeds.Collectivised and even state run farms in both Russia and China were more successful and produced yields higher than or on par with private farms after 1947-1961 once chemical fertilisers were availible alongside adoption of mechanisation through reforms carried out by Khruschev and even Mao.The fact that the elimination of famines coincided with the Green Revolution is also not a surprise as Russia and China were able to avail of chemical fertilisers,better machinery and varieties by buying them,stealing them or even reverse engineering them from America and Europe.Hence why we had people living in poverty until as late as 1950-1976 after the death of Mao and the end of the Soviet Union.The Green Revolution that was happening everywhere else was the key driving factor.This is probably why the disastrous Great Leap Forward was initiated without much forethought and using pseudoscience as it was meant as a literal “leap forward” for the country to bring it forward several centuries ahead to be on par with the rest of the world and so was initiated and carried out with so much government mismanagement and lack of oversight as Mao wanted to lift China out of the literal Medievil ages and into the 20th century and beyond regardless of the cost – this is probably why he was lied to about the extent of grain yields and the death toll of the famine because there was so much at stake that if they told the truth it was his reputation to the international community that was stake.That is why most citizens of Cambodia,China and Russia were dirt poor and most people were living in squalor and they were still technologically even as late as 1950-1970 because it takes time to lift people out of the Medievil ages especially when using command economies which had to be adopted to prevent boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and famines.In the course of just a 100 years command and planned economies,social welfare and government programmes under government control or “socialism” and ”communism” and not capitalism is responsible for lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty,eliminated poverty by at least 80-90% to almost zero in China,Russia,Myanamar and Laos etc and advanced them technologically,politically and economically forward 500 years and as world economic superpowers.. which is a pretty amazing feat if you think about it.Capitalism would have taken at least several centuries to do this because their would be consistent boom and bust cycles and famine caused by hyperinflation and skyrocketing food prices.Mao was in power of China for 27 years barely enough time to allow for any real change to be done.Keep in mind the fact that capitalism was in charge of the country between 1912-1949 for 37 years ten years longer than Mao and the country was stil after this stuck in poor and squalid conditions.Its likely because of the effected of the Great Depression has in China’s economy in 1929-1939 due to deregulation.Had Mao,Lenin etc never came to power China,Russia etc in a purely deregulated capitalist economic they would still be centuries behind the rest of the world technologically,socially and politically equivalent to the 1300s due to boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation etc causing consistent famines that would have stunted their technological,political and economic successes.Russia was under control of Lenin and Stalin for 36 years until Khruschev came into power and the economy was good enough to allow for improved mechanisation and increased privatisation under Mikhail Gorbachev.In the 10 years due to deregulation by Boris Yeltsin in 1991 74 years worth of work was thrown out the window and the country was setback nearly 30 years.Mao in 27 managed to lift the country out of the Middle Ages while deregulated capitalism before him after 37 years kept it stagnant and stuck in the Middle Ages with the fact that China prior to Mao was completely deregulated meant it was badly affected by the Great Depression of 1929 and was still technologically behind the rest of the world.Only a planned economy with democratic input in regulations can lift countries out of poverty and the technological Dark Ages.Considering the geopolitical factors of Russia and China from 1917-1949 namely that they were still living under colonialism and Medievil style feudalism and their lack of arable land command and planned economies had to be adopted in order to gradually lift hundreds of millions of people becauss if they did not you would have constant boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and famines that would have kept China and Russia in Medievil level conditions forever.If planned or command economies were not adopted by Mao,Lenin then its possible that China and Russia would as of 2022 onwards would still be living in the same complete squalor and poverty circa 1916-1949 in otherwards equivalent to Medivil Europe in the 1300s and would still as of 2022 suffering from famine every few years because of boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and skyrocketing food prices.Mao,Lenin etc adopted command economies so as to allow the GDP,wages and standard of living to rise at first incrementally but overtime do so exponentially meaning overtime the growth in wages and GDP and elimination of poverty would be and in reality was growing exponentially every year thanks to adopting command and planted economies..Even during the adminstrations of Mao, Lenin etc poverty was declining at a steady rate,GDP and wages were increasing at a steady rate and overtime this would have been exponential in growth meaning left unhindered this would have eliminated poverty- which it did.Eventually this left unhindered the standard of living,GDP and wages would have increased exponentially to the point that they would become the top world economic superpowers and poverty would have eliminated completely to zero.China did from 1912-1949 did have a capitalist system and a brief respite from poverty but it was setback by at least a decade by the 1929 Great Depression because of no command economies with the rural areas being worst affected and their was a lot of corruption which probably influenced Mao to have his revolution.For China and Vietnam this is true their were some minor setbacks such as the 2007/2008 recession,the Vietnam War and of course for Russia it was Boris Yeltsin’s 1991 deregulation of the economy.It
Creates.It could be said that the work of China,Russia etc from 1917 onwards were attempts at creating the groundwork for this a century ahead – ever heard the phrase Rome wasn’t built in a day.It is an adage attesting to the need for time to create great things in other words it takes at least a century to lift an entire country living in medievil squalor to be lifted to 21st or even 20th century standards.This is why people in China,Russia etc still have significant Lenin,Mao and even Stalin despite their mass genocide,authoritarianism and the gulags because they literally set the groundwork for lifting the countries out of Medievil level squalor which would have continued up to living in Medievil level squalor until 2022 onwards because the American government did not give shit about them enough to have ignored them until because again America only likes to liberate countries with large amounts of oil,coal and gas – it’s the same reason they are turning a blind eye to dictators and human poverty and famine in Africa and other parts of Asia.If America did a crap about people starving to death in Africa etc then they would have overthrown the Czars and Qing dynasty themselves in 1912-1917 and in an alternate timeline where Stalin,Lenin and Mao would were never born then China and Russia would be completely ignored by the American government at all.Russia if still under the Czarist monarchy and feudalism of the Medievil age would still be under Medievil like conditions that have been ignored by the West especially America as the American government would have no interest in invading due to the fact that these countries lack any significant reserves of oil etc.This monarchy government may have sold oil etc on international markets etc and even crops on international markets but the farms would be run by lords and peasants and serfs working for them but the same Medievil feudalistic structure would still exist with people assigned to their social class at birth for life with no chance of social mobility.America and world governments already turn a blind eye to dictators in other countries and get crops etc from them on international markets so Russia under the thrall of Czarist monarchies would be no different.Apathy to suffering in Africa caused 20,000,000 people to die every year from hunger,preventable diseases etc thus meaning every five years capitalism kills more than Mao,Lenin,Stalin etc meaning since 1972 its apathy is responsible for the death of 1,000,000,000 people.Most of Africa is living extreme prehistoric conditions because the American government has no interest in overthrowing them.To paraphrase Jimmy Dore “If the United States is trying to help people in a humanitarian way what I would do is I would get a shovel and start digging because I know there is fucking oil somewhere underneath me“If Josef Stalin,Vladimir Lenin,Mao Zedong etc not carried out their revolutions then its possible that both China and Russia today in the 21st century even in 2022 onwards would still be under control of feudalist monarchies with China under a corrupt capitalist class with most of the country still under poverty and with regards the Japanese and also regional warlords that were both ripping the countries apart that would be still having everyone being dirt poor,have peasants and not the economic superpowers they are today and would be still several centuries behind the rest of the world politically,economically and socially.Vietnam still,Cambodia etc would still be under colonial rule would still be stuck in the 1700s.Had China,Vietnam and Russia not been held back by the colonialism and feudalism that held them back centuries from the rest of world then its possible that the standard of living and advances in automation etc necessary to bring it about would have been fully realised much earlier and probably meant that living conditions would not have been so bad.The adminstrations of Mao,Lenin,Stalin etc would have in 1917-1949 had a better starting point with them starting with countries with a higher GDP more money to spend on government programmes to eliminate poverty much more quickly and also had more money to pay for better housing,,better machinery etc thus allowing them to from the start had larger reserves of money that would have allowed them to build better machinery etc thus allowing them to from the start had larger reserves of money that would have allowed them to build better housing estates and have better machinery to grow more crops.They could have paid the workers of their state owned corporations much better.Furthermore having a country on par with the rest of the world would have meant that the economy would have been in better shape to allow them to as states afford to build housing much better on par with the West and paid state workers much better wages and more importantly although they would still have had to have employed command economies to avoid boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation but they could have had less government control of the economy that is they could have less of the countries economy run by state owned corporations and allowed both cooperatives and private enterprises to have more control of the economy and be more prevalent and also adopted more “capitalist” based economies similar to that experienced from 1990-2020 that is government control of the economy would have been much lower and as a result their would have been less genocide and authoritarianism in these countries.With the economy in better shape as well as being economically and technologically on par with the rest of the world it would have meant that the disastrous Great Leap Forward and resulting Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961 would have never happened because there would have been no need for the Great Leap Forward to have been implemented in the first place because the country’s economy and agricultural base would have been advanced enough with him less likely to have pursued pseudoscience and furthermore there would have also been less need for governmental control in Soviet Russia,Vietnam and China etc.Remember the whole purpose of the Great Leap Forward was to bring China a country that was practically stuck in the Middle Ages and being it forward at least several centuries forward into the 20th century.It would have been easier to jump start the economy and society if by 1917-1949 China,Russia had been on the same technological,economic and political level of the rest of the world including America this if possible allowing them to be at least several decades ahead of America from the 1950s-1960s and passed as them as an economic superpowers and eliminated poverty with a planned economy using free market capitalism by the 1980s if not earlier.In this parallel universe where both China and Russia as well as Vietnam would have had just as equally technologically,politically and economically developed countries as the rest of the world by not being held back by feudalism and colonialism wherein feudalism ended in Russia and China the same time as the rest of the world 500 years earlier and colonialism ended 200 years ago then its possible for private enterprises to have had a larger control of the economy but still require command and planned economies to protect them from boom and bust cycles and thus hyperinflation and skyrocketing food prices with the ratio of state and private control similar to modern day China of 60% state owned enterprises and 40% private control with a planned economy.This would have led Lenin,Stalin and Mao etc to have not been such brutish dictators and they would not led to authoritarianism and also mass genocide,gulags and such ridiculous levels of State worship and propaganda.By having from the start in 1917 and 1949 the same technology with regards to agriculture,transportation etc as the west from the start it would have meant that their agricultural productivity would have similar to the rest of the world this leading to virtually no famines and food shortages as they could have produced enough to feed everyone to have countered the effects of food shortages caused by droughts.Food shortages would still have occurred and thus could have reduced crop yields but not enough to cause famines with as always the main factor being droughts etc outside of the control of the government.The Great Leap Forward could have occurred but have involved better scientists and in fact with agricultural productivity already higher than in the original timeline through mechanisation,chemical fertilisers etc farmers could remain in the farms without adopting the pseudoscience such as deeper ploughing etc and possibly even the four pests campaign meaning agriculture could have been ignored completely by the state with other citizens trained to produce steel thus agricultural productivity would not need government interference leading to the Great Chinese Famine never occuring in the first place and they could focus on steel production through training other people outside of farmers thus allowing China to become an economics superpower through exporting more steel and rice.More thought could have been put into planning the Great Leap Forward thus having it not resulting in a famine.The gulags,Cultural Revolation,Hundred Flowers campaigns etc and crackdowns on private enterprises would have never occurred.In fact Soviet Russia and Maoist China and Vietnam and Cambodia under Ho Chi Min and Pol Pot could have been similar to modern day Russia,Vietnsm,Cambodia and China – still restrictive in civil liberties to a degree as under Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping etc currently is but nowhere near as authoritarian as under Lenin,Pol Pot and Mao etc then what is was in our universe and timeline.As a result China under Mao and Russia under Lenin and Stalin as well Cambodia and Vietnam etc would have in this alternative timeline had a better track record with regards to human rights and civil liberties and economic freedoms by allowing private enterprises to exist to a stronger degree and not resorted to censorship,authoritarianism and the gulags would not exist.The death toll of these “communist” and “socialist” hellholes would been almost zero with at most a few hundred or few thousand.It was the fact that the countries were held back so much by feudalism and colonialism etc that is a likely reason why Lenin,Stalin and Mao resorted to such authoritarian and genocidal practices and had to clamp down in private enterprises so much in order to develop the economy.Same goes for Vietnam and Cambodia under Pol Pot and Ho Chi Min – these countries held back by colonialism led to their unelected leaders being such brutish dictators.Therefore the blame for Lenin,Mao etc being such genocidal and authoritarian assholes was likely due to them taking charge of economies and countries that were at least several centuries behind the rest of the world due to feudalism and colonialism and thus in order to grow the economies from scratch they had to shut down of opposition with a iron grip to develop the economy especially control the amount of control private corporations and the state had.Part of the reason why China etc began to open up to international markets and allow more private control of the economy was because the economy especially in 2000 onwards was because the economy was more developed than before because of command economies as to allow more private control of the economy and adopt a planned economy over a command economy with the same for Vietnam etc with Russia when Khruschev and Gorbachevs reforms also done for the same reason.A country can only adopt a more deregulated or at least planned economy with increased private control of the economy outside of command economies only when it is sufficiently developed enough to allow for it in the first place for stability and also when technology etc is also equally developed.This is because state control through command economies lays the foundation for exponential growth to the point that it is developed enough for stable economic growth through increased private control of the economy to be possible through a planned economy to coupled with regulations to prevent boom and bust cycles provide even more exponential growth.When a country’s economy is developed enough then command economies can be discarded in favour of democratic planned economies with more privatisation but still have the state have a monopoly.Russia’s complete deregulation and adoption of privatisation of the economy in the 1990s shows that premature opening up of the economy and complete deregulation will result only in complete chaos.State control of the economy must occur and take place in order to set the foundation of a more privatised economy especially when dealing with economies that have to adopt command economies through necessity of their limited agricultural productivity and those that are least several centuries behind the rest of the world.This is because when people especially private entrepreneurs and their workers and those from cooperatives buy products and services from state owned corporations and the state has predominant control of the economy then the money to buy goods from these state owned corporations is fed directly into the state treasury thus giving the state more money to use on building up better infrastructure,build better housing and increase social welfare programmes that further develops the economy and improves the lives of citizens and even allows for more improved conditions that lays the groundwork that allows more private corporations to be set up exponentially overtime to develop the economy even more thus a state dominated economy is necessary as a perquisite and the infant state for the development of more more developed and freer “capitalist” economy with more private corporations.Workers in private corporations gain money from their employers and not from the state with their employers gaining money from profits generated from them.In both cases the money is not generated directly from the state yet in can come from money paid to them by state workers.This negates the need for the state to pay the wages of the employees and employers meaning that saves the state money and the money the workers and CEOs etc of private enterprises generate from profits can be fed into state owned corporations.The more developed a state dominated economy becomes then the more room for investment in housing and infrastructure and social welfare there is and also more likely and quicker it can shift from undemocratic command economies to democratic planned economies and also the more private corporations can be allowed to exist in a positive feedback loop.This is because the state owned corporations profits generated by money from private corporations are fed directly into the treasury that then house enough money to invest more in better housing,better infrastructure and social programmes.This in turn allows the economy to become more open to private enterprises with the state directly propping up more private corporations which causes an exponential growth in the economy and the amount of money from the CEOs and their workers of private corporations fed into state owned corporations for further investment into infrastructure etc in a positive feedback loop.The state ideally should have a majority control say at least 50-60% with private control consisting of at least 40-50% to keep the profits going to the state be consistent to continue an exponentional growth in investment in infrastructure,housing and social welfare programmes but still ensure that private corporations and private control of the economy is strong enough to make enough profits every year to invest in the state owned sector.Having the state have too much control of the economy causes an imbalance in the economy as once the economy is developed enough private control of the economy has to increase exponentially to a point that it has at least 40-50% share and control in order for this increased amount of private corporations and their employees to then buy more from the state sector this causes an exponentially more amount of money to be invested into the still majority state owned sector and at the same time increase the GDP of the private sector.The more private corporations there are the more money employees and CEOs can spend on goods and services from the state owned sector thus exponentially increasing the amount of money the state has for contributing to the GDP and also social welfare programmes and infrastructure thus encouraging the state to allow more private corporations to be set up with as stated the ideal ratio being the state having a majority share of 50-60% and 40-50% for the private sectors.Keeping the level of state owned corporations control above 50-60% forever actually hampers economic growth and GDP and also its ability to invest in social welfare etc this actually stagnating social development.In otherwards increased privatisation is necessary for the development of a countries economy but state dominance must exist to a degree with regulations always a constant,In some cases and geopolitical situations overtime this may involve the states control lessening over time with the private sectors control increasing overturns but at the same time the state should maintain and enforce sufficient government regulations to ensure ethics are still retained as with regards to worker and environmental regulations are retained and that financial regulations still exist to prevent hyperinflation and recessions and boom and bust cycles.In otherwards theoretically government dominance of the economy could decrease to 5-10% and private control could increase to 90-95% overtime to the point that the state has a minority control and private corporations have a majority control but at the same time government control and exertion in the form of regulations must exist and be constant to ensure workers and environmental protections exist and financial regulations that prevent boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation must always be present and constant no matter what the ratio of state versus private is to prevent private corporations gaining to much power over the economy and society and prevent imbalances.A completely deregulated economy would lead to chaos and would plunge the country into boom and bust cycles etc as seen with post-Soviet Russia,1929,2008.The rate that state dominated countries economy grows to a suitable point that it is more likely to be able to set up more private corporations to exponentially increase GDP is different for each country and its current and unique geopolitical factors.A country can only expand the amount of private corporations in the economy once the economy dominated by state owned corporations is developed enough through state owned corporations dominance providing enough funding to the countries GDP to provide the infrastructure of the increase in private corporations in the first place.Thus as state owned corporations become wealthier this allows the economy to become more developed to the point that it can be shifted to a more democratic planned economy and one where more private enterprises can be set up with government approval or set up by the government itself.This was evident in post Maoist China,Soviet Russia with cases such as Cuba and North Korea extreme authoritarianism shutting this down or lack of development due to multiple factors slowing this down.This is why private enterprises in Maoist China,Cuba and Soviet Russia was set up by the state and allowed to exist in the first place but regulated so as to allow wealthy but ethical private entrepreneurs and their employees would through increased disposable income would buy goods from state owned enterprises that would increase GDP and money in the treasury to the point that they could improve the infrastructure,improve social programmes and allow the economy to develop to the point that more private enterprises could be set up to then increase this exponentionally overtime in a positive feedback loop.The private enterprises were encouraged to take out loans from private banks and buy goods etc from state owned corporations in exchange for the state providing them with bailouts during recessions etc and guaranteeing markets.Therefore the private enterprises generated new money from loans from private banks,profits and wages and they bought state owned corporations goods and in exchange for this they were bailed out and given guaranteed markets.Cooperatives were also included in this deal.The money that private corporations spend on buying goods etc from state owned corporations is money added to the treasury that is spent on infrastructure and social programmes therefore the presence of private enterprises is necessary to build the economy and the more private enterprises there are the more new money is generated by them especially private banks that eventually ends up in the hands of state owned corporations that is then put into the treasury to increase GDP,infrastructure and social programmes and expand the economy and thus creates more GDP and money for infrastructure and social welfare there is exponentially that turn funds the state owned corporations and treasury and in turn GDP,social programmes and infrastructure in an positive feedback loop.This is the same reason why it’s theoretically impossible that the state cannot have a monopoly on all sectors the economy – that is the state cannot be the only game in town it needs private enterprises especially private banks to be present because it needs them to generate new money from scratch from loans they take out etc especially from private banks alongside profits and wages to use as disposable income to buy goods from the state owned sectors which in turn increases the amount of money that they generate to be then used for social programmes,GDP and infrastructure and why Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc and every so called “communist” or “socialist” hellhole had to have private enterprises set up by the state,bailed out and guaranteed markets and were thus state capitalism and not communism or socialism.As started only private corporations that would be integral to the economy and loyal to state would be allowed while those who were greedy and were likely to eat into sectors of the economy the state needed to have a majority control of and were not going to partake in the government’s plan for exponential yet stable economic growth as per state control gateway theory were shut down alongside those who mistreated their workers etc.To become economic superpowers that they are now today China,Vietnam and time a degree Soviet Russia had to crackdown on private enterprises they deemed would interfere with their plans to lift the countries into the 20th and 21st centuries.Without private corporations especially private banks money from state owned banks and corporations is essentially recycled ad infinitum in the economy with no new money being generated from scratch to be added to the economy and thus treasury of the state and this leads to a stagnant economy,imbalances in the economy and no economic growth.The presence of in particular private banks using the federal reserve system allows private corporations and state owned corporations to through taking out loans to create new money from scratch added to the economy that is then in the hands of employees and employers of private and even the employees and employers of state owned corporations that eventually ends up in the the treasury of the state through the buying of goods etc of state owned corporations with this better than loans from state owned banks as money from state owned banks is money that already exists in the economy with that from private banks being new money created from scratch added to the economy.Furthermore for this to work effectively private banks must exist that use the federal reserve system must as through the federal reserve system they can create new money from scratch outside of state run banks that prevents the state going to debt or other problems and also because the money in government state owned banks even that created by the federal reserve system is usually already money in circulation in the economy and adds to the states national debt thus negatively affecting economic growth with this new money created into existence from scratch as part of private bank systems using the federal reserve system is needed to to add new money to the economies circulation that adds new money to the economy that doesn’t add to the national debt of the state but rather of private corporations that is put into in the hands of private corporations and their employees and employers and even employees etc and even state owned corporations to spend in state owned corporations by buying goods and services from them thus adding new money to the treasury in contrast to that from government banks.By having private banks and other private enterprises create the new money this adds new money to the global economy and puts them in debt and also by having private corporations take out the new money it puts them in debt and allows the state owned banks to be less affected by global recessions thus meaning if an economic downturn occurs either nationally or globally then the government banks are unaffected and can maintain strong economic growth exponentially forever while the private banks and corporations are only affected and can be bailed out by the state that had saved up enough money in the treasury to afford this throughout the private corporations buying state owned goods and services thus keeping the system going on forever in an exponential positive feedback loop.Even if the money taken out as loans from private banks to either private or state owned corporations is used to buy goods from private corporations in the short term it will through by being new money added to the national or even global economy will be passed from individual to individual and corporation to corporation will be eventually end up being used by someone to buy goods from state owned corporations adding new money to the states treasury.Thus private enterprises especially private banks are an integral part of this system and were thus necessary to be set up by the state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia etc and thus these countries were state capitalist not communist or socialist with the ratio of private and state owned corporations was small at first due to the need to need to develop the state owned corporations dominated economy incrementally without the threat of boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation and private sector companies interfering in the sectors of the economy that the state needed dominance in and their plans to eventually expand the economy to include more private corporations to increase GDP as per state control gateway theory which was why Mao,Lenin and Stalin had an initial crackdowns on private enterprises especially those who were greedy and who would be untrustworthy and unwilling to buy goods on state owned corporations and likely to corner markets that the state needed to corner to prevent economic crises such and boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation that would prevent stable exponential economic growth and were also assholes who treated their employees especially bad as seen with the five anti laws and also the scissor crises and why only a few key private enterprises especially those loyal to the state were allowed to flourish at the start and why overtime the amount of private enterprises increased overtime under Mao,Lenin,Stalin and Khruschev,Gorbachev and Xiaoping he Cultural Revolution and attempts of Stalin to crush all remaining private enterprises were either premature attempts of installing socialism or communism or the actions of paranoid elderly delusional leaders.State owned corporations are the only way the state can generate profits to feed money into the treasury in order to fund infrastructure,social programmes and drive GDP and they in order to function need private corporations as competitors that are given bailouts and guaranteed markets in exchange for creating new money from scratch to fund the state owned corporations in a mutually beneficial positive feedback loop.That is why state owned corporations were the only way the state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia and Cuba etc could generate profits to lift these countries several centuries ahead through the profits generated funding GDP,infrastructure and social welfare and to that they needed to also set up and ensure the survival of private enterprises to fund these state owned corporations and develop sectors of the economy they could not.This is not how socialism or communism either the bullshit or real definition works this is how state capitalism works.The state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia etc needed to be state capitalist for two reasons – a) they needed state owned corporations to exist as the means by which the state had control of a sector because the profits generated by these state owned corporations allowed money to be fed into the treasury for GDP,infrastructure and social welfare and b)They needed private enterprises to be set up by the state in order to generate new money from scratch to be fed into the treasury of the state through these state owned corporations.This is the only way you can become an economic superpower and also bare the level of exponential economic,technological growth as seen in China from 1949-2020 and of Russia from 1917-2020 and that of can only occur in state capitalism and not in communism and socialism.The purpose of the shift of state dominated state capitalism towards to a more private corporations free market based one that is like the reason why China made a shift towards having more private corporations under Deng Xiaoping but still having state control similar to what Russia under Mikhail Gorbachev that had to be done was this.In a state dominated state capitalist economy the more private corporations that exist the more new money they generate especially through private banks providing them loans and profits,wages etc this thus adds more new money into the economy and thus the more private corporations employees and employers would as part of the deal continue to spend that money on buying goods from state owned corporations that adds more money into the state treasury that would then be used on social programmes and infrastructure and GDP in a positive feedback loop that would increase the amount of money for GDP,social programmes and infrastructure in the state treasury exponentially.Furthermore the more private corporations there are the more intensive research and development into AI and automation and adoption of this that there is in all areas of the economy managed by private corporations such as agriculture,mining,construction,manufacturing,retail etc to eliminate labour costs etc as the more private corporations there are the more exponential research and investment in automation and AI there is to expedite the development of communism since the end goal of corporations is to eliminate labour costs through AI and automation supersedes that of state owned corporations and cooperatives leads to an exponential increase of private corporations who will research and develop and implement AI and automation with this expediting the development of both minarcho technocratism and eventually communism.Therefore the state in state capitalist economies needs the prescene of private corporations and the rate of privatisation in the economy dominance of the economy is a first small but its increasing dominance is both incremental and exponential in order for the growth in the economy to be stable – in otherwards private control of the economy had to be small in Maoist China,Soviet Russia and the state had to control them in order to allow for exponential but stable growth in the GDP,infrastructure etc and in turn AI,automation and private control.As seen in Maoist China and Soviet Russia and Cuba and crackdowns on specific private enterprises and allowing specific private enterprises to be allowed to flourished was a necessary step or an necessary evil(with unjustified means)towards incremental but exponential growth in the state owned corporations dominated economy so it would be developed enough to increase money for investing in infrastructure and social programmes and thus allow for more privatisation in the economy and shift from an authoritarian command economy to a more democratic planned economy to allow for stable but exponential growth in the economy.This was due to the fact Mao,Lenin etc inherited countries that were several centuries behind the rest of the world due to colonialism and feudalism that still existed in their countries despite being abolished centuries ago in the rest of the world.The shift to a more private corporations based economy in modern China etc under Deng Xiaoping and Milkhail Gobachev was not about realising that “socialism” or “communism” was bad or inefficient and being evil or a failure but rather because the economy that already had private corporations present was developed enough to allow for more private corporations whose employers and employees that would buy more goods from state owned corporations that would increase GDP,improve infrastructure and social programmes and increase AI and automation development thus the purpose of switching to a more free market economy under state control in the case of China,Vietnam etc was done ironically to bring about actual real communism and not libertarianism and anarcho capitalism.Therefore so called “communist” or “socialist” did not fail at because they never existed in the first place and also them adopting a more private corporations based free market economy was a step towards actual communism and not away from it.Therefore the shift to free market economies in China and Russia was done as a step towards communism and not towards capitalism.The different results of this shift from a state dominated state capitalism of Maoist China and Soviet Russia etc to a more private enterprise orientated free market state capitalism in the case of modern day China,Vietnam etc is why China is an economic superpower with state majority control while Russia was on the track to that due to the reforms of Gorbachev was instead thrown into chaos and massive poverty thanks to massive deregulation under Yeltsin is not.Cuba is likely the result of stagnant growth and the state not opening up.This is different than state capitalist 21st century America as the state does bail out corporations especially big oil,big pharma,the military industrial complex and provide guaranteed markets but their contracts do not benefit society as a whole as welfare and other social programmes are usually cut by both the corporate democrats and republicans and is not invested in infrastructure as shown by the fact that America infrastructure is crumbling and considered one of the worst rated in the world with the scoring in average scoring a D grade for roads,bridges etc and the money is used to line the pockets of corrupt politicians in both the DNC/RNC etc and fund more illegal wars.As stated it’s theoretically impossible for the state to exist by itself and it cannot carry the entire weight of the economy by itself as without private corporations especially private banks money from state owned banks and corporations is essentially recycled ad infinitum in the economy with no new money being generated from scratch to be added to the economy and thus treasury of the state and this leads to a stagnant economy,imbalances in the economy and no economic growth.The presence of in particular private banks using the federal reserve system allows private corporations and state owned corporations to through taking out loans to create new money from scratch added to the economy that is then in the hands of employees and employers of private and even the employees and employers of state owned corporations that eventually ends up in the the treasury of the state through the buying of goods etc of state owned corporations with this better than loans from state owned banks as money from state owned banks is money that already exists in the economy with that from private banks being new money created from scratch added to the economy.Furthermore for this to work effectively private banks must exist that use the federal reserve system must as through the federal reserve system they can create new money from scratch outside of state run banks that prevents the state going to debt or other problems and also because the money in government state owned banks even that created by the federal reserve system is usually already money in circulation in the economy and adds to the states national debt thus negatively affecting economic growth with this new money created into existence from scratch as part of private bank systems using the federal reserve system is needed to to add new money to the economies circulation that adds new money to the economy that doesn’t add to the national debt of the state but rather the new money generated from scratch is added to the debt of private corporations who take out loans and of the banks that generate the money that is put into in the hands of private corporations and their employees and employers and even employees etc and even state owned corporations to spend in state owned corporations by buying goods and services from them thus adding new money to the treasury in contrast to that from government banks.By having private banks create the new money this adds new money to the global economy and puts them in debt and also by having private corporations take out the new money it puts them in debt and allows the state owned banks to be less affected by global recessions thus meaning if an economic downturn occurs either nationally or globally then the government banks are unaffected and can maintain strong economic growth exponentially forever while the private banks and corporations are only affected and can be bailed out by the state that had saved up enough money in the treasury to afford this through the private corporations buying state owned goods and services thus keeping the system going on forever in an exponential positive loop.Even if the money taken out as loans from private banks to either private or state owned corporations is used to buy goods from private corporations in the short term it will through by being new money added to the national or even global economy will be passed from individual to individual and corporation to corporation will be eventually end up being used by someone to buy goods from state owned corporations adding to the states treasury.Thus private enterprises especially private banks are an integral part of this system to increase GDP and money in the treasury of the state through state owned corporations and were thus necessary to be set up by the state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia etc and these countries were state capitalist not communist or socialist.State owned corporations are the only way the state can generate profits to feed money into the treasury in order to fund infrastructure,social programmes and drive GDP and they in order to function need private corporations as competitors that are given bailouts and guaranteed markets in exchange for creating new money from scratch to fund the state owned corporations in a mutually beneficial positive feedback loop.That is why state owned corporations were the only way the state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia and Cuba could generate profits to lift these countries several centuries ahead through the profits generated funding GDP,infrastructure and social welfare and to that they needed to also set up and ensure the survival of private enterprises to fund these state owned corporations and develop sectors of the economy they could not.This is not how socialism or communism either the bullshit or real definition works this is how state capitalism works.The state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia etc needed to be state capitalist for two reasons – a) they needed state owned corporations to exist as the means by which the state had control of a sector because the profits generated by these state owned corporations allowed money to be fed into the treasury for GDP,infrastructure and social welfare and b)They needed private enterprises to be set up by the state in order to generate new money from scratch to be fed into the treasury of the state through these state owned corporations.This is the only way you can become an economic superpower and also create the level of exponential economic,technological growth as seen in China from 1949-2020 and of Russia from 1917-2020 and this can only occur in state capitalism and not in communism and socialism.Thus to achieve communism state dominated state capitalist countries need a shift towards more private corporations dominated capitalist free market systems that is still regulated by the state to prevent hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles both to increase incomes etc but also to increase the amount of new money from private corporations generated by profits and loans etc to be then fed into state owned corporations through employers and employees buying goods and services from them to increase money to invest in social programmes and infrastructure etc but also to increase the amount of private corporations to expedite the rate of development of AI and automation that leads to increased productivity and abundance and massive layoffs and thus expedite the development of post scarcity communism..Furthernore the more private corporations there are the more investment into both research and development and adoption there is into AI and automation that increases productivity of and elimination of a resource and thus is a path to communism.Thus to achieve communism state dominated state capitalist countries need a shift towards more private corporations dominated capitalist free market systems that is still regulated by the state to prevent hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles both to increase incomes etc but also to increase the amount of money from private corporations generated by profits and loans etc to be then fed into state owned corporations through employers and employees buying goods and services from them to increase money to invest in social programmes and infrastructure etc but also to increase the amount of private corporations to expedite the rate of development of AI and automation that leads to increased productivity and abundance and massive layoffs and thus expedite the development of post scarcity communism.This is because as stated the increased presence of private enterprises whose main goal is to increase profits through eliminating labour costs is because they due to the profit driven motivation of private corporations they will be more willing than state owned corporations and cooperatives put more research and development and investment into automation and AI to eliminate labour costs that increases productivity,increases profits and eliminates scarcity through eliminating human labour as per the end goal of communism.This is the opposite than cooperatives whose democratic nature would prevent this to keep people employed and state owned corporations preventing unemployment due to loyalty to their employees as unemployment would be disastrous to the economy thus allowing the state to shift the blame private corporations for increasing automation and also if need be able to hire those made unemployed by AI and automation and also due to increased GDP from its relationships with the private corporations to be able to pay large sizeable universal basic incomes of welfare to those left unemployed.Private corporations whose goal is to eliminate labour costs to increase profits and productivity will be more likely to do so since they are ruled by undemocratic CEOs who being the greedy assholes they are will do everything they can to eliminate inefficient human labour costs and increase productivity and profits for themselves more so than democratically run cooperatives or state run corporations who have loyalty to their employees.When crushing labour unions are unsuccessful or are too costly then they will to finally eliminate their employees will start investing in research into AI and automation and adopting it which ironically to capitalists actually brings about actual communism through creating abundance of a resource or product that they are against.The more private corporations there are the more research and adoption of AI and automation there is which expedites the development of post scarcity moneyless communism.Therefore the adoption of a free market economy in a state dominated state capitalist economy is actually done not to bring about capitalism but in fact the very thing that state dominated economies politicians are working towards and the exact opposite that actual capitalists want which is communism.This is as stated because private corporations will to increase profits and productivity and cut labour costs will be more likely to invest in research and development and adoption of AI and automation more so than the state thus the more private corporations there are the higher the chance of adoption of AI and automation there will be.This will increase productivity and eliminate scarcity of a resource etc and contrary to popular belief will thus be a step towards communism and not capitalism.To ensure unanimous distribution of this development of AI and development many private corporations must be set up in all sectors of the economy by the state such as agriculture,manufacturing,mining,retail and restaurants etc to increase of automation and AI that results in abundance,unemployment through an increase of productivity through an increase in private corporations is needed to expedite the eventual development of communism.Thus the shift from a state dominated economy towards a private corporation orientated free market system that is still under the control of the states end goal is not to bring about fully fledged capitalism including libertarianism or anarcho capitalism but rather actual communism by having private enterprises increased presence creates more new money in the economy that eventually ends up in the hands of state owned corporations to further fund investment in GDP,social programmes etc and also thus increases the demand and implementation of automation and AI to eliminate the human labour force to cut costs paves the way to make room for exponential technological growth and abundance of energy and food etc.Therefore the shift in China and Russia under Mikhail Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping etc towards a more free market economy were carried out to expedite the development of communism by increasing the new money generated from scratch by private enterprises for state owned corporations to invest in social programmes and also increase the amount of automation and AI developed by private corporations that paved the way for for communism,Both Boris Yeltsin and Castro obviously did not follow this by going in two opposite extremes with Cuba adopting more state control and Russia under Boris Yeltsin installing complete deregulation in the economy.Thus the increased profits of the increased ratio of private corporations is fed into treasury of the state through their employees and CEOs buying their goods and services to improve GDP,infrastructure and social programmes and at the same the profit motive of private corporations increases the rate of automation and AI that brings about communism.Therefore increased privatisation of the economy is actually a step towards increased and improved social welfare and expedites the development of AI and automation both needed to bring about communism – real communism.As a result contrary to popular belief the shift to more market orientated private corporation based capitalism by China,Russia etc was not a route towards capitalism including libertarianism and anarcho capitalism but rather it was either consciously or unconsciously a route towards post scarcity moneyless communism – actual communism because the more private corporations existed the more new money in the economy they created that would end up in the hands of state owned corporations and thus the treasury of the state to fund GDP,infrastructure etc and also the more adoptions of automation and AI in order to increase productivity,elimination of scarcity of resources and also the more technological unemployment that would lead to actual communism.This is known as state control gateway theory that is defined as that the control and strength of the state of the economy through state owned corporations is determined by the amount of private corporations whose presence feeds the GDP and funding for infrastructure and social programmes for the state sector by the private sectors employers and employees and money generated from scratch especially from private banks with this having a positive feedback loop that allows for more private enterprises to appear causing a positive feedback loop in enhancing the funds for the state sector exponentially but also at the same time through the profit motive of private corporations drives the exponential development of automation and AI which paves the way for communism and it’s proto form minarcho technocratism.This is true for China,Vietnam etc but obviously not Russia due to Boris Yeltsin and Putin.Gorbachev cannot be blamed as he was overthrown by Yeltsin and died with only a mere $5,000,000 rather than the billions of dollars that Boris Yeltsin and Putin etc gained.Yeltsin was going to carry out his coup regardless of whatever reforms Gorbachev put through and had he never came to power.The rate of economic growth and the ratio of state owned corporations to private corporations has to eventually shift in order to pave the way for communism and this was seen by the reforms of Khruschev and Gorbachev which were unpopular with socialists and communists and the rest of the communist party – the “perestroika” economic reforms of Gorbachev were a failure and resulted to economic collapse because they were done to improve GDP growth as per state control gateway theory but were hampered by the leftover stagnation of Breshnev.Gorbachevs reforms that were restricted by the rest of the Communist party stalling these much needed reforms was following this model to a degree like Khruschev to increase the growth of state owned corporations and GDP by increasing the amount of private corporations whose employees etc would buy more goods from state owned corporations through this to bring about communism by increasing the amount of private corporations and free market reforms that was completely unlike Yeltsin who espoused and adopted completely deregulated free market principles.Gorbachev was following state control gateway economics that was increasing private corporations and introducing free market reforms to increase GDP encourage the development of automation and AI through encouraging private corporations to expedite the development of communism wheras Yeltsin etc were trying to and succeeding in undoing this to make him and his friends billionaires.Russia’s complete deregulation in the 1990s by Yeltsin was a sign that complete deregulation causes chaos as Gorbachev was trying to implement a state controlled economy with increased private control of the economy similar to China but was overthrown by Yeltsin.Gorbachevs “perestroika” reforms which were needed to end the era of stagnation and liberalise the country could have been more successful had the government had been more open to these reforms with Yeltsin’s reforms showing that government regulations are always needed to prevent complete economic failure.Critics state that Gorbachev was a greedy asshole who wanted complete deregulation and was responsible for Yeltsins complete deregulation – I disagree.The free market reforms he put forward were necessary to increase privatisation to increase their contribution to state owned corporations profits and the state treasury by increasing new money into the economy to eventually end up in the treasury of the state to increase GDP and money for social programmes and infrastructure etc and expedite the development of AI and automation as per state control gateway theory and his reforms were an ironic failure because of the stubbornness of the government he was part of.By carrying out his free market reforms while still retaining state control and regulations Mikhail Gorbachev was either consciously or unconsciously paving the way for communism and in reality and ironically the communist party government he was part of was holding this back and thus because his reforms could not be fully developed by the communist party they were a failure and resulted in mass unemployment.Boris Yeltsin would have carried out his illegal coup and complete deregulated reforms if Gorbachev had never been elected,never instituted the reforms or chosen better ones.The reforms of Mikhail Gorbachev were just a pretext for Boris Yeltsin to carry out his coup and his complete deregulation that were against the development of actual communism and possibly a way for Yeltsin to shift blame for what happened towards Gorbachev.The
fact that Gorbachev was responsible for installing democratic reforms for free speech in the media and society at large etc and ended the Cold War with as little bloodshed as possible to bring peace with the West shows this.Furthermore Yeltsin did the exact opposite by crushing the democratic reforms of Gorbachev and carried out an illegal coup against Gorbachev and his government and he and his buddies became billionaires while Gorbachev was only a millionaire when he died.Adopting more privatisation in a state dominated state capitalist economy as detailed here that was carried out by Gorbachev is contrary to popular belief actually the next step towards communism not a step backwards as more private corporations means more money is invested in state owned corporations by them buying goods from them and increasing the money in the economy that eventually makes its way to state owned corporations that increased GDP and money for infrastructure and social welfare.Furthermore private corporations due to their incentive to cut labour costs will be more likely to invest in and adopt automation and AI that increases productivity,eliminate scarcity of a resource and human labour to bring about a post scarcity,moneyless communism etc.China after the death of Mao was more successful than Russia due to the reforms of Deng Xiaoping etc being able to convince the communist party to adopt more free market policies and is why it has a markedly increased concentration of private enterprises but still has state majority control of the economy and is an economic superpower.Had Soviet Russia and Russia kept the same economic policies as Brezhnev and the rest of the Communist Parties then its possible the economy would have stagnated with China’s economy also stagnating had Deng Xiaoping not introduce his reforms.Cuba which did not follow the trend of China is an economic hellhole and followed a lack of privatisation is now riddled with poverty – Cuba is what would have happened had Gorbachevs economic reforms were not installed that is had someone else been installed then Soviet Russia would be riddled with poverty.Increased privatisation of the economy with state dominance and regulations to prevent boom and bust cycles and worker and environmental regulations will ensure exponential economic growth at a stable rate rate whereas maintaining tight regulations coupled with state dominance and almost no private enterprises causes economic stagnation – economic growth may be consistent but it will be slow.It is theoretically impossible for state owned corporations to carry the burden of the entire economy by itself it needs private enterprises to be set up by it and fund the state owned corporations to increase GDP by using their own disposable income generated by profits and wages not generated by the state that are created this way from scratch that are then fed into the state owned corporations to increase GDP exponentially to the point that it allows for more private corporations to be set up and use the money to improve the infrastructure and GDP with the more private corporations present to cater to the exponentially more powerful GDP growth etc.This is again why private enterprises were set up by the state in Maoist China,Soviet Russia under Lenin and Stalin and Cambodia under Pol Pot and was the economic model adopted by Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot who despite being bloodthirsty savage were economic geniuses and why these countries are in fact state capitalist and is why after a century their countries are now economic superpowers compared to the rest of the world that are the few countries to have eliminated poverty and are now been lifted centuries ahead.It is theoretically impossible for an economy to function with only state owned corporations with no private corporations as this would lead to a stagnant economy and GDP because the state owned corporations would only be recycling money and not getting new money created from scratch from private corporations.Maoist China,Cambodia etc and Soviet Russia to a degree by allowing and setting up private enterprises are why they are now economic superpowers despite being only a century ago being at several centuries behind the rest of the world technologically and economically.It is also why China after death of Mao and Russia under Khruschev were only able to gradually increase privatisation and open markets to the rest of the world in 1953-1976 and during 1980-2000 because the economy was developed enough through command economies to move to a more democratic planned economy.This is why any future attempts at “communism” and “socialism” by the bullshit definitions no longer needs complete government control of the economy and society – at least in the developed world such as Europe,America and most of Asia because the economies and technological development is sufficiently advanced to the point that it no longer needs complete government control of the economy and society.Africa could use this if it wanted to go the same incremental growth rate of China etc but that is debatable.The fact that capitalism after 37 years that is 10 years longer than Mao during 1912-1949 still hadn’t lifted the country out of poverty due to lack of a planned or command economy proved this as it was unlike Russia but like the rest of the world with deregulation severely affected by the 1929 Great Depression and this is why inspired Mao to carry out his revolution 10 years after it had finished and the country in poverty and squalor.This would apply to any other countries across the world including America,Britain,Austrailia etc.Put simply it was the fact that as late as the 20th century Medievil style feudalism and colonialism still existed in China,Russia and Vietnam etc then they were starting off quite literally from scratch in terms of the amount of money they had to start with and technology in terms of agricultural productivity etc.In otherwards you have to into account the fact that Mao,Lenin,Castro etc were inheriting countries that were already dirt poor and full of squalor to begin with as well as being already several centuries behind the rest of the world due not to them or either socialism or communism but rather the monarchy and colonial administrations they overthrew due not to them or either socialism or communism but rather the monarchy and colonial administrations they overthrew and thus growth in wages,GDP and elimination of poverty and increase in the standard of living conditions was incremental at first but this eventually became exponentially better overtime hence why today China and Russia and Vietnam are now today economics superpowers ahead of America.Cuba on the other hand were originally a luxury destination but was through the US backed Fulgencio Batista was driven into complete squalor and by the time of the Cuban Revolution most of the population was illiterate and living in slums.Its development has been considered wonky at best in comparison to Russia and China etc.Cubas economy was growing at a steady rate up until 1980 where it saw a 14 year slump with the chaos of post Maoist China and post Brezhnev Russia and and their fall of the Soviet Union likely caused by them not being able to import crops from Cuba.This is where the myth that socialism and communism makes everyone equally poor because it took several decades to gradually lift the countries out of the Medievil Ages into the 20th and 21st Century.So now any modern 21st century socialist or communist revolutions don’t have this problem because now unlike 1917 and 1949 we now have most of the world already at 21st century standards and more than enogh money to eliminate poverty and find necessary programmes and we also have the technological and scientific know how to eliminate scarcity,famine and poverty worldwide with the exponential increase in computing of AI further expediating this.Provided there are constitutional and democratic safeguards then any future communist or socialist revolutions would not led to authoritarianism and the same horrors and infringement of civil liberties as seen in Cambodia,Maoist China and Leninist and Stalinist Russia etc.Vietnam,China etc are still run by the single Party communist party and they are one of the only few countries in the world to have be successful at eliminating poverty especially extreme poverty – most other capitalist countries are lagging behind.Poverty although it still exists in these countries is dropping every year exponentially especially extreme poverty with the Chinese government for example in the last 10 years having lifted at least 100,000,000 people out of poverty through government programmes while poverty is increasing in other capitalist countries or is at least fluctuating by going up and down in accordance to boom and bust cycles due to lack of planned economies.When communist parties are in control of countries especially in modern times that are seeing an exponentional decline in poverty to almost zero and it staying that way due to government programmes etc and planned economies.These countries have the economy under a majority control of the state that is the state has 60-70% control of the economy through state owned enterprises and private enterprises have a minority control about 30-40% control of the economy as well as the state enforcing a planned economy and and strong social welfare and social programmes and yet they have the lowest levels of poverty in the world..That’s the kind of economic system you want in your country – a planned economy with democratic input and also the state having a majority control of the economy where boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation etc never occur not a deregulated free market system that leads to boom and bust cycles and the poor picking up the scraps everytime.Adopting a completely deregulated free market economy would cause boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation and would plunge the economies of these countries into mass unemployment and poverty and would reverse decades of hard work in an instant.China,Vietnam in the 21st century like they were in the mid 20th century are state capitalist countries and them through large scale government programmes and planned economies are decades ahead if the rest of the world in eliminating poverty and becoming economic superpowers.The question that remains is freedom of civil liberties and that can easily be resolved by instituting democratic institutions and safeguards that limits the states ability to infringe on the rights of the individual by preventing the government censoring the internet,press etc.You can still have a communist one party system and still prevent the State infringing on the rights of individuals through democratic institutions and safeguards present.We already have a one party system in the modern United States so I don’t see how this any different.If any of these countries abandoned these government programmes and so on and adopted unregulated free market capitalism then you would boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation and also skyrocking food prices and you would have nearly 73 years of hard work reversed completely and poverty would skyrocket to the point that China would be just like it was in 1912-1949 in otherwards back to Medievil level squalor and Vietnam etc would reverse back to their colonial era days of the 1700s and you’d still blame it on socialism.Cuba has been kinda finicky in its poverty alleviation and like North Korea shows that a communist country with corrupt heads of state can in fact stifle progress.Russia has still somewhat to go with at least several million still in poverty but it could have eliminated poverty had the Soviet Union not collapsed and had Boris Yeltsin not deregulated the economy.Vietnam has seen large amounts of its population escape poverty through “socialism” or “communism” but it was setback due to the Vietnam War.Poverty especially extreme poverty is dropping in these counteies every year exponentially with China in the last 10-20 years having lifted at least 100,000,000 people out of poverty while poverty is increasing in other capitalist countries or is at least fluctuating by going up and down in accordance to boom and bust cycles due to lack of planned economies..Russia has still somewhat to go with at least several million still in poverty.Had Boris Yeltsin not screwed up the economy and kept the command economies or installed planned economies then poverty would have been eliminated by now.This poverty reduction has been primarily due to large scale government programmes and the state controlling which sectors of the economy.These countries are ruled by the communist parties but have private enterprises with the state having a majority control of the economy ranging from 60-90% and have planned economies making not communism or socialism but rather state capitalism responsible for this – the same economic system of Maoist a China,Soviet China etc.By conservative standards communism and socialism are responsible for this decline in poverty due to state control of the economy through planned economies,government welfare programmes lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.Conservatives cannot call these countries communist and socialist as the bullshit definition despite they are run by the communist party because of the huge decreases in poverty because they would have to admit that unregulated market capitalism was not responsible for it and they cannot call it state capitalism because they would have to admit that regulated capitalism and social programmes abd the same economic system of Maoist China and Soviet Russia we’re responsible for this..If a “communist” or “socialist” revolution were to occur in modern times then it would not lead to famine,authoritarianism and all other problems associated with Maoist China,Soviet Russia under Lenin,Stalin etc since we know have the technological ability to eliminate poverty etc and ensure all citizens have the same universal standard of living especially considering the afvent of CRISPR,genetic engineering,geothermal,automation and AI etc from 2029-2045 onwards.The colonialism and feudalism that plagued the countries beforehand were so bad that had it not existed its possible living standards would have been better,the GDP could have better at the start and more investment could have been made into better housing as well as automation and possibly AI so as to allow the realisation of true “communism” etc to have been realised by at 2000.So even under Mao,Castro and even Mao at first living conditions were bad due to the previous capitalist administrations and aldo colonialism and feudalism but in the coming years and decades living conditions improved overtime and this improvements became exponentially better every decade.An example of this were Stalinkas,Khruschyoka and Brezhnevkas these were cheap apartment blocks that were mass produced during the administrations of Stalin,Khruschev and Breshvnev etc and were in the case of the first two extremely cheap with small apartments meant to house as much as 20 people and were disposable meaning they were falling apart by the 2000s while the later ones developed by Brushnev and were much bigger etc but smaller than American versions.These were mass produced on the cheap so as to ensure large amounts of people could be moved to the cities in order to work in factories as well as deal with a housing crises affecting a hundred million people and so were made in the cheap.It was only in the 2000s that due to agricultural productivity increasing and then able to embrace more market that they were able to start construction on more luxurious housing though today these buildings still stand either abandoned or at least occupied primarily due to the poor left behind by the new economy under Putin or nostalgia and those who want to live there.Most council flats etc that are built in modern Russia under Putin for the poor etc that are constructed by Russian private corporations are now considered by most critics and experts even worse than in the eras of Stalin,Khruschev and Brushnev.Thats right homes built by private corporations for the poor in Russia are even worse than those built by the government by even both even fucking Josef Stalin and Leonoid Brishnev.New technological advances such as VR technology,automation,AI,CRISPR and those relegated to science fiction across this entire website including the new technologies sections will by 2029-2045 onwards make a truly communist society possible by being able to push the cost of the basic essentials alongside luxuries down to zero – thus bring about Marxs dream of an egalitarian society where everyone is equally rich come true.Thats what communism actually is – where technological advances are able to push the cost of not only basic essentials but also luxuries down to the zero to the point that they are widely available to everyone at zero cost due to them being produced at an exponentially increasing rate at zero cost and when both AI and automation are advanced enough that can eliminate all dangerous and labourious work and the only work done will be those done for intrinsic value through voluntaryism.Thats kind of what were heading towards right about in 2029-2945 onwards that started roughly in 2012.This is why actual communism requires both the abolition of both the state in decision making with regards to resources but also the abolition of money and private property(which is different from personal property)that restricts people these because technological advances pushes the cost of everything to zero.This didn’t exist in the times of Mao,Lenin,Stalin etc.Hence the phrase it wasn’t real communism.Capitalism now holds back this by making only a select few rich and the rest poor by shutting down cooperatives,trade unions and having everything have a price tag and forcing people into unnecessary education qualifications and labour they don’t need to do as well stifling scientific innovation and research into renewables etc to the point that we are now 40 years behind solving poverty,famine and global warming.Its been doing this for nearly 40 years now before the fall of the Berlin Wall.The notion that it also always leads to famine is debunked by the fact that all of these countries China,Russia etc have all faced famines,droughts and food shortages since Ancient Times long before the October Revolution of 1917 etc due to their climate and lack of available arable land.It was policies by “communist” countries politicians that soon led up famine ending completely with for example the Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961 was the last ever famine in China ever – a country to which had been plagued by them routinely since -Ancient Times with for Russia another country that had been plagued by famines since ancient times the last one occurred in 1947.This because the government intervened and set out policies and programmes to increase agricultural productivity.Therefore “communism” and “socialism” have effectively ended famine in so called “communist” and “socialist” countries not capitalism.If capitalism did end famine in so called “communist” and “socialist” Soviet Russia and Maoist China then therefore Soviet Russia and Maoist China are therefore capitalist and not socialist and communist.The only way for capitalism to have ended famine in Soviet Russia and Maoist China is for both Maoist China and Soviet Russia to be one capitalist countries not socialist and communist ones and if you think that is not true then you must have to admit that it was socialism and communism that ended famine in Soviet Russia and Maoist China.Even outside of automation capitalism was able to produce a surplus of goods but this was restricted primarily to those who did the least amount of work. For example we are currently overproducing food – we create every year at least 10-17% more food than what is needed by the worlds entire population yet every year roughly 9,000,000 people die of starvation a third of this are children and most of the food that can feed those people is thrown away or is hoarded in obese people with it also restricted to them through being too expensive not just corrupt third world governments restricting it but also first world countries restricting it through the profit motive and also parenting laws as seen by Monsanto previously restricting seed through patents and also terminator seeds.Capitalists and conservatives will use the excuse that this is because of corrupt governments that can be countered by the fact that America and its government if it gave a shit about human life etc should be sending its troops to Africa and not the Middle East and that’s why the 20,000,000 mostly children who die every year due to lack of food and also water etc are added to the death toll of capitalism.Since 1972 that amounts to 1,000,000,000 people.After all they are going after only corrupt governments in oil rich nations so why are they not going after corrupt governments in African etc.Apathy to the suffering and death of millions is technically and legally complicit murder.Ask your self the question why are America troops in the Middle East and not in Africa when these corrupt governments have killed more than Gadaffi,Saddam and Osama combined every year through corruption,apathy and outright genocide.Sending troops to Africa is technically a justified war more so than Iraq,Venezuela,Syria,Afghanisthan especially since Ive shown American corporations and world governments could have eliminated poverty,famine and solved global warming more than 40 years ago even within the confines of a capitalist system.Why is that we are not overthrowing actual dictators such as Kim Jong un,those in Africa and countries where millions of people are dying every year?It is because there is no oil.The excuse that North Korea was not liberated in the Bush adminstration despite the fact that it was included in Bush Jrs Axis of Evil speech is simple.The excuse that there is a threat of North Korea has nuclear weapons and could retailiste an invasion and thus could bomb New York wtc with a nuclear weapon killing millions is bullshit because apparently according to the Bush adminstrations intelligence Iraq was armed to the teeth with nuclear and chemical and even biological weapons that didn’t exist.But we invaded them instead of North Korea.If two or more countries have nuclear,chemical or biological weapons capabilities and only one of them have large reserves of oil then guess which one is going to be invaded.This proves the war in Iraq,Venezuela,Syria etc was about oil and nothing else.To paraphrase Jimmy Dore “If the United States is trying to help people in a humanitarian way what I would do is I would get a shovel and start digging because I know there is fucking oil somewhere underneath me“.

Facism explained:
The same may apply to parties that labelled themselves socialist including the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics being an oxymoron like the Nazis National Socialism party being an oxymoron.Any party,economic system or government labelled communist and socialist by its members throughout the 20th and 21st century was state capitalist and only labelled itself such in order to distance itself from their opponents version of capitalism and capitalism itself in the western world and had to use anything other than capitalism or through sheer ignorance of Marxs writings with them labelled communist and socialist by the West by again sheer ignorance and also propaganda.No the Nazis weren’t socialist they were fascist capitalists who privatised most if not all industries including banks and weapons manufacture.Hitler also suppressed trade unions and refused to give the homes of German princes to the people,as he felt this would move the party towards communism.Socialists,along with other left-wing political activists opposed the Nazi regime and were persecuted under it.The Communist Party and Social Democratic Party (SPD) of Germany were banned in 1933 along with the limitation of the power of all those who opposed Nazi rule.Many members were arrested,sent to concentration camps,or exiles to Prague,Paris and London.The first concentration camp Dachau built-in 1933,was intended to be the internment camp for Nazi’s left-wing opponents especially socialists and communists before it was used to massacre Jews.Hitler was also publicly critical of the “November criminals”—those who led Germany after the First World War and signed the Armstice,the Treaty of Versailles.These leaders were social democrats.More left-leaning members of the Nazi party were also persecuted;Otto Strasser and his brother Gregor followed a strand of Nazism that wanted to remove the elites Hitler courted from power.Gregor was killed along with other pro-worker members during the Night of the Long Knives.The reason why the word socialists was in the name Nazi Socialists is because that was what it was before Hitler joined it and he used its aim of unifying the working class to gain support and create a base for his right wing capitalist facist ideology.Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Guevara as well as possibly Chavez like Hitler likely used the words Communism and Socialism to describe their movements in order to gain support from the ignorant masses who had never read Marx for power and control especially to garner support for workers who left behind by the previous adminstrations capitalist economic system which led to corruption and them being screwed over thus you have charismatic leaders move in who want power and use the terms workers revolution to gain support from an entire class screwed over by the bourgeoisie.Even if Marx was taught in schools people were tricked into believing they would be eventually led to real classless communism or money making socialism even though they were always kept under authoritarian state capitalism.This how state capitalist dictators gain control of a populace you use oxymoronic language,pull the wool over the eyes of the ignorant especially when they have been screwed over by the bourgeoisie and then you promise them a socialist or communist paradise constantly yet give them suffereing,destitution,poverty and famine as well as subservience to the state through state capitalism.Hence why so many people who lived in so-called Socialist and communist countries still believe they were communist or socialist despite a strong presence of private enterprises making them state capitalism because the brainwashing and propaganda by the state capitalist government was so successful.This how state capitalist dictators gain control of a populace you use oxymoronic language,pull the wool over the eyes of the ignorant especially when they have been screwed over by the bourgeoisie and then you promise them a socialist or communist paradise constantly yet give them suffereing,destitution,poverty and famine as well as subservience to the state through state capitalism.And no the Nazis were not left leaning socialists they were right wing facists.They May have had their origins in socialist parties byt this was abandoned for more right leaning fascism that had the majority of Germany’s economy privatised.In 1919 a Munich locksmith named Anton Drexler founded the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (DAP; German Workers’ Party).Political parties were still a relatively new phenomenon in Germany, and the DAP—renamed the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP; National Socialist German Workers’ Party,or Nazi Party in 1920—was one of several fringe players vying for influence in the early years of the Weimar Republic.It is entirely possible that the Nazis would have remained a regional party, struggling to gain recognition outside of Bavaria,had it not been for the efforts of Adolf Hitler.Hitler joined the party shortly after its creation,and by July 1921 he had achieved nearly total control of the Nazi political and paramilitary apparatus.It was founded as the German Workers’ Party by Anton Drexler,a Munich locksmith,in 1919.Hitler attended one of its meetings that year,and before long his energy and oratorical skills would enable him to take over the party,which was renamed National Socialist German Workers’ Party in 1920.That year Hitler also formulated a 25-point program that became the permanent basis for the party.The program called for German abandonment of the Treaty of Versailles and for the expansion of German territory.These appeals for national aggrandizement were accompanied by a strident anti-Semitic rhetoric.The party’s socialist orientation was basically a demagogic gambit designed to attract support from the working class.By 1921 Hitler had ousted the party’s other leaders and taken over.Under Hitler the Nazi Party grew steadily in its home base of Bavaria.It organized strong-arm groups to protect its rallies and meetings.These groups drew their members from war veterans groups and paramilitary organizations and were organized under the name Sturmabteilung(SA)In 1923 Hitler and his followers felt strong enough to stage the Beer Hall Putsch an unsuccessful attempt to take control of the Bavarian state government in the hope that it would trigger a nationwide insurrection against the Weimar Republic.The coup failed,the Nazi Party was temporarily banned,and Hitler was sent to prison for most of 1924.Upon his release Hitler quickly set about rebuilding his moribund party,vowing to achieve power only through legal political means thereafter.The Nazi Party’s membership grew from 25,000 in 1925 to about 180,000 in 1929. Its organizational system of gauleiters (“district leaders”) spread through Germany at this time,and the party began contesting municipal,state, and federal elections with increasing frequency.Put simply he hijacked a political party that was meant to be a socialist party intended to help and represent the working class and then used that to gain support from the working class but was really using it to increase private capitalist control of the country if not the world and spread his doctrine and ideology as well as not only imprison and massacre actual socialists but also pass laws that in fact hindered the working class that it was originally meant to represent.Find actual neo-Nazis in America and Europe and the say they are the same ideology as Bernie Sanders(a Jew)and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez(also Jewish)who are pro LGBT rights,pro immigrantion and equality,for regulating capitalism and for women’s equality see what reaction you get from them.Do it.I fucking dare ya.So yeah both communists and socialists were massacred in Dachau etc just as much as Jews,Homosexuals etc thus the Nazis were not socialists.Why would socialists imprison and massacre other socialists and communists in Dachau?Communism and socialism are two completely different ideologies and two completely different economic systems yet I’ve noticed that conservatives and capitalists always refer them as one in the same and thus at times label a country and its leaders both communist and socialist at either the same time or at different times which is impossible due to them being two different ideologies.A communist country or person cannot be a socialist country or person and a socialist country or person cannot be communist country or person it’s theoretically impossible.This is cognitive dissonance.State control of the means of production through state owned corporations can only occur in state capitalism and is not socialism which is worker control of the means of production.You can have coops,private enterprises and state control in state capitalism but you can’t have private industry and state control in socialism.One involves state control of the means of production the other involves worker control of the means of production and these are two very different economic systems.You cant have state control,private enterprises and coops in communism because communism requires the complete abolition of the state and money.You can however have coops,private enterprises and state control in state capitalism but you can’t have private industry and state control in socialism or communism.Most if you idiot conservatives on YouTube,Fox News,OANN etc would be laughed at by academics if you ever used your kindergarten level misunderstandings in academic circles outside of your junk and no people as part of the Cato institute and other ties to right wing think tanks are not academics have a debate with me,DemocraticMarxist01,Richard Woolf,Slavoj Žižek and you’ll be slaughtered.Wikipedia outranks virtually every dumbass conservative who cannot even tell the difference between different ideologies and economic systems and when that’s the case you are in Orwellian territories.

State Capitalism explained:
China is about to outcompete and in fact about outrank America as the global superpower by using a more efficient form of capitalism namely state capitalism.China like Norway,Singapore is a state capitalist economy.Marxist literature defines state capitalism as a social system combining capitalism with ownership or control by a state making it therefore a variant of capitalism.State capitalism is defined as capitalism in an environment wherein the profit seeking motive of capitalist enterprise is a component part of the state bureaucracy and the receivers of capitalist surplus value are state appointed bureaucrats.State capitalism is simply a variant form of capitalism like libertarianism,free market capitalism and anarcho capitalism where the economy is at a basic form capitalist with the state undertaking economic activity.State capitalism is an economic system in which the state undertakes business and commercial(i.e.for profit) economic activity and where the means of production are nationalised and corporatised as state-owned enterprises(including the processes of capital accumulation centralized management and wage labor).This can involved nationalised sectors of the economy or state owned corporations and state owned business of any type.The definition can also include the state dominance of corporatized government agencies (agencies organized along business-management practices) or of public companies such as publicly listed corporations in which the state has controlling majority shares.It is an economic system with a capitalist base in which the state undertakes business and commercial (i.e. for-profit) economic activity and where the means of production are nationalised and corporatised as state-owned enterprises (including the processes of capital accumulation,centralized management and wage labor).State capitalism is used by various authors in reference to a private capitalist economy controlled by a state, i.e. a private economy with a capitalist base with the existence of private corporations that is subject to economic planning and interventionism by the state.Private enterprises do exist making it a variation of capitalism with a capitalist base but they are under the control of the state.By having the presence of private enterprises as its base model it is therefore a form of capitalism and not socialism or communism with the definition state capitalism referring to the fact that it is a form of capitalism where the state undertakes economic activity and also where the state has control of the economy through planned or command economies.It is the only economic system wherein the state can partake in economic activity and is the only economic system where the state can control the economy or society in any way at all without democratic processes.It partakes in economic activity through the presence of state owned corporations wherein the state sets up and runs corporations that produce goods and services for a profit.It does this because when the state owned corporations sells goods and services and turns a profit and that money is used to fund the treasury which then is used to fund social programmes and infrastructure and increase GDP.Therefore when a state owned corporation exists in a country and the government gains control the economy it is state capitalist economy not a socialist or communist one.Nationalisation can occur in this as well but the prescene of state owned corporations are a defining feature that is if state owned corporations exist then it’s state capitalism or a variant of state capitalism.In order for state owned corporations to function they need competitors in the form of private corporations to pick up the slack and also fund the state owned corporations through state control gateway theory as detailed later on here meaning private enterprises always exist in some form or another or ratio of different forms and levels.Cooperatives are also allowed to exist but workers can only have democratic control for their own individual business and not on taxes,regulations etc on a federal level.Trade unions may also exist only at the behest if the state.Democracratic control of society only exists for workers within the confines of each individual business and not society as a whole.Meaning the state can do whatever it wants,whenever it wants with regards to the economy and laws without democratic authorisation from the public.That is because the state takes the role of the CEO in a corporation who have absolute control of a corporation.State directed capitalism is another name since it is a variant of capitalism with a capitalist base and the existence of private corporations but the economy and the actions of private corporations are controlled by the state.It has also been used to describe the controlled economies of the Great Powers during World War I.Alternatively,state capitalism may refer to an economic system where the means of production are privately owned,but the state has considerable control over the allocation of credit and investment.By this definition,a state capitalist country is one where the government controls the economy and essentially acts like a single huge corporation,extracting surplus value from the workforce in order to invest it in further production for profit – in other wards it is a variant of capitalism as the state acts as a giant corporation where all of society is modelled in a corporation and is run predominantly by state owned corporations that hires people,pays wages and gains profits by selling goods and services by seizing control of industries essential to the function of society but in some cases allows for other privately run corporations outside of it to exist in order to act as competitors and unlike communism where there is no state and unlike socialism which implies social ownership.The fact that private enterprises exist in it that run for profit,are modelled on private corporations,private corporations are allowed to exist and society is modelled on a corporate structure means it is in fact a variant of capitalism.The profits are fed directly into the state for further business investments and not social programmes which is the opposite of what is done in nationalisation with the workers paid wages like in real corporations in place of social welfare thus the profit making nature of the state means it is not socialism or communism.State capitalism itself has a society is modelled on the structure of corporations but the key facet of state capitalism that is state owned corporations that comprise of the key defining characteristics of it are themselves modelled on corporations.State capitalism can have different degrees of how much control each sector of the economy is maintained by the state,private sector and cooperatives based on the different geopolitical and economic situations of the country it is present.Ideally private control of certain areas of the economy should be allowed as it allows the private corporations control of sectors it thinks it should to increase productivity and develop areas the state cannot develop.The government structure and role in society itself is modelled on the same top down hierarchical structure as corporations with the most of the time undemocratically installed leader at the top acting similar to a CEO having complete centralised control of the economy and society itself with all cabinet members and members of government following a hierarchical structure downwards similar to board of directors with a small group of wealthy powerful people at the top until you have a large number of workers at the bottom – in otherwards both the government and society at large are modelled in the shape and image of corporations thus the state itself acts like a giant corporation that produces and sells goods and supplies services for a profit and extracts surplus value from the workers it hires.All facets of society including education,infrastructure etc is modelled on the same hierarchical and economic facets,image and interests of corporations both state owned corporations and private corporations and is centrered in their interests.This economic system is the only economic system that exists that involves centralised planning through a command economy or planned economy,in which prices,quotas controlling supply and demand and also what is produced and what quantity,production,trade and indeed all facets in the economy are all regulated by the state again like the undemocratic hierarchical systems of corporations with the state deciding whether or not to allow private businesses to exist and also bailing them out and controlling them them through minimum and extreme amounts of regulations.Command and planned economies exist to control the stability of economic growth with the state able to control how much of the economy is under private control by propping up private corporations and cooperatives and shutting them.All facets of society and the state since modelled on a corporation are managed like a corporation by the state similar to how a corporation manages its every day to day affairs and business.The state gets to decide regulations and also gets to decide how much control the state sector has in the economy,how much control the private sector has in the economy and in what areas of the economy both of them has control in the economy.This autocratic and undemocratic control is similar how a corporations CEO controls all aspects of a corporation and thus it is the only economic system where the state has complete authoritarian control of the economy and can engage in economic activity and have state owned and run businesses exist with it also the only economic system where all actions of the state like all forms of capitalism where the actions of the state are not democratically decided they is the stars can do anything it wants with no democratic control from the public and no constitutional safeguards leading the way to authoritarian regimes.Therefore it can be also called state directed capitalism because private corporations exist but they are controlled by the state and is thus a variety of capitalism.The reason why the state has complete control of society and the economy is because they take the role of CEOs in corporations with CEOs also having complete control of all of the day to day actions of their company.All actions in a state capitalist economy is undemocratic and authoritarian because they are modelled in the undemocratic and authoritarian hierarchies of corporations.The state in state capitalism therefore takes the role of a CEO in a corporation who has unlimited,unrestricted and undemocratic power over all facets of society similar to how a CEO has unrestricted,unlimited and undemocratic power over all facets of a corporation.This is why corporate CEOs like Jeff Bezos,Elizabeth Holmes,Koch Brithers etc are undemocratic dictator assholes on par with Stalin,Lenin,Mao and Hitler and why you have people in corporate America working for people like Bill Gates,Jeff Bezos etc hating their job just like people hated living in Maoist China and Soviet Russia etc.Everyone in a company like authoritarian dictators in state capitalist countries takes orders from the state because like a CEO in a corporation the state has complete unrestricted control of the country.All facets of society and government follows the same departments of corporations.As stated the state takes the place of a CEO who has complete control of everything while the board of directors are replaced by the parties administration cabinet members.The members of the party are elected by the state similar to how a CEO decided who is on the board of directors with the state also choosing who to replace them as leader when they retire or are facing death similar to how this is done in corporations where a CEO chooses his successor when he retires etc and in cases where the leader suddenly dies like a corporation the party members like the board of directors elected a new leader.The HR departments that carries out evaluating the performance of employees,compliance with labour law and other departments that keep workers compliant is replaced with government officials that keep an eye on all citizens such as state police.Marketing departments and other market research sectors are replaced by ministries of propaganda and information including corporate and state news outlets that keep citizens in line and spread propaganda to the outside world lying that everything is okay.Posters of the CEO and the products they provide and how great they are present in streets and corporate headquarters are replaced by those of the state leaders and ideology in streets and media etc about how great they.Lack of compliance results not in being fired but being executed or sent to labour camps etc.Bailouts and guarenteed markets are done in order to keep business afloat similar to how corporations give bonuses and perks to keep certain sectors afloat and running and bonuses to reward loyal employees for goods performances.The command economy ie state control of the economy where it gets to decide where the state and private corporations have control in the economy is similar to a how a corporation CEOs controls all aspects of its day to day running with the state doing this by controlling the entire economy like how a corporation controls every aspect of its goings on.All actions of the state are carried out by the state without input by the workers meaning the population has no democratic input with regards to taxes,regulations etc.Therefore when the state intervenes in the economy in state capitalism and controls all aspects of the economy and has state owned corporations alongside private enterprises as competitors it is state capitalist a variant of capitalism with it controlling the economy like how a corporation controls all aspects of itself since the economy is an extension of the state which is the exact opposite of both socialism and communism which involves the state have no control of the economy and not intervening at all.This is in contrast to decentralisation planning espoused by Marx in the definition of socialism and most socialists especially democratic socialists.All aspects of the economy are run by the state similar to how a corporations CEOs operates it day to day business and affairs.This designation applies regardless of the political aims of the state, even if the state is nominally socialist.All facets like education,news etc are run and managed by the state in the interests of corporations etc.This where the name state capitalism comes from because it is a form of capitalism wherein the state runs society similar to a corporation with a capitalist base where private enterprises can exist.State directed capitalism is thus another name for it.Variations where democratic control exists is similar to trade unions with it in the form of the public able to democratically decide changes in the constitution etc and worker etc regulations on a federal level but overall the state still has control of the majority of society..Put simply in state capitalism the state decides every facet of the economy in an undemocratic manner which is the exact opposite of socialism where its actions are democratically decided.All actions are decided by the state itself with no democratic input by the workforce and population and not like communism where the state doesn’t even exist in the first place.Hence the name state capitalism and why it is a variant of capitalism because the actions of the state are done for profit and all facets of society are modelled on the hierarchical structures of corporations and is within the confines of a capitalist economy where private enterprises are allowed to exist but whose extent of power and existence is determined by the state based on the current geopolitical and economic situations.Think of how corporations are organised and how they operate and then apply this to how the government modelled on a corporation would work.Hence the name state capitalism because the states structure and how it is operated is modelled on that of corporations.This state ownership and nationalisation of natural resources,taxing private enterprises and the presence of private enterprises cannot occur in either socialism and communism only state capitalism.Private enterprises exist in state capitalism and their control of the economy etc is determined by the state.Cooperatives can also exist and again their control of the economy is decided by the state.State capitalist states cannot be considered socialist due to the profit making motive of the state owned corporations absent in socialism,the fact that private corporations can exist,privatisation as well as state owned corporations and nationalisation of the economy can occur and that the state has absolute control of the economy in terms of prices and command economy with the level of control dependent on administration – the exact opposite of decentralised planning and democratic process present in socialism and socialism does not involve private corporations as well as privatisation and nationalisation of the economy and the state intervention in the economy that cannot occur in socialism.Furthermore unlike socialism where all actions of the state are democratically decided in state capitalism it is the state that has control of all actions and control of the economy meaning the state can do whatever it wants whenever it wants with regards to regulations,taxes and even the election of the almost zero democratic control meaning citizens and workers have no control over the type of regulations and taxes that are passed.It cannot be considered communist due to the presence of money,the state and corporations in the first place and it cannot be called socialist because the lack of democracy and presence of private corporations.Sound familiar?This is exactly what happened in Cambodia under Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge,Maoist China and Soviet Russia etc.Many if not most experts and scholars(you know the people most conservatives deride as being full of bullshit on all issues including science) such as Noam Chomsky,Richard Wolff and now me agree that the economy of the Soviet Union and of the Eastern Bloc countries modeled after it,Cuba under Castro etc,Cambodia under the Khmer Rogue,Vietnam and also including Maoist China,were state capitalist systems and that the current economy of China,Norway etc also constitutes a form of command/planned economy state capitalism.Modern day Norway,Finland,Sweden,Denmark,North and South Korea and also Vietnam,Cuba,Venezuela,Singapore,Ukraine,United States,Algeria,United Arab Emirates,Brazil,Bolivia,Ecuador,India,modern day China,Taiwan(during its right wing KMT dictatorship period and to a lesser extent today) are the same economic system of state capitalism as Soviet Russia,Maoist China or indeed it’s just that the government is more flexible with regards to private enterprise but still has a large amount of control on prices,trade agreements etc on the same vein as Norway meaning whenever capitalists correct Bernie Sanders for thinking Norway is not democratic socialism but rather a capitalist system with strong government control and point to modern day China,Norway,Singapore etc and even the good ol United States as a capitalist success they too have to be corrected in that it’s the same economic system that killed roughly 55,000,000 plus people through government programmes like the Great Leap Forward and led to the mass human rights abuses,secret police,gulags and genocide in Maoist China,Lenin and Stalin run Soviet Russia and the eastern bloc etc and thus can’t condemn democratic socialists like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez as crazy socialists who want to destroy freedom and can’t praise Taiwan,Singapore,Norway and modern China or even the United States as bastions of freedom when it’s the same economic system that they chastise as having killing millions of people.These countries are considered state capitalist because of the existence of state owned corporations such as in the case Venezuela which has Petróleos de Venezuela(PDSVA) which is a state owned oil and gas corporation alongside Alcasa,CANTV,Buena Television much as Petrobas of Brazil is a state owned corporation amongst others and how EP Petroecuador is a Ecuadorian state owned oil company again amongst others and how Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Bolivianos is a Bolivian state owned oil company yet again amongst others.China and India has a large number of state owned industries you can check on Wikipedia most of which are oil companies.Ireland has An post,Coillte,Electricity Supply Board,The United States of America has several state owned companies such as Export–Import Bank of the United States,Federal Crop Insurance Corporation,Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,Federal Financing Bank,Federal Prison Industries, Inc,Government National Mortgage Association,Commodity Credit Corporation and many other state owned enterprises you can find on Wikipedia.The fact that these state owned corporations exist by conservative logic implies that America is therefore communist and socialist.Examples of state owned corporations in Norway,Finland and Sweden are Motivo,Postigroup,Finnerva,LKAB,Teracom,Vattenfall,Petero,Posten Norge,Avinor.Cuba of course has Aero Caribbean,Havana Shipyards,Cuba Petrolo Union.These countries have the state plan the economy through planned economy.Virtually every country around the world has at least one state owned enterprises that it runs for profit with some having at least a few dozen showing that state capitalism is global thus proving as both Lenin and Friedrich Ingles prophicised that we are in late stage capitalism as demoted by the world entering a phase of state capitalism.By conservative logic therefore the vast majority of countries are socialist or communist including America die to the government gaining countrie of a sector.Each countries have state owned corporations in key areas such as oil,gas coal,raw elements and also in broadcasting because the state believes that they are in the best interest have allowed profits benefit the state and then in turn its citizens.They also have private corporate competitors but in some cases the state has a monopoly which is the exact opposite of America where the vast majority of sectors are all privatised with no government opposition including energy and healthcare because you know “freedom” and “socialism”.All of these state owned corporations in key areas such as oil,gas coal,raw elements and also in broadcasting because the state believes that they are in the best interest have allowed profits benefit the state and then in turn its citizens.They also have private corporate computers but in some cases the state has a monopoly which is the exact opposite of America where the vast majority of sectors are privatised.All of these state owned corporations unlike nationalised entities are state owned corporations where the state runs them by providing goods and services for a profit for further investment and in some cases social welfare programmes which can only in capitalism namely state capitalism.Labelling Cuba,Venezuela,Sweden,Norway,Finland,Bolivia etc communist or socialist because the government is doing stuff and owns sectors of society is bullshit kindergarten level crap as it also social welfare programmes which can only in capitalism namely state capitalism.Labelling Cuba,Venezuela,Sweden,Norway,Finland,Bolivia etc communist or socialist because the government is doing stuff and owns sectors of society is bullshit kindergarten level crap as it also means that you have to call America communist and socialist due the American government owning corporations and sectors of society and you have to accept the fact that America is the same economic system as Castro run Cuba,Chavez/Maduro run Venezuela,Morales rum Bolivia and of course Maoist China,Stalinist/Leninist Russia etc because they two had state run enterprises run for profit meaning America is the same economic system that killed 100,000,000 people.Labelling a country like Venezuela,Cuba,Russia etc communist or socialist is kindergarten level crap because virtually every other country in the world including America has state owned corporations etc meaning by this logic America must be communist or socialist.If American is not socialist or communist but capitalist then Venezuela,Cuba,Soviet Russia etc must not be socialist or communist they must like America be capitalist namely state capitalist.If America is socialist due to the government having control of sectors of society then America would be socialist under the most feverant Republican adminstrations in the White House ie George Bush Jr,Ronald Reagan,Donald Trump when the Republicans party have a majority seating in both houses of Congress.So therefore by this logic America is a socialist or communist country because the government owns state owned industries like Chavez run Venezuela,Morales run Bolivia even if a Republican is in the White House and Republicans have a majority control in the Senate and House of Representitives.This is kindergarten level logic.Wikipedia has extensive lists of state owned corporations for these and many other countries if not all countries around the world that are state capitalist.Virtually every country on the planet has state owned enterprises some of them have more state ownership of the means of production and sectors of the economy than Venezuela and Bolivia and even have their oil,gas,coal etc under the control of state owned enterprises with example China,Norway,Finland,Denmark but no one considers them socialist.Now why is that?The Nordic model including Finland,Denmark and Sweden are state capitalist to lesser degree than Norway as Sweden,Finland and Denmark have state owned capitalist enterprises that are not nationalised as well as the states control of the economy through price fixing varying between each country and their history and their experiments in “socialism” in the 1970s etc was not socialism it was a mixed economy market socialism where cooperatives existed and state capitalism with planned command economies involving government owned enterprises,coops and private business and social welfare.The state and its own state owned enterprises controlled the economy and carry out command and planned economies which is not socialism it is state capitalism.Everytime they are labelled as democratic socialist they are in reality state capitalist.Everytime a capitalist points to Norway,Singapore,China etc as successes of unregulated free market capitalism they are wrong it’s state capitalism where the state took control of the economic growth by doing exactly what Mao,Stalin,Lenin and Chavez and more importantly they are praising as their own an ideology which was responsible for most of that 100,000,000 death toll and human rights abuses.Other historical and modern examples include Hungary under Viktor Orbán,Russia under Vladimir Putin,Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew and Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan,as well as military dictatorships during the Cold War and fascist regimes such as Nazi Germany.Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge government did have a moneyless system with workers paid food rations and did have coops etc but cannot be classed as communist or socialist as it had state intervention in the economy that can only occur in state capitalism.All land was owned by the state with most of not farms being state run farms with others being coops however under certain circumstances some members of coops were allowed their own private plots of land for extra rations of food.Venezuela due to its nationalism of oil,price controls and public entities could itself under Chavez and Maduro be considered quasi state capitalist.Venezuela under a Chavez and Maduro as well as Bolivia under Evo Morales has no control of the economy except price fixing but no command or planned economies as seen by the economic crash.They have citizens have democratic control of the law similar to how trade unions have control of corporations thus making them quasi state capitalist or a more democratic variation with this democratic control of the constitution similar to trade unions.Both South and North Korea could be considered variations of state capitalism to various degrees as they have mixed economies and command and planned economies and state enterprises with the difference in wealth distribution showing what can happen when the state has different levels of control.Cuba with its command economy and state run enterprise under both Che Guevara and Fidel Castro can be considered state capitalist with the same going for Vietnam both at the time of the Vietnam War but also even today.As stated Maoist China like modern day China was state capitalist alongside Soviet Russia and the Eastern Bloc.The state having control of the economy in any shape or form such as price controls,having control of a single business or enterprise such as farms/factories/healthcare etc through nationalisation or state run enterprises for profit and regulating private enterprises or being the monopoly etc can only occur in capitalism especially including state capitalism not socialism and communism due to to state either not existing or having limited control.Thus Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Venezuela,Cuba,Norway,Sweden etc were not socialist or communist but rather state capitalism.The fact that a vast majority of the worlds countries are state capitalist proves that the world is predominantly state capitalist.State capitalism can have the state have control of all entreprises in the economy that provide different services and products but must have private enterprises exist and thus allow competitors to exist in the form of privately run corporations with zero state control in running and operating them but can regulate them.Private enterprises can also exist but the amount of private corporations that exists is controlled by the state.Private enterprises can also exist but the amount of private corporations that exists is controlled by the state.Co-operatives,collectivisation of all forms of similar entities from socialism can exist as well in mixed state capitalist economies.It is very unlikely that the state has an monopoly with it required to have private enterprises as competing enterprises to pick up the slack in developing areas of the economy it cannot.The state has control of the economy through state owned enterprises that are modelled on corporations that gain profit,revenue etc and hire workers that are paid flat wages and run by a state installed CEOs who gains profits much like private corporations CEOs.Theses state owned corporations compete with other and the private sector.The state may have a majority control of the economy or a minority control of the economy and must always always has co-operatives and private enterprises as competitors.Having the state have complete control of the economy is almost impossible because it needs private corporations as competitors to pick up the slack and develop parts of the economy it can’t in cases where due to geopolitical and environmental factors state owned corporations cannot develop the economy it can’t.Having the state have complete monopolised control of the economy is both theoretically impossible but also economic suicide as private enterprises must exist to develop sectors of the economy the state cannot with private enterprises also needed to fund the state owned corporations by creating new money from scratch to buy goods from state owned corporations goods and services as per state control gateway theory..The ratio of private enterprises to state owned enterprises and also cooperatives varies depending on each country and also its current economic,environmental and geopolitical situation at any given time meaning as these change over time then the ratio of state owned enterprises to private enterprises and cooperatives in a country will change overtime.In cases where the state has a majority control of the economy then private sectors are usually left to control areas of the economy to pick up the economy with in these instances command economies installed in order to keep the private secotor under control due to geopolitical factors.In cases where the state has a minority control of the economy private sectors have a majority control of the country that does not involve a command economy.Furthermore the degree at which the state interferes in the economy such as price fixing,state ownership and also regulations of private enterprises determines the economic freedom of the average citizen.The state through a command economy can control prices and other facets of the economy thus directing the rate at which cooperatives,private industry and even state owned enterprises can generate profits and thus control the rate of GDP.State control of the economy via nationalisation,command economies and even state owned and operated enterprises such as farms,banks,factories,energy,healthcare can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism and not in communism or socialism.Within capitalism there are sometimes when private enterprises in charge of a sector of the economy is good and sometimes when cooperatives in charge of a sector of the economy is good and sometimes where the state is good at being in charge of a sector of the economy and this can change depending on the country and its current geopolitical and economic situation.Private enterprises can be beneficial to the economy and increase productivity provided their are strong worker,financial and environmental regulations in the country and strong trade unions and worker regulations and workers are paid well and competitors exist to them in the form of cooperatives and state owned corporations.Likewise state owned corporations can be just as innovative and increase productivity as private corporations depending on who is in charge both of the country as president and the state installed bureaucrat etc and how much people are paid etc with cooperatives also being just as innovative and productive depending on the economic climate and the level of cooperative on within cooperatives.How productive and innovative cooperatives,state owned corporations and private enterprises are depends on the geopolitical factors and who is charge and government influence in the economy.Maoist China,Soviet Russia and all other historical state capitalist countries mislabelled socialist or communist had a combination of coops,collectives,private enterprises and state run corporations and were thus state capitalist and thus were not any form of socialism or communism.Again state capitalism can take varying forms with the degree to which the state has control of the economy determining the level of economic freedom and wealth of the average citizen.With regards to state capitalism it is the government administration in power that determines the economic and civil liberties of the average citizen not the economic system just like capitalism meaning the human rights abuses and genocide in Maoist China and Soviet Russia can be put down to the administrations in charge much like the DNC/RNC are responsible for the war crimes and genocide in the name of capitalism.This still doesn’t mean you can look to Norway as an excuse of state capitalism done right just like you can’t look at any other capitalist country as an excuse of capitalism done right.An authoritarian state capitalist government can heavily regulate private sector businesses and control all aspects of the economy while more liberalised progressive governments can deregulate them and have minimal control of the economy.They were and are state capitalist command economy wherein the state had complete control of capitalist enterprises through command economies,in which prices,production and trade are all regulated by the state.There are various theories and critiques of state capitalism,some of which existed before the October Revolution.The common themes among them identify that the workers do not meaningfully control the means of production as in socialism but it is rather controlled by the state and that capitalist social relations and production for profit still occur within state capitalism,fundamentally retaining the capitalist mode of production making it a variant of capitalism and thus it is not worker control of the economy and thus cannot be classed as socialism with the existence of the state and money means that it cannot be classed as communism.If the state not the workers have control of the economy then it is capitalist not socialist and if the state exists alongside money then it is capitalism not communism.In Socialism:Utopian and Scientific (1880),Friedrich Engels argued that state ownership does not do away with capitalism by itself,but rather would be the final stage of capitalism,consisting of ownership and management of large-scale production and communication by the bourgeois state.He argued that the tools for ending capitalism are found in state capitalism thus again making state capitalism a variant of capitalism.In Imperialism,the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1916),Lenin claimed that World War I had transformed laissez-faire capitalism into the monopolist state capitalism.Thus state capitalism once it becomes inherent in all facets of society via monopolies cannot be reversed into more liberalised or unregulated forms of capitalism such as anarcho capitalism,libertarianism and laissez faire capitalism since it is virtually impossible to democratically split the government from the corporations it helps foster and it is necessary to bring about socialism wherein the economy gradually shifts towards one dominated by cooperatives to eventually to communism wherein the state no longer exists alongside money,private property etc.To paraphrase Vladimir Lenin:”The goal of state capitalism is socialism and the goal of socialism is communism”.The fact that a vast majority of the worlds countries are state capitalist proves the fact that we are in what’s known as late stage capitalism as per Friedrich Engels.The term refers to an environment where the state intervenes in the economy to protect larger monopolistic or oligopolistic businesses from economic threats.As conceived by Lenin in his pamphlet of the same name the theory aims to describe the final historical stage of capitalism,of which he believed the imperialism of that time to be the highest expression.The main Marxist–Leninist thesis is that big business,having achieved a monopoly or cartel position in most markets of importance fuses with the government apparatus.A kind financial oligarchy conglomerate therefore results,whereby government officials aim to provide the social and legal framework within which giant corporations can operate most effectively.This is a close partnership between big business and government, and it is argued that the aim is to integrate labor-unions completely in that partnership. Lenin insists in The State and Revolution (1917) that state monopoly capitalism should not be confused with state socialism as well as socialism and communism altogether.State capitalism has also come to be used (sometimes interchangeably) to describe a system where the state intervenes in the economy to protect and advance the interests of businesses.Noam Chomsky,a libertarian socialist applies the term ‘state capitalism’ to the economy of the United States,where large enterprises that are deemed “too big to fail” receive publicly funded government bailouts that mitigate the firms’ assumption of risk and undermine market laws,and where private production is largely funded by the state at public expense,but private owners reap the profits.Thus should a recession occur and a business loss profits and run the risk of bankruptcy the state through a legal contract and agreement comes to its aid and bails out the business to ensure it stays afloat.This practice is held in contrast with the ideals of both socialism,communism and laissez-faire capitalism.Furthermore it involves the process of guaranteed markets wherein governments have assured contracts with large corporate monopolies or even small and middle sized private enterprises of any type.This is where contracts are made where private enterprises enter agreements with the state to provide goods and services to the state to ensure consistent sales and profits to ensure they stay afloat even during recessions and form a large portion of the countries GDP and economy with this increasing the disposable income of the entrepreneurs and their workers to allow them contribute to the economy usually in an agreement and promise where the private entrepreneur and there workers agree to spend a significant portion of their profits on buying products from state owned enterprises in a mutually beneficial relationship.These are private corporations are those that generate large amounts of profits and thus are key to sustaining the countries GDP with should their be a drop in sales then there will be a recession in the economy so as the result the state will go out of its way to guarantee markets to them thus keeping them afloat with them should a recession cuts into profits due to a a drop in the economy due to factors out of its control such as deregulation in the financial sector ie banks,pandemic or even epidemic as well as natural disasters etc or change in the climate that affects tourism,agriculture etc then these corporations are bailed out using large reserves of taxpayers money or loans from banks.To cater to guaranteed markets the governments must artificially create demand in the economy for these corporations to flourish.In otherwards to keep the guaranteed markets contract open the state must create demand in the economy for the corporations products to be used in thus keeping the corporations afloat at all times by purposefully instigating geopolitical,sociological,economic or environmental problems and situations out of thin air that would otherwards not naturally occur by itself.If there is no demand for the corporations products then the government will go out of its way to create those markets either locally,nationally or internationally by purposefully instigating geopolitical,environmental,environmental and economic events.Other cases may require the corporate entity to exist in order to aid the government solve a problem in society and prevent imbalances in society and the economy with this problem solved by the government providing guarenteed markets to the private entity wherein the corporate entity once set up will solve the problem but at the same time be given consistent sales and profits.The corporations may provide a service that is esssential to the economic,political and societal stability of a country and this they are propped up and efforts done to keep them afloat forever.Allowing these corporations to collapse economically and go bankrupt would cause the countries GDP and economy to nosedive and collapse and even cause societal collapse through widespread poverty and famine thus the state will do everything it can to keep the business afloat through whatever means either legal or illegal.When ever a recession occurs or their sales declines these corporations will be bailed out in a whims notice using large reserves of taxpayers money and also loans created from scratch thus adding to the countries national debt.In return for bailouts and guaranteed markets the corporate entity promises to use a certain amount of profits that are in the hands of the CEOs as income and its workers as wages to buy state produced goods and services from state run industries or even through illegal bribes and other legal and illegal economic deals.These corporations are thus usually propped up,started up and kept afloat by the government itself to provide income to the CEOs its workers,provide resources to the state and solve issues it has and keep the economy afloat forever.The corporations are usually those that become key facets of the economy by contributing millions,billions or even trillions of dollars with if they go bankrupt or suffer losses will effect the national economy negatively thus they need to be given guaranteed markets and bailouts.Having them shut down or go bankrupt is thus economic suicide and even political suicide and would cause the economy and society collapse leading to societal unrest and famine so therefore keeping them afloat is done to ensure stable exponentional economic growth and usually to keep the population of the state loyal and prevent civil unrest.To keep them afloat should recessions occur or they are in danger of going bankrupt for whatever reasons the state aids them through bailouts using public funds to prevent them going bankrupt and stay afloat as if they go bankrupt then the economy will enter a serious recession.Whenever there is a recession these coroporations are the first to be bailed out instantly with large amounts of money from the taxpayer while public entities and the general public are not.Bailouts are also done the instant that the corporation is in danger of going into debt and bankrupt to keep them afloat.Therefore the state has control of the economy without the need of regulation or through a command economy.Furthermore the corporations must have all candidates of all political parties present in the government bought out through lobbyists to ensure that regardless of whose in power and regardless of their political leaning and political party they will always have someone to bail them out and supply them with guaranteed markets.This can be done through lobbyists bribing and corrupting them with the state on behalf enacts or removes regulations and laws that keeps the monopolistic corporations profits stable and consistent with it also have the state enact regulations that keep competitive business out of business including those regulations that stunt the growth of new small business and cause them to go bankrupt and keep the monopolies power as monopolies thus eliminating all competitors with this thus creating giant monopolies.As a result cronyism that is a close knit relationship between monopolistic entities and the state is built into state capitalism alongside corruption thus making it impossible to eliminate the corruption and cronyism with the relationship between them playing a key role in keeping increased rise in the states countries GDP meaning should the corporations go bankrupt or their profits decrease then the country would fall into a severe if not permanent recession or economic stagnation thus keeping these corporations afloat through guaranteed markets and bailouts is in the best interests of keeping the states economic growth stable forever.This is why state capitalism once it is formed it cannot be changed it is always inherently corrupt regardless of whose in power and what political party they belong to you end up with a revolving door of corrupted politicians who despite being on both or all sides of the political spectrum they will be always doing the same thing for the same plolitical donors as if someone else from another political party is present and any attempts from the outside to change the system from other third political parties will be quashed into oblivion or made to fall in line.State capitalism always involves undemocratically installed dictators who’re through illegal means usually an illegal coup or changing the constitution illegally change the law in the constitution to remain there permenantly with the cronyism and close relationships with corporations ensuring that even if a new person is installed as the leader that person is of the same political party guaranteed through nepotism or through even different opposing parties being bought.Mao,Stalin,Lenin and all successive administrations in Soviet Russia were not democratically elected and from the same political party with in the case of Mao his successors also not democratically elected and again from the same political party,the same occurred with Chavez and Maduro in Venezuela(although they were both democratically elected there was nepotism and from the same political party),Cuba,Cambodia etc in all of these cases not only were of the same political party they all had the same economic interests supporting them to keep them in power though with Chavez and Maduro this was to a lesser degree and with regards to America both the corporate democrats and republicans are supported by the same lobbyists and the same donor corporations Wall Street,big oil,big pharma and the military industrial complex with them elected through the undemocratic electoral college.Chavez and Maduro run Venezuela are less corrupt versions as they were elected democratically and changed to the constitution to allow Chavez to extend to unlimited terms through democratic means hence why Venezuela is considered a quasi state capitalist economy with him having very little in terms of bailouts and guaranteed markets in comparison to the rest.With regards to America having both the Corporate Democrats and Republicans in both houses of Congress and the White House being bought out by the same special interest groups they are both in bed with as stated Wall Street,the fossil fuel companies,pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies and also the military industrial complex ensures that progressives or libertarians never get a majority of the seats in both houses and that a progressive or libertarian or any other political party never sets foot in the White House thus keeping the revolving door opening where there is zero effort to end perpetual warfare in the Middle East etc,that universal healthcare never becomes a reality,anthropogenic climate change is never solved and that whenever the shit hits the fan their donors get large bailouts everytime with everyone else left to pick up the scraps and that corruption,cronyism and all other problems in Washington are never solved or eliminated ever.It is virtually impossible for state capitalism to be reformed into other previous or new subtypes of capitalism and is therefore considered both a symptom and component of late stage capitalism that is eventually to be replaced by other higher economic sumystems such as minarcho technocratism and eventually communism.Democratic socialism or more correctly democratic capitalism,progressive politics,libertarianism and anarcho capitalism will never ever take dominance in American politicians due to the effects of the variant of state capitalism present.In otherwards things will always stay the same.An moree succient definition is that state capitalism involves a close relationship between the government and private capitalism such as one in which the private capitalists produce for a guaranteed market especially one for the state with the state buying manufactured goods and services from specific monopolistic firms.An example of this in the context of the United States is the relationships between Washington,the military industrial complex,pharmaceutical companies,fossil fuel companies wherein the American government has to consistently initiating and maintaining wars in oil rich nation to please the oil companies and pleasing the military industrial complex by buying from them tank,bombs,bombers,guns and all apparel used by the military.This guarantees markets at all times meaning the American government has constantly to start illegal wars and coups etc to ensure Lockheed Martin,Raytheon etc can make profits by selling them weapons and the fossil fuel companies are ensured profits by being given access to cheap oil,coal and gas reserves in primarily countries rich nations.The pharmaceutical companies are ensured guaranteed markets by eliminating universal healthcare,allowing insurance companies to exist and other means that are gained through lobbyists.Therefore perpetual warfare must exist for the likes of Raytheon,Lockheed Martin and other corporations as part of the military industrial complex to function and exist,environmental degradation and deregulation must exist for Exxon,Shell etc to exist and function and disease and insurance companies must exist for big pharma to stay afloat with the state thus constantly going out of its way to create new markets for each of these corporations.Install world peace,universal healthcare,green energy etc and these companies will go bankrupt thus eliminating billions of not trillions of dollars from the economy.Perpetual warfare,disease and environmental degradation are thus the defining hallmarks of modern day late stage capitalism because without these corporations staying afloat through bailouts and guaranteed markets capitalism cannot function anymore and the American economy would nosedive,tank and possibly go bankrupt and thinking otherwise is delusional nonsense.The American economy and its corporations needs perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and deregulation and disease to function without it it would simply collapse in on itself because the American government has becomes so intertwined with the companies that needs these to function.It is both economically and physically impossible and also economic suicide for you to have magical libertarianism,anarcho capitalism or indeed any type of capitalism where these corporations do not exist and where world peace,immortality and environmental stability can coexist because they are two polar opposites that go against each other in principle.This is cognitive dissonance..If you are a defender of capitalism you are a defender of perpetual warfare,poverty,environmental degradation,suffering,corruption and disease etc and your against world peace,universal healthcare as well as the safety of the planet and that makes you a piece of shit.War,environmental degradation,disease,cronyism and corruption etc is needed to keep these corporations and the economy and thus capitalism itself running and your delusional as hell and you’re a piece of shit to think it’s a necessary evil.Whats that misquote again – “But – to put it brutally – you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs.Each and every time a major recession occurs either nationally or globally these corporations are the first ones to receive finiacial assistance with their bailouts usually being significantly larger than that of the public.Corruption and cronyism is an inherent facet of both of late stage capitalism and state capitalism.Therefore the state in the form of Congress has control of the economy albeit without regulation and command economies in a variant form of state capitalism.Therefore variations of state capitalism can exist without command economies but where the state still acts like a giant corporation by being intertwined with monopolistic corporate interests where it indirectly extracts surplus value from the workers through employees of the corporations it is intertwined with and it putting profits into further investment and profits through this cronyism.The cronyism and corruption as well as guaranteed markets etc could be a form of command economy wherein the state inadvertently without knowing it does directly control the economy towards an oligarchy and plutocracy in a quasi command economy coupled with versions of price fixing and similar regulations that are built into it thus meaning variations of a command economy does exist to an extant in the United States.By having having guarenteed markets and bailouts with the military industrial complex,fossil fuel companies and big pharma as well as close relationships with Wall Street the state in both Republicans and corporate Democrats created a a quasi command economy where it is able to directly control the fate of the economy even though boom and bust cycles exist under the illusion of free market unregulated capitalism as the rich are always kept rich and the rest of society are left constantly picking up the leftovers scraps and the cleaning up the pieces when the shit hits the fan.This system of guaranteed markets,bailouts and cronyism is similar to the guarenteed markets and bailouts of Maoist China and Soviet Russia that were carried out with private farmers,merchants and other private business.Everyone claims that the governments of Maoist China and Soviet Russia were corrupt and yes they were just like America by having close relationships involving guarenteed markets,bailouts etc with private farmers,merchants etc that were required to keep the economy afloat but at least the corruption to a degree helped the average citizen as the private farmers and other private businesses were kept afloat to prevent people dying from famine and descending into poverty as were even the poorest the poorest were lifted out of abject poverty and kept from descending into it by through a constantly rising GDP and also constant increase or at least stabilisation of wages and were protected from famine as most as possible.The censorship of independent progressive and to a degree alt-right voices on the Internet by corporate YouTube,Facebook,corporete live news and newspaper media is no different if not exactly the same as the censorship of opposing views in Maoist China and Soviet Russia alongside Castro run Cuba etc.Teapot calling kettle black anyone?Cronyism and corruption is thus an essential component of capitalism namely state capitalism including variants of state capitalism which itself a component of late stage capitalism and no amount of wishful thinking with the magical and retarded anarcho capitalism and libertarianism cannot change that because once you have state capitalism you cannot go back to any more liberalised deregulated forms of capitalism because the politicians in charge cannot be voted out of office due to them being bought off and being the supplier of guaranteed markets and bailed out of and for monopolistic corporations that are integral to the functioning of the economy.The corporations that are provided guaranteed markets provide billions if not trillions of dollars to the American economy and getting rid of them would cause the American economy to nosedive,tank or plunge it into an eternal recession therefore they are part and parcel of the American and global economy and an anarcho capitalist,libertarian or progressive will never ever set foot in the Oval Office or never have a majority stake in both houses of Congress – your delusional for even thinking this could occur.Perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and deregulation etc are needed to keep the American economy going and it would thus be economic suicide to get rid of any of these.Thus the cronyism and corruption of Washington as seen by the politicians in bed with big oil,big pharma and big pharma alongside the military industrial complex is in fact the sign of late stage capitalism and the fact that we are heading towards fully luxury automated stateless,moneyless communism and not the beggings of a non existent glorious magical age of anarcho capitalism or libertarianism.Regulations that exist in countries such as America that stunt the growth of small emergent businesses is the result of cronyism on part of state capitalism similar to Maoist China,Soviet Russia in order to ensure that a small number of large monopolistic private business that were and are key to the functioning of the economy stay afloat through bailouts and guarenteed markets as they contribute hundreds of billions of dollars to the economy every year with the government doing everything to ensure they stay afloat including putting in regulations that shut down competitors in the form of any new or existing small companies because if they go bankrupt then the American economy also nosedives and tanks as well.Therefore cronyism and corruption is built into the very fabric of capitalism and nothing can ever change that fact.This why a progressive,libertarian or anarcho capitalist will never set foot in the Oval Office or gain a majority of either houses of Congress and why perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and disease are required for capitalism to exist at all.You cannot change the system to any other form of capitalism including democratic socialism it’s pure fantasy you can either have fully luxury automated moneyless communism for all or you have crony state capitalism wherein perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and disease is a constant variable to keep the economy booming and going.Thus everytime the United States government whether it is a Republican or corporate Democratic adminstration in the White House and both houses in Congress engages in economic deals with private sector corporations of any kind and everytime they bail them out during an economic recession they are not free market capitalist or socialist they are state capitalist governments.Furthermore as detailed America has many state owned corporations that it runs for profit and not social welfare such as Federal National Mortage Association,Corporation for Public Broadcasting,Commodity Credit Corporation and many more you can find on Wikipedia similar to Cuba,Bolivia,Venezuela etc and also similar to Maoist China and Soviet Russia with its state run corporations it ran for profit.As a result America is in fact the same economic system as that which killed 100,000,000 people.America is a state capitalist country similar to Castro Cuba,Chavez/Maduro Venezuela,Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc and there is no way you can deny that fact.By all technical definitions the cronyism and corruption on Washington is what goes part in parcel of a state capitalist economy.Crony capitalism is the defining features of state capitalism and state capitalism is the defining end goal of capitalism.Though that doesn’t get any corrupt politicians,lobbyists and CEOs a get out of jail free card by being punished in both Hades and Tarturas for the next few hundred million years since their actions within a framework of capitalism involves environmental destruction and the loss of human life.This system of bailouts and guaranteed markets is exactly what happened in both Maoist China,Soviet Russia and also Venezuela etc and in fact virtually every single so called socialist or communist hellhole.

State owned corporations are the key defining facet of state capitalism that are state run enterprises that are modelled on the same hierarchical structures as private corporations that are run for profit.They can exist in all forms of capitalism namely state capitalism and mixed economies.They cannot exist in either communism or socialism.This because like state capitalism which is having society at large modelled on the structure of corporations state owned corporations are enterprises owned by the state that are modelled on private corporations.They are corporations that run for profit,have all facets of private corporations ie a CEO,board of directors,marketing department,assets,revenue etc but are run by the state for profit.Each individual state owned enterprise compete with each other and private corporations as competitors and each one is modelled on the same hierarchies as corporations with CEOs and board of directors of each enterprise replaced with state installed bureaucrats and state run board of directors thus making them state run corporations as well as being run for profit and not coops as seen in socialism as profits are not shared equally but rather like each corporation different individuals are paid different wages based on their role and hourly workload each week and the existence of money and the state means it cannot be classed as communism despite their being communist parties.Each state owned corporation although managed by the state etc they are still competing companies meaning they compete with each other for profits and customers etc by providing different services.The wages for CEOS and employees are generated by each individual state owned corporations profits..Even though the state can seize the profits they can only be given to CEOs and employees of state owned corporations that a person uses. These bureaucrats act like CEOs and are elected by the state or through in corporate board of directors thus their wages and earnings rises and falls due to the success of the corporation like that of private corporation CEOs with them like capitalist CEOs earn a certain percentage of wages,workers earn wages based on how many hours a week they work while the revenue and all monetary assets of the state owned corporations are stored in corporate reserves,bonds and assets etc or is either fed directly into the treasury of the state for use for social programmes etc.The state installed bureaucrats can be anyone at all the state wishes it to be it can be can a current elected politician playing a dual role of politician and CEO,it can be any random person off the street or it can be businessmen that are former CEOs of other private corporations and also even the corporations former CEO as staled after or during the conversion of a private company through being purchased or once it is set up from scratch.Therefore existing or former private corporate CEOs can be installed as the state installed buercrat meaning even Amazon,Facebook,Tesla,Apple,Wall Mart and Exxon can be state owned corporations with the state having limited control and people like Mark Zuckerberg,Jeff Bezos,Elon Musk etc can continue to be their CEOs and make billions of dollars every year.The actions of the state installed buercrat are compliant with the state with some freedom meaning democracy exists with this means that workers and the general population cannot vote to change working conditions etc directly but trade unions may exist.Like private corporations they have revenue,net income,assets,stocks and bonds etc and can be traded on national and international stock markets with members of the public able to buy and own shares in them like private corporations. of directors may also exist alongside the state installed beuracrat.They also have marketing departments,human resource managers etc and all parts of private corporations.Each state owned corporations are run for profit with workers paid flat wages using money from profits not taxpayers money and the CEOs are replaced by bureaucrats whose wages rises and falls in the same way as that of a capitalist CEO in charge of a private corporation.Otherwise the wages and salaries of the bureaucrat is a flat high one just like politicians but is usually a high one at least a six figure salary ranging between $100,000 – $1,000,000,000.Otherwise it may be both.They are essentially corporations that abide by the same by laws of capitalism but are owned and operated by the state.State owned corporations are different from and have advantages over nationalisation.Nationalisation is where all wages of government employees and all expenses to run a government run service or sector is paid using taxpayers money thus it requires rises in taxes with them run by politicians and not CEOs.State owned corporations are where the sector is run like private business but managed by the government where profits are used to pay expenses including wages for all workers and business expenses thus eliminating the use of taxpayers expenses meaning the government can lower taxes or divert money used in nationalised sectors to other sectors of the economy such as new government programmes or pay off national debts.This is why state owned corporations are better than nationalisation of a service or sector as it allows taxes to be lowered or diverted to other sectors of the economy.Unlike nationalised sectors bureaucrats are eliminated as they are run by CEOs and a board of directors may or not exist making them just as cost effective to run as private corporations.The profits can be used for variety purposes such as for future investment within its own assists and funds or be used for social programmes or fed into the states treasury depending on what the government wishes to do.Although run by CEOs and board of directors thus giving them autonomy they are subject to what the state wants them to do such as what is done with regards to funds,what to do with regards to wages,new services and acquisitions to be made.They can do what they want outside of the states directions giving them the same autonomy of private corporations and also more autonomy and freedom than nationalised sectors but if the state wants the state owned corporations to do something important with regards to acquisitions then it has to be done.This allows the state to buyout other private companies or carry out economic deals and large economic and infrastructure projects without wasting taxpayers money as the state owned corporations money in its reserves gained from profits is used to carry out these actions.Thus the state can carry out economic projects it has control over especially big expensive ones without wasting taxpayers money while at the same time the CEOs can carry out certain and many of its own economic deals and projects of its own without state interference that increases the wages of the CEO in charge thus the CEO can create new products and services it wants and expand into new countries and franchise etc and all other legal practices carried out businesses to increase the companies revenue and its own earnings without state control making it just as free as the free market system.The CEO is allowed freedom in most decisions but the most important ones must be authorised by the state especially risky ones since the state has financial investments in the financial security of its economic future meaning it cannot authorise deals that would be too risky and thus would cost it money and cause it go out of business therefore it must have some semblance of control over important deals to prevent the state owned corporations going bust because they don’t have the luxury of falling back in taxpayers money either through bailouts or stealing them.If gets too risky it will lose money and go bankrupt therefore the state must have some control in risky deals and ventures similar to how a private corporation CEO would not carry out risky decisions because it cannot allow it to go bankrupt and it cannot be bailed out through taxpayers money.Unlike private corporations these state owned corporations cannot be bailed out using taxpayers money and do as a result the state must intervene in certain situations and authorise certain actions and must have most of not all actions undergoe risk assessments where the financial risks are weighted and if too risky must avoided completely to prevent the state going bankrupt as they cannot be bailed out.Only private corporations can be bailed out.If it goes bankrupt by not providing a high quality,affordable service and takes dangerous risks it will go bankrupt and it will dissapear and thus the government will itself go bankrupt.Thus the state has a vested interest in providing a high quality service and be innovative and being financially responsible and efficient.These risky decisions have to be regulated and assessed because if the state owned corporation goes bankrupt then the country itself goes bankrupt.As a result regulations to prevent boom and bust cycles and risky decisions must be enacted and the state because it has money invested in it must prevent the corporation from carrying out behaviour that would cause it to go bankrupt.This forces the state owned corporation to be more money and resource efficient than private corporations and be more innovative than private corporations because it cannot be bailed out and thus if it goes bankrupt them the the state goes bankrupt.The system installed CEO is allowed the same economic freedom as in private corporations in free market capitalism and the government will aid in it expanding its markets and portfolio because it has a vested interest but it won’t bail them out therefore it has to regulate them and have control over risky decisions in order to prevent it and the country going bankrupt.State control is only reduced to regulations that eliminate corruption and authorising any economic projects etc it wants to be done by the state owned corporations and of course authorisation of risky deals.The amount and degree of control the state has can range from 10-50% with the degree and amount of control the CEO has can be between 50-90% .In fact the state may even aid the corporations in expanding to foreign markets,create new products etc and franchise as it is in its best interest in the state owned corporation making more revenue and thus more money it can utilise.The state has a vested interest in ensuring the state owned corporations economic survival and its economic safety because if the corporation goes bankrupt then it will go bankrupt and as a result it has to be innovative,money and resource efficient and at the same time it cannot be too risky because unlike nationalisation it cannot fall back on taxpayers moneys and taking out huge loans with unlike private corporations it cannot rely on bailouts.If a boom or bust cycle occurs or will survive it while private corporations will go bust..Since the corporations economic portfolios etc and even debt is separate from the national state debt it has to be careful not to increase the corporations debt or else it will have to deal with two completely separate debts etc to cover with this also meaning that if it is innovative and fiscally wise with the corporations money it will be able to use some profits but more importantly the saved taxpayers money can be used to pay off the government official debts such as national debt and indeed even medical debt and education debt.The profit motive encourages them to be resource and money efficient and at the same time encourages them to provide a same high quality service as private corporations and be innovative in all aspects to increase customers and profits.The profit motive exists in state owned corporations and this means that not only do they have to be financially efficient and it also means that they have be innovative just like private corporations to come up with new ideas,services and products to compete with competitors unlike nationalisation.Once these are paid off the state owned corporations can take some extra risks.State owned corporations by having the profit motive and also by having them resource and money efficient like private corporations this eliminates problems of inefficiency,bureaucracy and mismanagement as well as corruption that exists in nationalised systems.In otherwards all the inefficiencies if a government system are weeded out.If they are corrupt then they will just as likely be as corrupt as unregulated private enterprises.The more powerful the corporation becomes especially worldwide the more economic and political power the state has especially in foreign countries without wasting taxpayers money and without using military force.The state can expand its political power and influence into foreign nations without using military forces or carrying out coups as it can financially back desired politicians and presidential candidates through bribes,economic contracts and other legal means without spending a penny on military operations or for that matter costing human lives or even breaking the law or international laws and without firing single bullet or using a single bomb.If for example a country has large reserves of oil,coal,gas and lithium them rather than carrying out a coup,illegal war or war crimes you make an economic deal with the existing government or potential presidential candidates where you allow your state corporation to set up in you country or allow it to buyout existing state owned or private corporations that exploit that resource allowing you to move in and gain control of that resource through legal means and without wasting human lives and taxpayers money on needless warfare.In otherwards you can gain control of a country and its natural resources by buying out existing state owned or private corporations through your own state owned corporations that hold a stronghold on that resources without resorting to a coup,illegal imperialist war,war crimes etc without wasting taxpayers money and any human lives and its perfectly legal by international standards and conventions.You can buy out the existing oil etc companies secretly through a dummy company in the guise of one that isn’t from your native country and just pretend to be of benefit to its citizens then have the money from the oil etc sent your treasury and diverted to the bank accounts of American oil etc companies and then sell off your dummy corporations to your American oil companies and voila you have gained control of a countries natural resources without anyone noticing and not having to waste billions or trillions of dollars on pointless wars,coups etc.If you want to change the politician in charge you can do so legally by instigating democratic elections and by propping up and funding your desired candidate without a coup etc in the next election and prevent democratic reforms to give them unlimited term limits.Dictators can be dealt with instigating grassrots rebellions and coups by citizens and your candidate.Give your candidate all the weapons,private or government mercenaries they need and you can overthrow a dictator through grassroots democratic movements,coups,subterfuge and infiltration amd double agents without sending any of your own soldiers into harms way and without starting wars that destabilise the entire Middle East and to a degree it can be legal.I can think of a billion ways American fossil fuel companies could have taken control of the reserves of oil Iraq,Afghanistan,Syria,Lydia,Venezuela etc without using any weapons etc allowing them to be done in a year,at a fraction of the cost and completely legal even by UN standards and conventions.Thus the illegal wars and coups in in Afghanistan,Iraq,Libya,Syria,Bolivia,Venezuela etc could be avoided by purely legal means by having American state owned corporations either buying out directly or secretly oil companies in these countries,bought oil from them cheaply or in the case case of Afghanistan could have made a deal with the Taliban since after the disasterous war their still in control without wasting trillions of taxpayers dollars,sacrificing millions of lives.This creates a balance where the state benefits and the CEO benefits in a mutually beneficial relationship with the state allowed to carry out certain economic deals and enact regulations and the CEO has the freedoms to make as much money as they can potentially becoming multi millionaires and billionaires as the CEOs of the state owned corporations despite having to abide by regulations and being controlled to a degree by the state still functions within the confines and by laws of the free market system ie boom and bust cycles,bankruptcies,the invisible hand of the market etc.Since controlled by the state they cannot bribe politicians and thus are easier to be regulated as the state can introduce or remove any new legislation it wants without being bought out or influenced by the CEOs.This eliminates corruption and cronyism and allows the prices and other practices to be regulated more easily than private corporations thus allowing the state to enact worker,environmental,price regulations with little to no resistence.Since owned and operated for profit by the state they cannot by their very nature and by law buyout politicians thus allowing them to be regulated with little to no resistance and eliminating cronyism and corruption and to a degree bailouts etc.If the CEO does attempt to resort to bribery and push back on regulation the CEO can be replaced by a new one on demand by the state thus giving the state more power over the enforcement of regulations.The profits are kept in the corporations reserves for future investment but the state on demand can have the corporations profits and reserves be fed into government treasuries contributing to GDP directly or it can use it for social welfare programmes.By having the wages and expenditures paid by the corporations it allows money normally paid by the government generated by taxes from the taxpayers to be eliminated or used for other purposes.If possible these taxes can be used to pay off the national debt,education debt and other debts in the country thus alleviating problems in the economy.If possible the taxes can be fed into a government treasury where they can build up exponentially overtime to be used for future government programmes especially those to fund social programmes such as those that help those laid off due to pandrmics,recessions etc or things like a Green New Deal,$15 federal minimum wages and universal basic income.Otherwise taxes can remain and they can be used to increase wages of those working for the state in remaining nationalised sectors,eliminating the need to increase taxpayer expenditure and improving quality in remaining nationalised sectors and increase social welfare programmes with it even used to start new government programmes.Excess profits from the state corporations can be on demand also be fed into government treasuries in desired amounts in the range of 5-100% for a desired amount of time.In essence the profits generated by them and taxes not used to fund for them can be used by the state for anything it desires and the leftover money from taxes can also be used for any purposes the state desires.Therefore because of this taxes normally used to fund that sector can be eliminated,used to increase government workers wages and fed into a treasury to build up overtime for future social and government programmes and thus is more efficient than nationalisation and its is therefore for an incentive for the state to convert as many nationalised sectors of the economy into state owned corporations and even more of an incentive for the state to buyout private corporations and convert them into state owned corporations.This however does not lead to a state monopolies as competing private enterprises are allowed to exist and in fact encouraged to exist and flourish to encourage competition to keep prices low and give variety,alleviate strains in the government,to ensure that if economic crashes occur then the invisible hand of market will ensure that there is always both private and state owned corporations still existing ensuring that people still have employment.If one or several state owned corporations survive then there still will be goods and services availible provided by private corporations thus increasing successful rebounds in the economy and vice versa.Furthermore private companies must exist to develop areas of the economy the state does not have power to do so and the private enterprises are needed to create new money in the economy from scratch that will eventually end up in the hands of the state owned corporations that can be used for social programmes and infrastructure as part of state control gateway theory.Thus private enterprises can be allowed to function with or without regulations while state owned corporations are regulated.State owned corporations thus in fact need private companies to exist as competitors thus creating a a competitive environment between both private and state owned corporations wherein the free market system allows for efficient services while still allowing an affordable regulated government option to exist and to ensure exponential economic growth through state control gateway theory.State owned corporations can be just as innovative as private corporations due to the profit motive and the necessary presence of private enterprises.When people complain about the government being inefficient,sloppy and lacks innovation and stifles competitors in the form of private corporations they are referring to nationalised sectors of the economy not state owned corporations as state owned corporations are better at providing key services than nationalisation such as healthcare,oil,gas etc but not always – sometimes nationalised sectors are more efficient in certain circumstances etc.State owned corporations allow for private competitors to exist and since they themselves can be regulated while any private competitors themselves that exist can be completely unregulated and be as corrupt as possible still giving consumers a choice of an affordable state option and also private options.The regulated state owned corporations forces the private sector as per the machinations of free market principles improve its services and lower its prices or they go bankrupt thus creating an environment of both the private and state sector competing constantly with each other for customers by keeping prices low and even provide different perks etc.It is thus ideal for any sector of the economy that is operated by state owned corporations to have as many private competitors as possible to improve service through the machinations of the free market system.The state owned enterprises in exchange of allowing regulations and on demand sending money and carrying out economic contracts and the state can give excess money to the corporations assets etc and even the bank account of CEOs government donations that are legal bribes that keep the CEO loyal to abiding to regulations set by it and having competitors in the private sector making him richer.Thus CEOs can get as rich as he wants by franchising,expanding markets,creating new products and have as much economic freedom as possible with it given bribes,bailouts and even guaranteed markets to stay afloat and loyal to the state in exchange for allowing the state enact regulations and also allowed acres to its reserves etc and have for set time periods of time profits fed directly into the state treasury for social programmes with the state using taxpayers money or money saved from not using taxpayers to do this.Rather than the corporations bribing politicians,politicians bribe state owned corporations to keep them loyal and in line and prevent them getting corrupt.The degree of freedom of each state owned corporations has is dependent on the administration in charge of the country and not the system itself.These corporations are thus run and operate like private corporations but they are just state owned and operate under the same by laws of capitalism such as the invisible hand of the market,supply and demand boom and bust cycles etc meaning they are just prone to boom and bust cycles and have to worry about market shares,the state of the economy,still have worry about going bankrupt and competitors such as other state owned corporations of other countries and private corporations worldwide,invisible hand of the market just like private corporations etc.In otherwords they are corporations but are different in the fact that they are owned and operated by the state. Since state run corporations unlike private corporations they would by law have to be regulated and the government would have an incentive to be profitable as if they go out of business the country itself goes out of debt and thus the economy collapses and so they have a larger incentive than private corporations to be profitable and stay in business and since they are under the control of the government they are they are yes prone to corruption but it’s easier to have them regulated since they are under control of the state.Private corporations if they go bankrupt it’s a blip on the economy except of course if they are monopolies key to the functioning of economy that are thus guaranteed markets.State owned corporations are since managed by the state and since they are directly managed and interlinked with the state they must be regulated and have better incentives to be be profitable and stay afloat as if they go bankrupt them the state loses income and the country goes into a recession.This leads to price fixing and other measures to stabilise the economy through regulations and to a degree a command or even planned economy.Therefore they have to better managed while still abiding by the laws and invisible hand of the free market.Corruption may occur but its usually low level corruption such as money laundering and bribes etc.Each state run enterprises creates different products,provides different services or carries out work in different sectors of the economy with all profits going to the state with the state of there is a monopoly in this sector will be the only sector ie there are no state enterprises competing with each other for the same product or service.State owned enterprises can include state run farms etc that have other state run farms to compete with for profit meaning they may have to compete with other state run enterprises of the same type in the same country.There may be however be private enterprises and cooperatives that may act as competitors for the same service etc but there can be situations where the state has a monopoly in one service,product or sector of the economy and private enterprises and cooperatives have a monopoly in other sectors of the economy.

Nationalisation explained:
Nationalisation is a process where sectors of the economy and private businesses are bought by the state through legal means and where expenditures and wages are paid through taxpayers money and can only occur in a capitalist system it cannot occur under socialism.Economists can distinguish between nationalisation and socialisation,which refers to the process of restructuring the economic framework,organizational structure and institutions of an economy on a socialist basis.By contrast,nationalisation does not necessarily imply social ownership and the restructuring of the economic system.By itself,nationalisation has nothing to do with socialism – historically,states have carried out nationalisation for various different purposes under a wide variety of different political systems and economic systems.Nationalisation is the process of transforming privately-owned assets into public assets by bringing them under the public ownership of a national government or state.This is not public ownership in the same sense of socialism.Nationalisation usually refers to private assets or to assets owned by lower levels of government (such as municipalities) being transferred to the state.Nationalisation may occur with or without compensation to the former owners.Nationalisation is distinguished from property redistribution in that the government retains control of nationalisation property.Nationalisation despite being a facet of capitalism especially state capitalism is different from state owned corporations in they are not run for profit they are funded by taxpayers money including the wages of employees etc.Nationalisation which is what Bernie Sanders wants to with healthcare in America which has been done in every other country in the world is not socialism as the entity or sector is state owned but not publicly owned by the public like a collective or coop as in socialism.Therefore government run healthcare in other countries and what Bernie Sanders wants to do is nationalised healthcare not socialised healthcare.All industries and services in a country could be nationalised completely but that doesn’t make it state socialist or any type of socialism.In fact if all industries,sectors and business are nationalised its likely using a stretch of logic is closer to state capitalism than socialism because they are state owned and the state gains profits from them which are then put directly into social welfare and other government programme therefore using conservative bizarro logic using the concept that nationalisation more than likely leads to state capitalism then Bernie Sanders is not a socialist or democratic socialist he is a capitalists..Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocazio-Cortez are not socialists they are capitalists because they want to nationalise the healthcare industry.Nationalisation is bringing something under state control not public ownership or control as in socialism with nationalisation only capable of occurring in a capitalist system it cannot ever occur in socialism due to the fact that the state cannot partake in the economy or can’t occur in communism since the state does not exist in communism and nationalisation occurs in every capitalist country worldwide.Socialising a business or sector of the economy in socialism involves having it turned into a cooperative that is owned and operated by its workers with zero government control and cannot be carried out by the government it has to be done by having the workers of a competing cooperative buy them out through legal means.Nationalisation is where the government gains control of an industry or business and is able to control all facets of it with further legal procedures required to convert it into a state owned corporation wherein it can generate profits and be used for further investment and is therefore the exact opposite of socialism and can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism.Turning a entity into a state owned corporation is again not socialism and it’s not nationalisation it can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism.Nationalisation can be even further distinguished from state owned corporations and state capitalism with nationalised sectors of the economy usually referring to where a sector of society is operated by the government but not as a business that doesn’t use money as profit but rather as a means of funding the sector in terms of wages of staff such as healthcare and the money fed into the treasury for various uses with these even run at a loss with the nationalised sector usually funded directly by taxes with state owned corporations involve having a sector of the economy converted into a state owned corporation that is run for profit with it funded in the same way as private enterprises not through taxes but through selling a product or service,fed into treasuries or used for future investments.Nationalisation is where the state has complete control of a sector or service and thus can do whatever it wants with zero democratic control or private control and all expenditures such as wages etc are paid through taxpayers money.Nationalisation is where all wages of government employees and all expenses to run a government run service or sector is paid using taxpayers money thus it requires rises in taxes as that sector is controlled directly by the state through politicians.Nationalised sectors of the economy are run by politicians especially those relevant to that area ie nationalised healthcare run by the minister for health and minister for transport for nationalised trains etc.State owned corporations are where the state owns it but it is run like a private corporation for profit and has limited control through instalments of a separate individual to manage it as a CEO but it can only regulate it or give it direction and gain profits when it desires and all expenditures such as wages etc are paid by the corporations profits not the taxpayer.These state owned corporations are where the sector is run like private business but managed by the government through an intermediary CEO where profits are used to pay expenses including wages for all workers and business expenses thus eliminating the use of taxpayers expenses meaning the government can lower taxes or divert money used in nationalised sectors to other sectors of the economy including new government programmes or pay off national debts.Again like nationalisation if all sectors of an economy is turned into state owned corporations then it is not socialism it is state capitalism.It is why state owned corporations are better than nationalisation of a service or sector as it allows taxes to be lowered or diverted to other sectors of the economy.Socialism or socialisation is where a sector of the economy is turned into a worker run cooperative or collective with zero government control.The government gaining control of a sector or industry of the economy such as healthcare and energy and also farms and business of all types is done through either nationalisation or state corporatization which can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism it can never occur in socialism or communism.The state can only ever gain control of a sector of the economy through either nationalisation where taxpayers foot the bill of all wages and expenditures or through state owned corporations where the wages and expenditures are paid by the profits generated by the state owned corporations.This can never happen in socialism or communism it can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism – get that through your thick skulls.If this simple economic fact does not compute then your an idiot.Chavez and Maduro who turned the Venezuelan oil industry into state owned corporations are capitalists not socialists.Government agencies and industry like healthcare and energy etc can be socialised but again it involves turning it into a worker controlled cooperative with nationalisation where it is put under government control is not socialism.This never happened in Venezuela,Bolivia,Brazil or even Sweden and other Scandavian countries and also all other other socialists hellholes such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Cambodia,Cuba etc.In these countries the sectors of society were turned into state owned corporations in the case of oil and nationalised in the case of healthcare.Most if not all government run healthcare systems across the world including the NHS are nationalised while government run trains etc are either nationalised or state owned owned corporations with resources like oil,raw elements etc when under control the government are done under state owned corporations.The government can never gain control of any sector of the economy in socialism as all enterprises etc are under the form of cooperatives with it only able to gain control of any enterprises or sectors of the economy to gain profits for direct investment or for social welfare in capitalism especially state capitalism.Thus state control of any industry,business or sector of economy can only take the form of nationalisation or state corporatization turning an entity into a state owned corporation which can only occur in capitalism and cannot occur in socialism which involves the sector,industry to be run as a cooperative that is run by all workers with zero control from the state with it unable to occur in communism because communism requires the the abolition of the state altogether.State ownership and control of the means of production,energy and sectors of economy and social ownership and control of the means of production and sectors of the economy are two completely very different things.State control and ownership of the means of production and sectors of the economy involves having them under state control in the form of nationalisation and state owned corporatisations and this can only occur in capitalist systems namely state capitalism such as Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Castro run Cuba,Venezuela,Brazil,Bolivia,Cambodia and all other so called “socialist” or “communist” hellholes it cannot occur in socialism or communism.Nationalisation and state owned corporations are state control and ownership of the meanship.Social ownership and control of the means of production and sectors of the economy is where it is under social,public control not state control and takes the form of cooperatives and collectives and can occur in primarily all subtypes of socialism and also mixed capitalist economies.Social ownership of the means of production etc involves it being owned by the public itself separate from the state hence the association of socialism being “working together” because it involves members of society not the state owning a business etc and then working together through democratic means.Social ownership can to a degree mean quasi state ownership but this involves through a government planner who unlike state ownership has to be run through democratic processs.If a government official exists or any government influence exists in social control of a factory,hospital or cooperative or indeed any facet of society then that individual must be democratically elected and their actions are democratically decided and run.This person is like an elected politician who is not elected or controlled by the state but rather by society itself.Therefore if any form of social ownership where government influence exists then it is democratically controlled through democratic process to prevent authoritarianism.In a purely socialist system, all production and distribution decisions are made by the collective, directed by a central planner or government body.If the government does have control of any facet of society in any shape or form then it is still democratically controlled that is the workers and society at large through democratic processes elect a government planner and again democratic processes authorise decisions meaning state control in the form of government officials etc and the state itself must be under control of the populace itself with the state and government official bring elected by the populace itself and all of its actions are decided or authorised by democratic process thus keeping any influence the state has under control of the public.This was not present in Maoist a China,Soviet Russia etc.Worker cooperatives, however, are also a form of public socialized production and ownership.All corporations and factories would be shared among the members of society,but individuals and households would still own their own personal effects.Socialism is social ownership through the formation of cooperatives and collectives and not state ownership through nationalisation and state corporations.Thus the only way to have something under social ownership of the means of production through socialism is through having it turned into cooperatives with zero interference.Socialism requires that all facets of society are social owned and thus turned into cooperatives and the second it has any sector under state control it is no longer socialist it is state capitalism.The second its has any private enterprises it is no longer socialist it is a mixed capitalist economy and the second it had any government interference as in the state running the sector it’s no longer socialist it is state capitalist.Therefore if something is under state ownership it is not socialism it is state capitalist.Therefore Maoist China,Soviet Russia,Venezuelan run Chavez,Sweden,Denmark,Lula run Brazil,Morales run Bolivia,Norway and Castro run Cuba can only be considered state capitalist as they either nartionalised or converted into state run corporations healthcare,oil,aluminium,farms,factories which can only occur in state capitalism and not either communism and socialism as socialism would require turning them into worker run cooperatives etc and communism would require the state to dissapear completely.Any country that had had state run enterprises,industries or sectors of the country under the control of the government were state capitalist systems such as Norway,Sweden,Denmark,Cuba,Brazil,Bolivia,Maoist China,Soviet Russia etc they were not socialism which would have involved said industries,enterprises and sectors of the country turned into worker cooperatives.If you don’t know the basic differences between these type of economic ownership means your fucking idiot and are economically illiterate and cannot claim to be an expert on the subject and thus have no right to be labelling things communist or socialist at all when they are not.You cannot call something communism or socialism when you don’t know basic economics or political theory.Anyone with a basic understanding of economics and political theory knows the difference between public and state ownership because it’s the founding principle of economics and political theory as it determines the type of economic system that one has.State ownership and public ownership of the means of production are just as vastly different from each other as how publicly listed companies are just as vastly different from private companies and just how vastly different nationalised sectors are completely different from state owned corporations as well as how private property and personal property are two completely different things and again how command economies and planned economies are different from each other – again you can look this up also on Wikipedia.Many countries across the world have state owned and nationalised industries and more than what was in Venezuela,Bolivia etc but they are not considered socialist why because they don’t have large reserves of fossil fuels which you know are always in the hands of left wing socialist dictators.If you don’t know basic economic and political theory you’re a fucking idiot and thus can’t be making opinions on communism and socialism because anyone with even the most kindergarten level understanding of economics and politics would know the difference between public ownership and state ownership of the means of production and sectors of the economy.State ownership of the means of production and sectors of the economy can only occur within the confines of capitalist economic system especially stats capitalism – it cannot occur within any forms of socialism or communism.Socialism is where the public itself in the form of the cooperatives with zero state control or interference or control – socialism it’s not state management or ownership of the means of production.The fact that you can’t tell the difference between these two basic facts alongside the difference between private property and personal property etc means that most capitalists,libertarians etc are so ignorant of basic economics and political theory that they only have a basic kindergarten level understanding of how capitalism works and what it actually is with their understanding of socialism and communism being sub kindergarten level.If you think socialism and communism involves state ownership of the means of production etc or that public ownership is the same as state ownership you are frankly an idiot or brainwashed or both and would get laughed out the door of the halls of academia.Either they were turned into state run corporations or nationalised as per the machinations of state capitalism which again is not socialism.

State Capitalism in Castro run Cuba:
Cuba under both Che Guevara and Castro etc had at least 22% of the economy privately run under private corporations by 2006 compared to 8.2% in 1981(although it has shrunk since then)meaning during Castros presidency the amount of private companies and their market share of the economy actually rose by 13.8%.There are still small percentage of the economy run by the private economy roughly near the 1981 level of 8.2% level but its still privately run and it rise during Castro and Guevaras administrations.The sectors run by the state are state run corporations that can only exist in state capitalism not socialism or communism.The country is a net importer of food due to the fact that its main cash crop is sugarcane with most of the crops grown being exported as cash crops to sustain the economy and the countries GDP in regards to agriculture is dependant of exporting cash crops that it has to compete with larger producers such as India,China etc and its main crop sugarcane to produce sugar is not suitable for human diets.Agriculture in Cuba is mostly state run but it does have a significant percentage consisting of private farmers.Furthermore the American government still hasn’t shut down outdated sanctions against importing Cuban crops due to its outdated alliance with Soviet Russia.The private farms that do exist are like Maoist China private farms on leased state land and are by all technical legal definitions private farms.Private farms in Cuba since the times of Castro and Guevera that are by all legal definitions private businesses have always existed in Cuba right from when Che Guevara and Castro were in power to modern times – this can only occur in state capitalism and not in either socialism and communism.Cuba with regards to agriculture is a net importer of food due to sanctions by the United States and the fact that its climate restricts it to growing only a small number of cash crops.There are now private farms in Cuba that produce about 70% of all of the produce in Cuba.This is despite the fact that the state has a majority control of the agricultural sector.The private farms are required to sell 80% of their crop to the state, and can sell the remaining 20% in markets including international markets.Private farms that are by all technical legal definitions wherein people farm crops and sell them for profit exist in modern day Cuba and have always existed in Cuba throughout its entire history including before and during the administrations of both Castro and Guevara.Two years into the implementation of the first agrarian land reforms in Cuba approximately 58.4% of arable land was privately owned, while 41.6% was under government control,which required a second wave of reforms.Both of these reforms were carried out for the purpose of increasing production, diversifying crop production, and eliminating rural poverty.The second agrarian reforms of Cuba were introduced in 1963 to further limit the allowable size of private farms—all property holdings over 67 hectares became nationalised.Thus, these reforms allowed for the state farmlands to dominate the agricultural sector—70% of the arable land was under the state control and the government became the largest employer, while 30% was privately owned.As a result, between 80% and 85% of Cuba’s land was expropriated.Even after the second set of laws a substantial percent of farms were privately owned roughly 15-20% which cannot occur in communism or socialism only state capitalism.Hardly a successful socialist or communist revolution.Therefore since these private farms exist the country is and always has been state capitalist and never have been socialist and communist.As stated its main crops is sugarcane which is not good for sustaining a diet on,rice which it competes with Asia and also the fact that its climate is not conducive to large scale agriculture like China etc with global warming from the 1950s complicating this further as even the slightest change in global carbon dioxide concentrations caused by anthropogenic climate change can alter an already fragile climate such as that of Cuba.Cuba is smack in the middle of the Carribean meaning every year unlike the rest of the world it gets hit by tropical storms and hurricanes every year which in one fell swoop can devestate entire yields.Whenever you have a hurricane or tropical storm hitting the US especially Florida those storms always hit Cuba first and are always more devestating to Cuba because they lose energy as they hit land including Cuba so by the time they arrive in Florida meaning by the time they have reached America the have lost most of their power and strength so Cuba always gets the full brunt of hurricanes and suffers more than Florida and as a result they suffer huge losses in terms of crop yields..Harvesting for most crops occurs from late September to early December and hurricanes season occurs usually June through to November thus meaning all of a years work can be wiped out just before they are meant to be harvested by powerful hurricanes.If Florida experiences any crop losses due to hurricanes the rest of country can rely on crops grown in other states to feed the country and cater to GDP growth and of course these farmers can be bailed out.That is why private farmers are needed in Cuba to ensure higher productivity should the state run farms crops be decimated by hurricanes and needs command economies to prevent skyrocketing food prices as a result of these hurricanes.It is also why crops grown in Florida are also grown in other parts of the country so if Florida experiences losses of yields due to a hurricane other states can provide a backup to those losses.Cuba does not have this luxury as Cuba is much smaller than the United States and when a hurricane hits it the entire country is covered by the hurricane thus meaning that the entire countries agricultural land is laid bare to the mercy of hurricanes and thus it more likely than America to have complete crop failure and it cannot rely on other parts of the country to import them so it has to import them from other countries and thus has to rely more on private farmers to increase productivity and increase the chances of more crops surviving hurricanes – therefore private farmers have to exist.Most crops grown in Cuba are invasive non native crops not suited to the countries climate and are as stated cash crops that are mainly grown to provide large amounts of GDP to be exported at low prices with them not suited to the climate with the country having very little if any plants that can be reared as edible crops on a commercial scale.The climate consists of only two seasons dry season and wet season.The vast majority of Cuba’s plants are tropical rainforest plants very little if any are edible,produce actual fruits or vegetables and cannot be reared as commercial crops.Cuba has no crops unique to it that it can export that no other country can grow and export meaning all the crops it does grow are also grown somwhere else thus it does not have an advantage over other countries it only sells these crops at slightly competitive prices so it can compete with thrse other countries and cannot compete with them fully because these other countries where the crops are native to have more predictable climates and are much larger than Cuba with more arable land available to grow these crops especially when multiple different crops are grown and exported from multiple different countries at once.As a result of lower yields etc it sometimes had to sell them at a profit and sometimes they are sold at a loss.Furthermore as stated these crops are not suited for it climate and soils and therefore even when private farming is adopted it produces lower yields than the crops native countries meaning it cannot compete on international markets.These crops it relies on for both exports and feeding itself such as citrus fruits,rice,sugarcane,beans etc are from Asia,Central America,South America and even Asia and Europe and North America which do not have hurricanes and are suited to growing in vastly different soils and climates.These countries already have a monopoly with these crops and can sell the at higher amounts than Cuba.Even when private farms are used to increase productivity in Cuba the yields of these crops are always exponentialy lower than in other countries that grow them especially their native countries even when grown by private farmers because these crops are not suited to the soils and climates of Cuba.In other countries these crops are also grown by private farmers but they have exponentionally higher yields because they have better climates and soils suited to them because the crops originate from and evolved in these countries.So not even private farmers in Cuba whose main purpose is to increase productivity of crops cannot produce enough to compete with other nations or exports due to them always producing lower yields or even feed Cuba itself because the crops are not suited to Cuba’s climate and soil.It would be like farmers in Ireland or England trying to grow bananas and coconuts or American farmers deciding to grow rice or other crops from Asia and other countries it’s just impossible you could get some crops to grow but they would have exponentially lower yields than their native countries because the crops are suited to growing outside their desired range and would be just too much effort for too little yields – agricultural productivity would drop from 40:1 to 4:1 and we would be relying on subsistence farming just like the Middle Ages.The fact that certain crops can only be grown in certain parts of the country is a further indication of this.Some crops have to be grown in certain parts of Cuba and not other parts of the country.In most countries and states the crops they grow are suitable to grow in all parts of the country or all parts of a state etc because all arable land and climate is usually the same or consistent everywhere in all parts of the country or state – this not the case with Cuba.Its climate and soil types are vastly different in each area of it.Most countries tend to grow only crops for exportation that only they have a monopoly on and this thus gives them economic advantage ie crops that no other country can grow and thus exports them to other countries.The same goes for beef to a degree but by and large the purpose of agriculture is to grow crops that are staple crops to you the country growing them and exotic to the countries around the world who want access to them and thus you are able to feed yourself and export large excess amounts of them for a profit to the country GDP.If a country does not have a crop it has a monopoly on that only it can grow and no other country around the world can grow it then it does not have an advantage it can however turn these into cash crops where they are grown in large amounts and sold at slightly cheaper prices to try to undercut competing countries but still has to compete with multiple other countries who can grow that at larger amounts due to larger amounts of arable land and more predictable weather.Countries that export cash crops are only able to do so because other countries feeling sorry for them and their situation decide to import crops from there to prevent that country going bankrupt as part of economic deals and if they can in turn have their commodities sold to that country in return.Other countries import cash crops including those from Cuba purely because it is another country that it can expand their markets to it so it has to import crops from Cuba that it canot get somewhere else sometimes in larger amounts for a cheaper price only because it wants Cuba to buy its commodites as another market..Its essentially charity markets and also greed and Cuba has to agree to this and had no choice in the matter.Countries only buy cash crops from Cuba it can get cheaper elsewhere because Cuba in return will buy crops etc from that country.The crops that are grown in Cuba are suited only to grow in soils and climates completely different to Cuba namely America,Asia etc not in Cuba and countries only import these from Cuba because Cuba agrees in turn to import their commodites.Part of the reason these crops such as rice,citrus fruits,sugarcane etc are grown there is because they were originally doing so to sell to Soviet Russia and Maoist China to give these countries access to these crops as part of a deal with Cuba by importing them from Cuba and not North,Central and South America thus allowing Soviet Russia and China access to these without giving money to American farmers and adding to the American GDP but to add to Cuba’s GDP and money to Cuban farmers thus undercutting American farmers even if they have lower yields as an economic deal amongst the three state capitalist countries with the fall of the Soviet Russia in 1989 and the fall of Maoist China thus led to a huge decline in exports with America then imposing economic sanctions to this making things worse.Cuba was growing these crops in the first place because during the Cold War and the time of Che Guevara and Fidel Castro it had made a deal with Soviet Russia to export crops normally grown in America(North,South and Central) to allow Russia access to these without importing them from America thus improving Cuba’s GDP and not that of America despite the fact that these crops are not suited for being grown in Cuba.Soviet Russia etc agreed to it in order ti get access to American crops etc without funding American farmers who were their enemies.In return Cuba would import crops etc from China and Russia.All major state capitalist empires of the 20th century made economic deals with each other that would import crops and commodites primarily from each other and not the US and in some cases some of these countries if they wanted to get American crops without funding American farmers had to grow invasive crops that were native to America but not to them in climates and soils completely unsuited to them so as to allow them and other state capitalism states access to these crops while undercutting American farmers and undercutting the GDP so as to not be funding their enemies at the time the US.Cuba grew these crops because Russia and China wanted these crops but didn’t want to import them from America because that would mean they would be funding American farmers – their enemies at the time so the only way to get these crops to Russian and Chinese markets without funding American farmers was to have Cuba grow them due to the country being in the same geographical location and thus having pretty much same climate as North,Central and South America even if they were unable to produce as much as America.Furthermore they wanted to start markets with Europe through Cuba with these crops where Cuba would sell these crops to European markets to undercut and put out of busines American farmers – the best way to strike at your enemy and cripple them without launching a single nuclear missile especially during the Cold War where the threat of mutual annihilation through nuclear weapons are involved is through affecting their agriculture sector and the best way to do that is to produce the same crops as them and sell them at cheaper prices to their international markets thus putting their farmers out of business,undercutting them and negatively affecting their GDP.Thats what Stalin and Mao aimed at doing by making an alliance with Castro and Guevera and other state capitalism countries by having them grow predominantly American crops.By having Cuba grow and sell American crops to both them and Europe etc they could cripple the American agricultural industry and thus weaken the entire country economically pushing America into deep recessions,hyperinflation possibly even starvation caused by skyrockiting food prices while at the same time command economies utilised by Cuba,Russia and China etc would ensure their GDP would soar exponentially forever making them economic superpowers.It could allow them to win the war without risking mutually assured destruction through nuclear weapons and allow that button used for nuclear bombs never to be never be pressed.This method of agricultural warfare is the best way to cripple an enemy countries economy and cause mass starvation in that country or drive them to surrender and win a war without ever launching a single nuclear bomb,or dropping a single bomb into an enemy base or civilian settlements because you can cripple their economy to point that they never recover and will be begging to be given food and surrender or face starvation.This was why Mao was so hesitant in making deals with America during the Nixon administration because he had to make economic deals especially agricultural ones with the very people he was carrying out economic warfare with through agricultural warfare.Cuba to ensure high productivity,high exports and a stable GDP due to crops unsuited to its climate and soil etc had no choice but to adopt both command economies and private farmers to ensure consistently high yields and sales to Russia and China and Europe.They did however underestimate just how unsuitable Cuba is for agriculture.Its important to notes that the percentage of private farms to state farms was almost consistent across all three countries.With the fall of the Soviet Russia and Maoist China this led to a dramatic decline in Cuba’s food exports and GDP alongside food sanctions from America made things worse.It continues to grow and sell them because it can’t grow anything else and because other countries are using it as another market for cash crops and expanding their markets.Cuba therefore has had to export to other countries crops that other countries have a monopoly on and thus cannot be an agricultural powerhouse.This is how its always been in Cuba even before Che Guevara and Castro had their little revolution.In otherwards Cuba just in no way can support itself with intensive agriculture even if it adopted only private farms.All of the odds are stacked against it supporting large populations and being an agricultural powerhouse – how it’s able to grow anything is frankly a miracle it thus has to be a net importer of food and adopt command economies and private farmers.If it adopted complete private agriculture with no state intervention it still wouldn’t be able to feed itself and still wouldn’t be a major exporter because as stated it would have to compete with so many countries and also it would still be producing exponentionally much lower yields than other competitor countries due to its climate and soils.Therefore it has to rely on food imports,private farmers and of course command economies.You could convert all availible arable land in Cuba into private farms and it still wouldn’t be able to feed itself and would still be a net importer of food.Other sectors of the economy can be privatized but they have become state owned corporations over the year.At most 22-40% of the country could be privatized like China but then anything more than that would result in boom and bust cycles and hyperinflation thus leading to skyrocking food prices and thus famines.Even if private companies were set up in Cuba that made electronics etc they still would be poor in comparison due to it relying on food imports.They have to rely on large monopolistic corporations that produce electronics much like most of Europe.Even of the government allowed for large tech firms to form in Cuba their status as a net importer of food would compete with their need to provide manufacturing labourers and also import raw materials.Cuba unlike China can’t provide cheap manufacturing labour force and cannot outcompete it in manufacturing or agriculture so it relies primarily on tourism.China due to its tech boom,disregard for human rights with regards to labour laws and thus willing to look the other way while big tech companies were willing to treat their employees in factories like crap and larger population was able to outcompete Cuba for manufacturing with its large landmass and it less likely to suffer hurricanes has made it a hotspot for giant multinationals to move in.There is simply not enough to give Cuba the edge in manufacturing,agriculture and other sectors of the economy it relies primarily on entertainment and tourism even if a capitalist was in charge.Therefore even if Cuba adopted a fully laziest faire economy it would still have not much going for it asides for tourism,entertainment,finance and banking and agriculture as well as retail but it can be now where as big as most capitalists want it to be due to the need to adopt a command economy and it being a net importer of food.China and most of Asia seized the cheap labour deal for multinationals before Cuba had a chance and the fact remains that Asia just has a higher population who are willing to work in these factories and the government is willing to lower costs so low. and look the other way why they exploited as slaves..Cuban this can only rely on tourism and agriculture and also be the drop off point for illegal drug deals.If modern day Cuba like modern day China and Russia adopted a deregulated economy it would lead to hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles and consistent famines due to its inability to be self sufficient and skyrocketing food prices.The fact that it cannot sustain itself through agriculture even private agriculture means it cannot be a rich country that could feed itself.Perhaps if it adopted aquaponics and vertical farms then maybe it would be able to sustain itself and become a net exporter of crops and possibly undercut other countries and thus be able to expand into other fields all funded by the state.With regards to Castro and Fidel being mass murderers it well documented by most experts that the death toll of either of them is at least only several hundred people and its generally accepted by most experts and academics that the people who were executed by them were rapists,murderers,war criminals etc that were under the control of the American backed Fulgencio Batista government.Batistas government which was a right wing capitalist government was responsible for the execution of thousands Cubans all of them civilians that opposed the Batista government and turned Cuba into a playground for wealthy foreigners while the entire population was left in poverty..Batistas government was also extremely corrupt,heavily involved in censorship of the media etc and opposing views and drive the country into mass poverty and was backed by the United Staes government.On October 6, 1960, Senator John F.Kennedy in the midst of his campaign for the U.S. presidency,decried Batista’s relationship with the U.S. government and criticized the Eisenhower administration for supporting him.- Fulgencio Batista murdered thousands of Cubans in seven years … and he turned Democratic Cuba into a complete police state – destroying every individual liberty.Yet our aid to his regime,and the ineptness of our policies, enabled Batista to invoke the name of the United States in support of his reign of terror.Administration spokesmen publicly praised Batista—hailed him as a staunch ally and a good friend—at a time when Batista was murdering thousands, destroying the last vestiges of freedom, and stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Cuban people, and we failed to press for free elections. on October 24, 1963.Batista murdered thousands civillians,Che etc killed primarily only murders,war criminals etc.In otherwards they killed the assholes as part of Batistas government who kinda deserved being executed.That doesn’t negate the fact that Che and Castro were themselves especially Castro we’re authoritarian assholes who killed civilians and created their police state.It shows that capitalism and state capitalism under a left or right wing dictators can produce the same results.It not nether whether a country is “socialist” or “communist” or capitalist that creates actual freedom it’s about who is charge and what democratic safeguards are put in place.Batista like Castro etc was propped up through an illegal coup this time by the America government just like how the Cuban Revolution was an illegal coup and under a capitalist conservative government created mass genocide and an authoritarian police state.Teapot calling kettle black.This information can be found on the Wikipedia page for the country of Cuba itself.So under both Castro and Geuvara private control of the economy actual rose which is not socialist or communist but state capitalist.Having the private sector rise in Cuba by 13.8% over twenty five years and having a third of all farms being privately owned under a Cuban dictator is hardly the signs of a successful socialist and communist dictatorship or revolution.Despite the best efforts at nationalisation and bringing industries such as oil,agriculture etc under state control private enterprises and private control of the economy actually rose underneath both Guevara and Castro.Hardly a sucessful communist and socialist revolution.The fact that private control of the economy actually grew under both Castro and Guevara proves that Cuba were thus neither communist or socialist with the fact that private enterprises still exist in Cuba after 73 years of control under the Castro dynasty.The existence of private enterprises after 73 years proves that it is neither communist or socialist.If Castro and Che Guevara did carry out an actual communist/socialist revolution then it was an absolute failure in every sense of the word due to these statistics because they did not reduce private control of the economy and in fact private control actually increased under them especially with regards to farms and agriculture which is the exact opposite of communism or socialism both the bullshit and real definition – the same goes for Stalin,Lenin and Mao etc.Maduro/Chavez,Mao,Lenin,Stalin,Castro were thus failed revolutionaries by conservative standards.How can a country be considered socialist or communist when the amount of private enterprises and private control of the economy actually increased substantially to the point that it consists of nearly a third of the economy in the case of Cuba during the presidency of so called communist and socialist dictators?Having the amount of private enterprises rise by this much or indeed by any bit at all is not how socialism or communism works – this is how state capitalism works etc .State farms etc were state owned corporations that sold goods and services for a profit to fund infrastructure,social programmes and increase GDP.State owned corporations like the ones that existed in Cuba can only exist in state capitalism..State owned corporations existed in Cuba because due to the profit nature of state owned corporations the money generated by profits was fed directly into the states treasury to be used for GDP,investing in infrastructure and social welfare which cannot occur in nationalisation and socialism.Therefore Castro run Cuba were in fact state capitalist societies.The evidence that Cuba was communist or socialist does not exist its pure fantasy.The evidence that it was state capitalist does exist therefore it was state capitalist

State Capitalism in Venezuela:
Modern examples of state capitalist economies include Norway,Sweden,Finland,Bolivia,Brazil.Prime examples of other modern state capitalist societies include both Castro run Cuba and Venezuela under the guidance of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas a Maduro.Venezuela under both Chavez and Maduro had 65-71% of the economy managed by private corporations such as El Universal,Bolívar TV,Empresas Polar.The CEOs of these Venezuelan enterprises are multi millionaires and billionaires which is exact opposite of what is a conservatives view of socialism.In a capitalist bullshit definition view of socialism and communism the state has complete control of the economy,everyone is dirt poor and no one is allowed to be a millionaire or billionaire yet these three companies and many others prove otherwise.If socialism requires the complete abolition of private enterprises then how can these multi billion dollar companies exist.The amount of private control of the economy increased from roughly 65% to 71% from 1999-2011 during the entire presidency of Chavez who died in 2013.In fact many foreign corporations including good ol American Wall Mart,McDonalds,Colgate,Chrysler,Johnson and Jonhson and Fiat alongside at least 150 other multinationals have a strong presence in Venezuela including Caracas.How can a country be considered socialist when American corporations exist in the first place.Are WallMart,Chrysler,Fiat,McDonalds and Johnson & Johnson now socialist?.Like Soviet Russia the farms were put under state control but unlike Lenin,Mao and Stalin he outlawed private farmers which is why productivity fell and why you had food shortages and a large amount of food being imported.These were state run farms not publicly owned farms.Any business etc that were seized by both Chavez and Maduro were nationalised not socialised.The amount of private control of the economy in Venezuela actually increased under Chavez and Maduro.Venezuela is a prime example where an ineffective planned or command economies were not substantial enough to prevent economic collapse.Chavez introduced price fixing measures that were in reality not enough as seen in the dramatic decrease in oil prices thus leading to total economic collapse.Had he enforced more effective controls then the economic collapse in Venezuala would not be so severe.Economic collapses,hyperinflation etc as seen in Venezuela or indeed anywhere else can only occur due to lack of command economies and lack of government regulations – yes the economy was mismanaged through over lending,overspending,investing too much in oil and Dutch diseases but the reality was it was because of lack government control.Government control of the economy and government mismanagement of the economy are two completely different things.Government mismanagement is when the government handles funds etc incorrectly.Meanwhile government control is when the government has a majority control of the economy through a majority stake in in all corporations and regulations – this was not present in Venezuela under Chavez and a Maduro.If they had government control of the economy through a command or planned economy and government the government having a majority of the economy and regulations this would have prevented the economic crash even with his overspending.Had Chavez and Moralas been proper socialist dictators that Fox News etc likes to paint them as they would have gained even more control of the economy and actually imposed actual government regulations and command economies like actual “socialist dictators” then the price drop in oil prices would not have occurred or not have impacted the country so much.The hyperinflation,economic crash etc since the economic crash after the death of Chavez was due primarily due to a lack of government regulation and a lack of government control of the economy and this can only occur in unregulated free market capitalism and not socialism either the real or bullshit definition.Command or even planned economies and government regulations did not exist because you had a massive recession and hyperinflation.If a command of planned economy or government regulation did exist then there would have been no economic crash during the 2010s – because the whole purpose of command and planed economies and government regulations that is where the government steps in and interferes in the economy by controlling it is to prevent hyperinflation,economic crashes and boom and bust cycles in the first place.Like countries who are unable to become self sufficient in agriculture due to climate and limited arable land – a country that becomes dependant on a single resource for exports say like oil etc and doesn’t diversify leaving it prone to economic crashes once the price of that commodity drops and leaves it prone to Dutch disease etc needs a command economy and strong government regulation to ensure the growth is sustainable, exponential and continues forever.It also exponentially lessens the intensity of any economic shocks caused by sudden drops in the price of the exploited commodity.Thus even in this case of over reliance on a single resource used for exports government regulations and command as well as planned economies may not prevent a recession at all but they can lessen its intensity exponentially meaning the road to economic recovery may take only a few weeks or few months rather than years or decades meaning it will be solved before the recession affects society in anyway possible and the government can be more able to control the economy.Had government regulations and command economies been put in place like actual “socialist dictators” then the economic crash would not have happened at all and if it did happen then it would have been exponentially less severe and ended within a few months.Furthermore the majority of the Venezuelan economy was and still is under control of the private sector and rose from nearly 66%-71% during his administration.Thats right the amount of control the private sector had on the economy of Venezuela actually grew by 5% during the adminstrations of both Chavez and Maduro during 2000-2020 gaining majority control of the economy.Two thirds of the Venezuelan economy is under the control of private corporations and the state control did not increase under Chavez and Maduro in fact state control of the economy actually decreased under Chavez and Maduro.There are many countries across Europe with more state control through nationalisation and state run corporations than Venezuela and they are considered by America etc as capitalist countries.If Chavez and Maduro did carry out a socialist revolution then it was an absolute failure in every sense of the word evidence by an economic crash caused by the lack of command economies,lack or government regulation and the private sector gaining a majority control of the economy during his administration.How can a country be considered socialist when the amount of private enterprises actually increases under a socialist dictators regime and their exists no government regulation or control of the economy to prevent economic crashes?If private enterprises were allowed to run even more freer and the government did not carry out social welfare programmes,overspending etc and private enter were allowed to do everything they wanted then the economic crash still would have happened and would have been just as severe.Venezuela is not a socialist country – its capitalist country as two thirds of the workforce works for private enterprise and the private sector has a strong base controlling two thirds of the economy – its a capitalist country with a government trying to enact social welfare polices that exist in other non socialist countries and can only occur in capitalism with the oil industry nationalised and under Chavz they had a pretty good success in wiping out poverty the same like the Nordic countries libertarians espouse.Most European and Asian countries as stated have more governmental control,social programmes and government industries than Venezuela and are still considered capitalist.Venezuela has a strong social welfare programme which is not socialist it happens in virtually every other country in the world with it only capable of occurring in capitalism including state capitalism.The only way to carry out the major reduction seen in poverty in Chavez run Venezuela,Lula run Brazil and Morales run Bolivia a country has to have three things – have at least 50-90% of the economy run by the private sector,have the private sector taxed heavily,have them consist of a majority control of the economy and buy goods and services from the government sector as per state control gateway theory and have key commodities and natural resources such as oil,lithium,gas,alnuminium nationalised or owned by state owned corporations hat are in high enough abundance to be sold on national and international markets with them kept at low prices through price controls and abundance to ensure that they compete other countries for market share and thus allow them to make sizeable profits.This can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism.This existence of the private sector,taxing the rich,at these parameters,nationalisation of national resources and price controls that existed in Lula run Brazil,Morales run Bolivia and Chaves/Madurai run Venezuela can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism meaning Venezuela,Brazil and Bolivia under control of Chavez,Maduro,Lula and Morales are state capitalist and not socialist.Many of the private business such as Empresas Polar,El Universal and so on many of which were not only private corporations but also critical of Chavez thus shutting down any concept of Venezuela being a dictatorship.If Chavez and Maduro were and are dictators then these corporations would not exist or would have been shut down or nationalised and the CEOs murdered or jailed but they were not thus showing free speech and opposing views and capitalism was allowed to flourish under their presidency.The healthcare and oil corporations were nationalised which is the exact opposite of socialism and occurs in Norway and virtually every single capitalist country.Any business that are state owned were nationalised not socialised.It was only when the oil prices tanked and them putting all their eggs in one basket and not having a safety net for a rainy day like Norway that the economy tanked and also the effect of sanctions by America including the harsh ones from the Trump administration trying to illegally overthrow Maduro and do exactly what the Obama administration did in Libya and Syria and Bush Jr did in Iraq and install a puppet dictator to secure the vast reservoirs of oil.The main cause for the recession just after the death of Chavez caused by the fall in oil prices was too much corporate control of the economy and would have been non existent had the government gained more control of the economy and a majority share of it by nationalising etc and gaining more state owned enterprises in all sectors of the economy thus reducing corporate control from 65% to somewhere between 10-20% that would have diversified the economy by eliminating all private enterprises in Venezuela which did not occur because at least 66% of the Venezuelan economy is under private control.Therefore the economic collapse of the Venezuelan economy was due to capitalism not socialism and a lack of government control of the economy and too much corporate control of the economy and not the other way around.Had Chavez and Maduro actually been a “socialist dictators” by the bullshit definition or by real definition state capitalists and seized control of the areas of the economy that were under corporate control and had 80-90% of the economy under state control or even just at least 50-80% and had corporate control of the economy between 30-50% or even 10-20% it would have meant that that the government would have diversified enough of the economy and gain direct investment from these diversified sectors and be earning more money through these areas especially if they were state owned enterprises that gained profits rather than nationalisation as in the case of oil thus allowing profits to be fed directly into the government for further investment and could have allowed those profits to go into social welfare thus eliminating the need to borrow obscene amounts of money thus preventing the country going into debt or the profits could have been used to cover the debts with this also diversifying the economy enough preventing Dutch disease to the point that once the oil proces fell the economy could have stayed afloat or the shock and economic crash after the death of Chavez would have been exponentially less disastrous and there could have been a quick recovery due to them relying on other sectors of the economy there would be enough money to cover the debts as well as still intake large amounts of money for GDP to be continually rising and the value of the countries currency would have not plummeted and the economy would have been diversified enough to have fallen back onto all other parts of the economy.Attempts at price fixing and a command economy were futile or basic half attempts that didn’t really do much to hasten the fall in the price of oil with the country having many private corporations in charge of key sectors such as food distribution in the form of Emperses Polar they could have contributed extra billions every year if bought by the state.Therefore the economic collapse in Venezuela after the Chavez adminstration and the Maduro administration was a result of not too much government regulation and control or socialism but in fact too little government control and regulations but also too much of the economy being privatised and under the control of private corporations.It was the result of runaway capitalism namely state capitalism the same economic system of the United States,a Maoist China and Soviet Russia and not socialism – the exact opposite of conservatives and capitalists think it was.Chavez and Maduro operated a quasi command economy through price fixes and also through guaranteed markets present alongside bailouts to several of its many key private corporate interests making it just as corrupt etc and just as much a state capitalist state as its imperilist.Regulations were put in place to a degree to make it difficult for new private enterprises to be set up thus ensuring that key businesses were kept afloat with some democratic control given to the populace with regards passing legislation that allowed Chavez to have an indefinite term as well as other chanted to the constitution but all taxes,regulations etc were not democratically decided upon and although cooperatives were set up they only consisted of small part of the economy with the private sector dominating the economy.Venezuela is a prime example of not how socialism destroys a countries but how runaway capitalism can and how not to do state capitalism as the command economy was half assed at best and can be called quasi state capitalism as the majority of the economy was in private control and there was vain half assed attempts for state control.Any other economic crashes that occurred during or after the administrations of other “left wing socislist dictators” in South America,Central America and indeed the rest of the world can be blamed on there being too much privatisation and private control of the country of the economy that are caused by the same problems as Venezuela which follows the same pattern across countries that have too much of their economies controlled by the private sector.Furthermore the largest corporation that manufactures and distributes manufactured food products is Empresas Polar headed by Lorenzo Mendoza a supporter of the opposition and IMF who has been hoarding large stocks of food raising food prices and making the famine even worse while Maduro has been raiding these stocks to get them into the hands of his electorate and doing other things to lower food prices and educating people how to grow crops and tear livestock to alleviate the famine.This is not the sign of a dictatorship.On Mendozas,the IMF and the oppositions part part stealing stocks of food and preventing Maduro distributing it to the citizens of Venezuela constitutes as genocide -and we all know what thats gonna get him.Maduro and Chavez were democratically elected and all changed to the constitution were through legal means decided by public referendum.If you still think thats not happening there and in Syria and Iran has nothing to do with oil companies wanting the vast reserves of oil then youve been effectively brainwashed into following propaganda aimed to keep you subservient.Doesnt matter any ways all of the vast reserves of oil etc in Venezuela,Iran,Bolivia and Syria is going to be worthless in less than ten years time.State ownership of news stations or any business,government control of the economy such as through price controls that occured in Venezuela and Cuba cannot happen in socialism or communism only capitalism namely state capitalism.Therefore it is runaway capitalism not socialism that is responsible for the economic crash in Venezuela and Chavez and Maduro are not socialist dictators.Any regulation that existed was lax such as lax price fixing and had it adopted complete deregulation then the crash in the economy would have exponentially worse and probably more lax than America ie was more lax than the most draconian “socialist” corporate democrats.It did take control of banks and some but not all private farms but that’s about it except of course you know the oil and aluminium..The state taking control of banks and farms is not socialism its state capitalism like how Mao and Lenin had state run farms.Socialism as well have established is having the public itself control the means of production of state control of the means of production.The mistake Chavez made was not allowing private competitors or realising that the state did not have to to take over agriculture because unlike Maoist Russia and Soviet Russia – Venezuela like most of South America do not need as stringent regulations or government interference with regards to agriculture as there is enough arable land,predictable stable climate and expansion for growth and predictable climate for it to rely entirely on private control especially due to modern day machinery.Prior to his interference Venezuala was producing more than enough to feed itself and export them to make a sizeable profit and was not in need of being a net importer of food.It only became a net importer of food after the economic crash and after Chavez interfered.The farms being taken over was more about indigenous rights and redistribution of it from wealthy private farmers to etc rather than them being state owned.The land was taken to wealthy farmers and then given to poor private farmers.The farms are still privately owned and managed they were just given to poor people based on indigenous rights etc with the purpose of his reforms also being to put poor urban people to work in the countryside being similar to the Great Leap Forward of Mao with again this can only occur in state capitalism not communism or socialism.The agriculture in Venezuela is still privately operated by private farmers just now those who don’t know how to farm.Furthermore a lot of the farmland was illegally owned prior to him coming into office so part of the agricultural reforms was getting rid of illegal corrupt and greedy private farmers.Furthermore it was taken from wealthy farmers etc and then usually given to other less wealthy individuals that were private entrepreneurs meaning it was still to a degree privatisation just taken from wealthy people and then given to poorer people who were still capitalists and they were heavily regulated.The government still does not run the farms in Venezuela they are privately owned and managed under misguided stewardship of state sponsored programmes which can only occur in state capitalism or even laisse faire capitalism.These are not state run farms.The reason why the yields dropped was because he put people in charge of farms who were inexperienced in running them rather than them being government run farms.The idea was to move poor urban people with zero understanding of agriculture to become private farmers by taking it from wealthy private farmers to then turn poor urban people into private wealthy farms.The banks taken over by the state was done to provide cheap loans to fund his social programmes.This is government mismanagement not control and was done as part of returning farmland to native indigenous people and urban poor people who were not skilled at farmers.Any government influence in agriculture like oil etc is through government programmes,state owned corporations and nationalisation and not socialism.Nationslisation and state owned corporations as we have explained here is the exact opposite of socialism.Attempts to rectify this after the crash was to introduce measures to make Venezuelans especially urban ones self sufficient by setting up urban farms in cities to alleviate the problem they created which was actually quite successful.Chavez and Maduro if they had the hired better economists,agricultural scientists etc could have prevent the recession and hyperinflation and still had the same it better reduction in poverty.If they wanted the state to run agriculture then they should have set up vertical farms because Aquaponics in vertical farms allows the state to run farms that have consistently high yields at least 6-10 times more than conventional farmers.He and Maduro are only called socialist dictators that need to be overthrown despite all evidence contradicting this because of one simple fact – Venezuela has the largest reserves of oil in the world larger than Saudi Arabia,Afghanisthan and Iraq etc you know the countries we already spreed “freedom” to and are turning a blind eye to economic friends and buddies the Saudi Arabian princes whose genocide in Yemen we are funding – you know those places and Maduro and Chavez like other so called dictators didn’t want the American fossil fuel companies getting profits from it and instead he wanted state owned Venezuelan oil companies to use profits to spend on social welfare programmes and to bring millions of Venezuelans out poverty – just like every other “socialist dictator” of oil rich nations.Furthermore “socialism” now come to describe governments whose country has large reserves of oil and gas we want our fossil fuel corporations to seize for themselves to get rich off but they won’t give it to us instead they are using the profits to lift millions of their own people out of poverty – the big selfish meanies.When a country has large reserves of oil and the government wants to use that oil to fund social welfare programmes to lift millions of people out of poverty and not give it to American oil corporations then its likely your going to have an illegal coup and the leader of that country is going to be called a “socialist dictator” despite being leaders of countries that are predominantly capitalist who are democratically elected.So yeah Venezuala has the largest reserves of oil on the planet larger than Saudi Arabia and that oil is under the control of state owned corporations namely Petróleos de Venezuela(PDSVA) under the control of Maduro(formerly Chavez) who are using that oils profits to fund social welfare programmes that have lifted millions of people out of poverty – and the American oil companies like Exxon etc don’t like that they want that oil for themselves to make billions of more profits every year like the greedy assholes they are.To do that they need to overthrow Maduro,install a puppet like Juan Guido and have him let the oil companies in and make the citizens poor again and to that they need to make shit up about Venezuela being socialist despite all of the statistics and evidence saying otherwise.Disagree with that fact and you’re a fucking idiot.If an economic crash of this magnitude happened anywhere else in the world that did not have as much oil as Venezuala or not at all I can bet your ass that you wouldn’t hear a peep from Donald Trump,Faux News and rest of the swamp and vloggers.As Andrew Mcabe recounts in “The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump” – Then Trump brought up Venezuela: “That’s the country we should be going to war with next,”Trump said, according to McCabe’s recounting. “They have all that oil and they’re right on our back door.”.Further reiterating this on MSNBC – he stated.The president’s remarks to the room were along the lines of ‘I don’t understand why we’re not looking at Venezuela.Why are we not at war with Venezuela?’”This shows that the attempted illegal coup and a war with Venezuala involving the CIA puppet Juan Guido was in fact orchestrated by Donald Trump himself and had nothing to do with “freedom” and fighting socialism and more to do with the oil and being a greedy asshole.He was willing to start another illegal imperialist war like Bush Jr did with Afghanistan and Iraq for oil and was willing to waste trillions more of taxpayers money on another illegal war that could have been spent of universal healthcare or a dual option,ending homeless and solve other of the countries problems and would have lead to more human rights abuses,torture and was willing to carry out torture and war crimes etc and was willing to allow millions of more people to needlessly die including American soldiers and possibly more American citizens through the lone wolf attacks and terrorist attacks inspired by perpetual warfare in Venezuela and Syria etc especially considering if he would have had a second term in office he would gone and started more illegal wars with Syria,Iran etc again for oil and made no effort to ending the illegal imperialist war in Afghanistan and Iraq to secure the oil and put the world in the brink of WWW3 all for reserves of oil I have shown here would have been worthless within a few years or even decades ago.He also broke his promise on getting American troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq meaning he can be charged for the death tolls and war crimes from 2001-2021 onwards during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as shown by the fact that he was willing to go to war over Venezuala over the oil means he sure as hell was not going to pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan and war with Syria and Iran was inevitable if elected for a second term in 2020-2024 especially considering the fact that both Syria and Iran have large reserves of oil themselves and he already fired the first shot at instigating wars with Iran and Syria.If he won in 2020 and Coronavirus pandemic never occurred Donal Trump would have likely kept troops in Afghanisthan and Iraq and attempted another coup in Venezuela,Bolivia and also Syria and Iran this costing trillions more of taxpayers money and more importantly costing more American lives and Iranian,Venezuelan and Syrian both military personnel and civilians.A war with these countries would have led to them lasting for another two decades even if Biden became present in 2024 because it would been harder to pull out of Venezuela,Iran and Syria – the reason being that it would have harder to pull out of a country just starting a war.Part of the reason Biden was able to end the Afghanistan was because it was beginning to wind down after twenty years despite the fact that it was a losing victory.A war with Venezuela would lead to millions of Venezuelans flooding into the rest of South America and also Central America especially Mexico further destabilising the country and the entirety of South America and possibly ironically North America as well as even further destabilising Central America including Mexico because all of those Venezuelans moving into Central America including Mexico would inevitably lead to them and more Mexicans moving into North America at the borders which would further lead to more immigrants from Mexico including those from Venezuela flooding into America at the borders the exact opposite of what Trumpists want and a war with Syria and Iran would lead to millions of more Muslims flooding into Europe from Syria and Iran and more lone wolf attacks inspired terrorist attacks in both Europe and America,would put the world on the brink of a nuclear Holocaust with them also wasting trillions of more taxpayers money that could have paid for a dual healthcare option and leading to millions of more dead bodies including American soldiers and citizens.The wars with Venezuela,Syria,Iran would lead to twenty or more years of warfare in the Middle East and Venezuela,destabilise the entire Middle East and both South and Central America for decades to come until at least 2040 and lead to millions of more dead bodies including American soldiers and citizens through lone wolf terrorist attacks inspired by them alongside civilians in these countries and trillions of more taxpayers money wasted that could have paid for universal healthcare and the list goes on and put the world at the brink of a nuclear holocaust.That and his genocide of his own citizens during the pandemic is why the associations of Donald Trump as a tyrant and a bloodthirsty dictator on par with Hitler by progressives are justified and the fact that you are unable to understand this means you have the mental capacity of a kindergartener.Donald Trump was willing to risk causing more civilian and military personal deaths and was willing to put the world at risk of nuclear holocaust with zero interest in the consequences his actions of starting a war with Venezuela,Iran and Syria and was unwilling to end the war with Iraq and Afghanistan thus meaning he did not care about the millions of more lives that could have been lost as a result and the trillions of more dollars wasted on them that could have eliminated poverty,healthcare problems etc in America and that was done with malicious intent which is a sure fire way to get tortured for a few hundred million years.As shown by his attempted coups and be charged an extra 1,000,000 years for the attempt.This is also why he deserves to given sentences for all deaths in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars alongside George Bush Jr because he was unlikely to end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to maintain security of the oil and it also applies to his coup in Bolivia.Him granting legal immunity to the Saudi Princes and also funding their genocide in Yemen alongside him cutting back on aid to civilians in Yemen during the pandemic shows he had zero interest in the safety of the lives of the Yemenese people and was content making business deals and money over human life again malicious intent.These wars would have wasted trillions of more taxpayers dollars that could have solved homelessness,provided universal healthcare etc and cost millions of more lives and led to more destabilisation of both the Middle East and the entirety of Latin America both South and Central America and inspired more terrorist attacks in America and Europe.Furthermore it would have put us on the brink of of World War 3 and a nuclear holocaust with Iran and Syria.All of this was by following the selfish asshole ethos of Ayn Rand.This is the actions of an immature 70 year old with the mentality of a 5-10 year old.This is what happens when you elect people with mental capacity of a 5-10 year old in the body of a 70 year old.Trumps actions are not the actions of an adult endowed with the wisdom of old age rather a man with the mental capacity of a baby.This is where the anti Trump rhetoric comes from.T real draconian measures in Venezuela came in after the economic crash thus too little too late and were still not socialism.Unlike Mao,Lenin Maduro and Chavez were not economic geniuses they had good intentions and they did reduce poverty but did not know how to effectively run an economy especially one as complex as Venezuela by not diversifying enough,not setting up a rainy day trust fund,printing more money only to increase hyperinflation and running government owned corporations etc into the ground running them at a loss until they went bankrupt,a perfect storm of mismanagement,economic illiteracy,agricultural illiteracy,putting all of ones eggs in one basket,Dutch diseasss etc.Had they had better economists on their side and actual agricultural scientists in their cabinet then the economic shock would not have occurred or been not as bad and agricultural productivity would have increased with even if the economic shock and recession never occurred he’d still be labelled a socialist dictator simply because of all of the oil in Venezuela.Venezuala has the largest reserves of oil on the planet,larger than Saudi Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan something which oil corporations have wanted ever since the failed Venezuelan coup in 2002 under the Bush administration.The oil is under the control of a state owned corporation named PDSVA in order to have the profits used to fund infrastructure and social programmes and state owned corporations can only exist in state capitalism and not socialism that can only exist in state capitalism and not socialism and communism.The economic crash in Venezuela was a godsend to the military industrial complex and fossil fuel companies because it gave them a pretext and excuse to overthrow Maduro and install Juan Guido as the knight in shining armour to those poor Venezuelans even if they failed – miserably under the orange haired one with the onion brain..As stated this attempted illegal coup would still have happened even if an economic collapse never happened because they needed the oil – after all they attempted and failed coup under Bush Jr in 2002 when the economy was rising exponentially why not try under the orange haired one with the onion brain do the same who managed to successfully and illegally overthrow albeit for a while Evo Morales even though Bolivia’s economy was booming.Ask yourself the question why is it that the American government since the end of the Cold War or even during the Cold War has only been involved in wars,coups and humanitarian efforts in countries with large reserves of oil and gas and not those with actual dictators who are killing their own people,allowing millions to die of preventable diseases and starvation,commiting war crimes and involved in training child soldiers?To paraphrase Jimmy Dore “If the United States is trying to help people in a humanitarian way what I would do is I would get a shovel and start digging because I know there is fucking oil somewhere underneath me“.Venezuela is just as much socialist as Afghanistan and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction – two other oil rich countries.Socialist dictator etc was spun by the media in order to bolster the population to support a coup and war this is called manufacturing consent as detailed by Noam Chomsky.For those of you who are not aware of the term manufacturing consent it is a tactic used by a countries government who wants to carry out an illegal war or coup but make it look legitimate.To qdo that what they usually do in order to cover up the fact they are carrying out an illegal war and make it look legitimate and legal is to use buzzwords,propaganda and making shit up and use mainstream media to galvanise public support for that war.For America its usually when said country has large reserves of oil in the case of Iraq it was making shit up about their being weapons of mass destruction that didn’t exist and using that to justify an illegal war that has been going on for 20 years now.To an extent it was used for Afghanisthan when really Saudi Arabia should have been the target and for Syria etc.The CIA etc made up bullshit about non existent weapons of mass of destruction being present in Iraq and Saddam being tied to 9/11 that did not exist at all to give them authorisation from the United Nations and gain public support by pounding them with propaganda through Fox News,CNN,Colin Powell,George Bush Jr,Donald Rumsfeld,Condazella Rice etc and this was done again through Syria etc in 2011 and again with Venezuela,Iran etc to the case of Venezuela it involves labelling a predominantly capitalist country socialist to justify illegal coups and wars when the statistics say otherwise.Russia under Putin is using this to a degree in order to carry out his illegal war with Ukraine and NATO.In otherwards it is how governments through making shit up and using propaganda in mainstream corporate and state controlled mass media to beat the drums for war and gain public support for said war.Venezuala like Bolivia where Trump carried out another unsuccessful illegal coup due to the country having the largest reserves of oil on the planet in the hand of a state owned corporation namely PDSVA you are going to hear Cold War era buzzwords like “socialism” and “socialist dictator” being thrown around liberally despite the people using it not knowing anything about economies.Since it’s less likely for Maduro to be housing weapons of mass destruction than Saddam(which didn’t exist) then considering the oil is under the control a state owned corporation that can only occur in state capitalism then the world your going to hear a lot of is “socialist dictator” by playing on the general public’s ignorance of economics.Notice the fact that Venezuela and Maduro was not called or labelled socialist by the mainstream media and vloggers and was completely igonored by them despite the crash occuring in 2013 until after Donald Trump came to office in 2017 and had that 2017 meeting with Andrew Mcabe.Between 2013-2017 there was very little coverage of the economic collapse in Venezuela on Faux News,CNN etc because Obama was in power and he was putting economic sanctions on the country.Yes there were frequent reports about the economic crash in Venezuela here and there between 2013-2016 but once Trump came to power and had that meeting was their a major increase of reports of the failure of the Venezuelan “socialist” failure because Obama was very wisely towing the line with Venezuela to prevent any incursions with the country.This all changed once Trump came to office and after that meeting involving Andrew McCabe in 2017 four years after the collapse only then did Faux News,CNN etc and even PragerU and Reason TV suddenly start taking notice,carried out an all out onslaught against “socialism” and beating the drums for war alongside all of the oil lobbyists,Republicans and Corporate Democrats.Even progressives like Tulsi Gabbard,Bernie Samders and Alexandria Ocazio Cortez had to publicly denounce Chavez and Maduro as dictators in order to tow the line as being “democratic socialists” they had to publicly denounce Venezuala as a socialist failure and still label Norway as democratic socialism in order to make themselves look good and keep people loyal and say that’s not us.Ecinomic crashes,hyperinflation,recessions and boom and bust cycles can only occur in a completely deregulated or lax regulated capitalist economies – it can never happen in command and planned economies and with the presence of government regulations and government control control of the economy or even in socialism or communism both the bullshit or proper definition.The reason being is because the whole purpose of planned and command economies and government regulations and government control of the economy that is where the government gain controls of the economy or sets down regulations to stabilise economic growth is to eliminate,prevent or lessen the intensity of boom and bust cycles,hyperinflation,recessions and economic crashes in the first place.Therefore the fact that an economic crash did occur in Venezuela under Chavez means there was no command economy,no government regulations put in place and no government control of the economy existed because the whole purpose of command and planned economies and government regulation is to prevent economic crashes,hyperinflations in the first place.Therefore by using actual logic – the thing conservatives seen to be unable to understand or utilise for a single second due to their brains being underdeveloped since an economic crash occurred there was no government regulation or no government control of the economy present at all making the Venezuelan crash the result of runway deregulation and runaway capitalism not socialism or communism because the whole purpose of government regulations and command economies is to prevent economic crashes and hyperinflation in the first place.Any regulations that existed was extremely lax with only a few price fixing regulations but even they were very lax to begin with.This is basic kindergarten level economics that I should not have to explain to adults.If a country is going through a recession,hyperinflation of inflation or any type of economic crash then its because of government deregulation,lack of government regulation and lack of a command control of the economy and lacking of planned or command economies.It is because the government has almost no control in the economy.This is because the whole propose of government regulations,planned and command economies and where the government has a majority control of the countries economies is to prevent recessions,hyperinflation economic crashes in the first place.Runaway capitalism that is where the government has minimal control of the economy,private corporations have a majority control of the economy and the economy is completely deregulated is the very thing that capitalists,libertarians and conservatives want is the very thing that caused the economic crash in Venezuela under Chavez and Maduro.If the coup in Venezuela was successful the first thing that Juan Guido and the US government would find out if they wanted to deregulate the economy is that their was very little if any deregulation they could carry out because the economy was already completely deregulated in the first place with them unable to deregulate the economy even further and them continuing this deregulation would cause an endless cycle of boom and bust cycle that keeps poor people poor and keeps hyperinflation at record high levels.Except when these crashes occur it will still be blamed on socialism for some reason.Runaway capitalism is also the very thing that caused the 1929 Great Depresion,2007 Great Recession and 1991 recession in Russia.Blaming socialism and government control on the Venezuelan crash is like blaming the 1991 Russian crash,1929 Depression and 2007 recession on the government and socialism which is bullshit at this point.The 1991-2010 recession in post Soviet Russia,the 1929 Great Depression and the Great Recession 2007/2008 proves that deregulation and runaway capitalism is the only way for economic crashes to ever occur it cannot occur in a regulated economy with government having majority control of the economy it can only occur in a deregulated economy where corporations have a majority of the economies control therefore the crash in Venezuela is also caused by deregulation and runaway capitalism.Recessions and hyperinflation etc can only occur within the confines of deregulated economies where the state has minimal control of the economy and private corporations have majority control of the economy – this has been shown again and again throughout human history such as 1929 and 2007.I shouldn’t have to be explaining this basic shit to adults.But unfortunately I have to due to effective brainwashing on part of Faux News and PragerU etc and the level ignorance that so called adults have.This is basic kindergarten level shit I should not have to explain to adults.Economic crashes whether they are localised ones or global ones can only ever occur due to deregulation in the economy and thus limited government control of the economy and thus capitalism because the whole purpose of government control and regulation of the economy is prevent economic crashes in the first place and not “socialism”.Economic crashes can never occur under socialism either the real or bullshit definition.Venezuela economic crash was caused by government mismanagement,Dutch disease and overspending and Dutch diseases which is not runaway capitalism and government control of the economy which is the exact opposite of government control of the economy.No government regulations existed to prevent the collapse caused by a combination of Dutch Disease,overspending etc.Had planned economies and financial regulations existed and Chavez was still overspending and Dutch disease was a problem then the collapse would have still happened but it would not have as severe as it was.Printing and of more money occurred after the crash but this was government mismanagement not socialism.Recessions,hyperinflation and economic crashes are almost always the result of lack of regulation in the economy.The only state owned corporations were those that controlled the oil(duh) and aluminium.As stated private control of the Venezuala economy actually increased by 5% from 66%-71% during both administrations of Chavez and Maduro from 2000-2020 thus showing that the government had barely any control of the economy.All they did was have the oil and aluminium industry managed by state owned corporations which can only occur in state capitalism and start social welfare programmes which can occur in capitalist systems.How can a country be considered socialist when the amount of private control in the economy actually increased and no regulations to prevent the economic crash existed thus leading to an economic crash.Going around blaming socialism(where the government supposedly has complete control of the economy) on the crash of the Venezuelan economy when there was no regulation present to prevent the recession in the first place is kindergarten level logic and only the bottom of the barrel with double digits IQs of at least 40-60 would believe this.How can a country be considered socialist or communist when private control of the economy actually increases under the adminstrations of socialist dictators and command economies and regulations to prevent economic crashes do not exist.If Chavez and Maduro did carry out a socialist revolution then it was an absolute failure in every sense of the word due to these statistics.Furthermore they did not bring any sectors of the economy and corporations into public ownership or any form of ownership as per socialism such as any media stations,the oil,healthcare,farmland etc they turned them all into state owned corporations where the profits generated are fed into treasury which is not socialism.The machinations of state capitalism was carried out where they were converted into state owned corporations via state ownership of them via the state purchasing them through legal means and the state generating profits from them which is the exact opposite of socialism and is in fact state capitalism.Remember state owned corporations can only exist in state capitalism and not socialism.The evidence that Venezuala under Chavez and Maduro were socialist or communist simply doesn’t exist.The evidence that it was state capitalist does exist therefore it was state capitalist.Same for Guevara and Castro and every socialist and communist dictator.The same state ownership of natural resources through state owned corporations and major social welfare programmes and also increase in private control of the economy occured in Bolivia,Brazil and all of Latin America under so called socialist dictators between 2000 – 2020 and thus was not socialism but rather again state capitalism.

State Capitalism in Soviet Russia:
Soviet Russia is a prime example of state capitalist economies.Enterprises in the Soviet Union were legal private entities engaged in some kind of economic activity,such as production distribution,the provision of services,or any other economic operation.An enterprise was the general equivalent of “company”,which was the legal entity prominent outside of the Eastern-bloc economies.Enterprises and production units engaged in activities that are generally undertaken by business-enterprises in capitalist systems,including the design,production,manufacture and distribution of producer and consumer goods and services.In contrast to business enterprises,enterprises and production associations did not engage in business-related activities such as marketing,buying-and-selling and financial decisions.Everything except “the commanding heights”, as Lenin put it, of the economy would be privatized.The commanding heights included foreign trade,heavy industry,communication and transport among others.These state run industries and state run farms were run like capitalist corporations and farms with the same hierarchical structures and the profits were fed directly into the state for further investment and not social welfare hence why they were state run industries and sectors.They were not communist because communism requires the complete dissolution of the state while they were not socialist because they were state owned corporations wherein the state provided goods and services for a profit to fund social programmes,infrastructure and GDP etc not publicly owned industries which are two completely different things.State owned corporations like the ones that existed in Soviet Russia can only exist in state capitalism.State owned corporations existed in Soviet Russia because due to the profit nature of state owned corporations the money generated by profits was fed directly into the states treasury to be used for GDP,investing in infrastructure and social welfare which cannot occur in communism and socialism.Thus everything outside of these such as retail,restaurants,agriculture,artisans etc was legally allowed to have citizens run privately owned business in these areas to act as competitors to state owned enterprises to pick up the slack and allow private citizens gain profits to gain more disposable income to buy more from state run services and business.In practice this limited the private sector to artisan and agricultural production/trade and well as restaurants and retail outlets.From its very inception Soviet Russia was state capitalist as private enterprises existed prior to the legalisation of private farmers in the form private retailers,artisans,restaurants etc in all sectors of the economy outside of the commanding heights.Private entrepreneurs were required to meet quotas and were allowed to supersede them as the more profits they made the more disposable income income they had to buy goods from state run enterprises.They were not however allowed to corner markets and sector that the state had secured in order to prevent imbalances in the economy.Despite having private businesses in its economy the government of Soviet Russia preferred the term enterprises rather than the terms corporation,business,company to distance itself from capitalism despite being state capitalist.Should any of them begin to flounder they were bailed out and they were guaranteed markets to the state and also to international markets in order to keep the running.The state to keep them running even would carry out legal procedures that would put them at a loss meaning the state would go into debt in order to keep private enterprises afloat with these guaranteed markets to the state and international markets would be ensured these enterprises always had consistent sales and were kept automatically afloat with goods purchased by the state from private enterprises sold on international markets at a profit to ensure the private sector would flourish with this also eliminating any debts the state incurred in order to bail out private enterprises.The produce especially food was bought by the state in significant amounts and often sold at a loss sometimes at a profit on international markets or given for free or lower price but mostly sold at a reasonable profit to the poor especially in periods of drought and food shortages.Whenever the private business were in danger of going bankrupt for any reason etc they were bailed out to keep them afloat.As a result a small number of key private corporations and private enterprises had formed monopolies in Soviet Russia similar modern day America whose survival was necessary to keep society and the economy functioning forever through what can be considered a form of cronyism and corruption with them having extreme power and influence on the state that rendered all small time businesses unable to compete.This system of guarenteed markets and bailouts is exactly the same as that carried out by the American government and similar modern day state capitalist societies.If Lenin and Stalin did carry out a communist or socialist revolution then it was an absolute failure in every sense of the word.Please explain this fact how can a country be considered socialist or communist when the state exists,when private enterprises exists,when the amount of private enterprises and its control of the economy increases under their administrations and when the state encourages and props up the formation and development of private enterprises,guarantees them markets and profits and bails them out in order to ensure they stay afloat?If they are communist or socialist then American under the rule of the corporate Democrats,Republicans and both Bush,Obama and Trump administrations are communist and socialist.This system of keeping private enterprises afloat through guarenteed markets from the government and bailouts for private industries by the government to keep them afloat is the exact opposite of both communism and socialism both the real definitions or bullshit definitions because the real definitions of socialism and communism cannot allow private industries to exist in the first place and the bullshit definitions of communism and socialism involve the state quashing out,going out of its way to shut down and eliminate private industries therefore there is no possible way for Soviet Russia to have been either communist or socialist they had to be capitalism namely state capitalism.Therefore all deaths,corruption,censorship and human rights abuses under Stalin and Lenin are attributed to capitalism.Private farmers were particularly initiated and kept afloat because they were needed to feed primarily the rural communities who were most at risk of starvation in the case of famines.Cooperatives did exist but they did not consist of a large or substantial percentage of the economy.The economy of the Soviet Union was divided into for different types of enterprises;privately owned enterprises,collective owned,state run enterprises and mixed enterprises.Private enterprises were divided into those run by private individuals and family run enterprises.Those based on collectivised property includes collective enterprises,consumer cooperatives,production cooperatives,partnerships,jointly-stock enterprises,enterprises of public or religious organizations.Those that were state run were union state enterprises,republican state enterprises,communal state enterprises with mixed enterprises in the form of mixed and rental enterprises.The New Economic Policy (NEP) was an economic policy of the Soviet Union proposed by Vladimir Lenin in 1921 as a temporary expedient.Lenin characterized the NEP in 1922 as an economic system that would include “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control,” while socialized state enterprises would operate on “a profit basis.”The NEP represented a more market-oriented economic policy (deemed necessary after the Russian Civil War of 1918 to 1922) to foster the economy of the country, which had suffered severely since 1915.The Soviet authorities partially revoked the complete nationalization of industry (established during the period of War Communism of 1918 to 1921) and introduced a system of mixed economy which allowed private individuals to own small enterprises such as private farms/retail outlets/restaurants etc while the state continued to control banks,foreign trade,and large industries.In addition,the NEP abolished prodrazvyorstka (forced grain-requisition)and introduced prodnalog:a tax on farmers, payable in the form of raw agricultural product.The Bolshevik government adopted the NEP in the course of the 10th Congress of the All-Russian Communist Party (March 1921) and promulgated it by a decree on 21 March 1921:”On the Replacement of Prodrazvyorstka by Prodnalog”.Further decrees refined the policy.Other policies included monetary reform (1922–1924) and the attraction of foreign capital.The NEP created a new category of people called NEPmen.Joseph Stalin abandoned the NEP in 1928 with the Great Break.The NEP was primarily a new agricultural policy.The Bolsheviks viewed traditional village life as conservative and backward. With the NEP, the state only allowed private landholdings because the idea of collectivized farming had met strong opposition.Lenin understood that economic conditions were dire, so he opened up markets to a greater degree of free trade, hoping to motivate the population to increase production. Under the NEP, not only were “private property, private enterprise, and private profit largely restored in Lenin’s Russia,” but Lenin’s regime turned to international capitalism for assistance, willing to provide “generous concessions to foreign capitalism.” Lenin took the position that in order to achieve socialism, he had to create “the missing material prerequisites” of modernization and industrial development that made it imperative for Soviet Russia to “fall back on a centrally supervised market-influenced program of state capitalism”. Lenin was following Karl Marx precepts that a nation must first reach “full maturation of capitalism as the precondition for socialist realization.” Future years would use the term Marxism–Leninism to describe Lenin’s approach to economic policies which were seen to favor policies that moved the country toward communism.The main policy Lenin used was an end to grain requisitions and instead instituted a tax on the peasants, thereby allowing them to keep and trade part of their produce. At first, this tax was paid in kind, but as the currency became more stable in 1924, it was changed to a cash payment.This increased the peasants’ incentive to produce, and in response production jumped by 40% after the drought and famine of 1921–1922.The NEP encountered strong resistance within the Bolshevik party. NEP economic reforms aimed to take a step back from central planning and allow the economy to become more independent. NEP labor reforms tied labor to productivity, incentivizing the reduction of costs and the redoubled efforts of labor.Labor unions became independent civic organizations.NEP reforms also opened up government positions to the most qualified workers.The NEP gave opportunities for the government to use engineers, specialists, and intelligentsia for cost accounting, equipment purchasing, efficiency procedures, railway construction, and industrial administration.A new class of “NEPmen” thrived.These private traders opened up urban firms hiring up to 20 workers. NEPmen also included rural artisan craftsmen selling their wares on the private market. the early Soviet Union who took advantage of the opportunities for private trade and small-scale manufacturing manufacturing provided under the The New Economic Policy(NEP, 1921-1928).The famine of 1921-1922 epitomized the adverse effects of War Communism and to mitigate those effects,Vladimir Lenin instituted the NEP, which encouraged private buying and selling, with people even being encouraged to “enrich yourselves”, as one Boshevik leader,Nikolai Bukharin put it.However, many Bolsheviks saw the policy as “a step backwards”. That included Lenin himself, who defended the measure as “taking one step backward to take two steps forward later on”.When the NEP was introduced by Lenin in 1921, many NEPmen took advantage of the chance to establish themselves in Soviet society. Lenin’s plan was to use the NEP as a temporary measure to rebuild the devastated Soviet economy. The NEPmen’s role in the new economic climate was to help spread trade to the parts of the country the government could not reach.In fact, in 1922 the NEPmen accounted for almost 75% of the Soviet Unions retail trade.However, not everyone in the country was happy about the NEP and the emergence of NEPmen. Many Bolsheviks saw the NEPmen as competition and feared that they would end up in positions of power, turning the Soviet Union into a capitalist nation.Lenin was highly criticized by his party members for the NEP because it was essentially capitalism controlled by the state. The disapproval of the NEP by many members of society greatly affected a NEPman’s quality of life. They were closely scrutinized and heavily taxed, and their right to vote was revoked. Lenin combated this slander and disapproval by asserting that the NEP was just a temporary measure required to repair the Soviet’s crumbling economy.He also pointed out that the NEPmen were helping the economy because they could be heavily taxed, providing more revenue for the state. The increase in revenue would aid the government in securing its plans for a socialist society, while also strengthening the economy. In the eyes of those who supported the policy, NEPmen were nothing more than a stepping stone, providing stability for the creation of the Soviet socialist state in that era. However, by the time of Lenin’s death in 1924, the NEPmen were being phased out of society to make room for socialist values, and during the Stalin era, NEPman became a dying breed.In 1922, Lenin had his second stroke, which affected his ability to lead.Before his death in 1924, an obvious power struggle between Stalin and Leon Trotsky had begun.Given the instability in Russian leadership, NEPmen gained a small window of opportunity. After a dramatic drop in sales directly from state industry to NEPmen (14.7% to 2.1%) in 1924, the Soviet economy once again relied heavily on NEPmen for stabilization. Decrees in 1925 and 1926 reduced taxes, state loans were no longer mandatory, and employee penalties were alleviated (i.e., lower number of employees, lower taxes).Although NEPmen enjoyed a more hospitable economic and social environment, it did not indicate that they were universally accepted, but rather tolerated. Stalin frequently expressed his disdain for the NEP and NEPmen. It was public knowledge that he was frustrated with members within the Communist Party who supported the policy.Through a series of tactical political moves, Stalin began to solidify his power. By October 1927, Zinoviev and Trotsky, Stalin’s main opposition, had been removed from the Central Committee and could no longer threaten Stalin.As a result, Stalin gained the maneuverability to propose a new economic strategy, and the freedom to develop means of eliminating private entrepreneurship. In 1928, Stalin reignited the attitudes of the October Revolution era, and aggressively propagated anti-NEPmen propaganda.In the same year, the NEP was replaced by Stalin’s Five Year Plan suggesting that NEPmen would also be replaced. However, some scholars argue that a modified version of NEPmen existed well into the 1930s well after the death of Stalin.Nonetheless, with Stalin’s increasingly unlimited power, tensions escalated, and force became an acceptable means of removing the wealthier class or the “enemy of the people”.These NEPmen that were set up by the state including by Lenin himself were by all technical legal definitions private entrepreneurs and businessmen who partook in private commerce but not only buying goods from private farms and other private enterprises to ensure the economic stability of the country and private farmers which is not allowed in ether communism and socialism either the bullshit or real definition.Lenin had to persuade communist skeptics that “state capitalism” was a necessary step in achieving communism as private enterprises were needed to develop the economy while he himself harbored suspicions that the policy could be abused by private businessmen in Soviet Russia during his administration.So you see Lenin himself saw and labelled Soviet Russia as state capitalism not either communism or socialism by his very own words and thus believed that private enterprises were necessary to the economy when regulated to pick up the slack and develop sectors where it was necessary then Soviet Russia was not a communist or socialist state it was a state capitalist state.How can a country be considered communist and socialist when its leader admits by his own words that it was state capitalist,it needed to be state capitalist and not communist or socialist?Although a large amount of farms were state owned this only applied to large collectivised state capitalist farms with farming businesses also allowed to exist alongside them.In Soviet Russia each citizen was by law allowed to have their own private plot of land for private food production which the government in legal definitions treated as private farms where they were allowed to grow food for themselves and sell them on farmer markets and to neighbours etc for profit to prevent complete famine,increase productivity and allow for private individuals to increase disposable income to buy manufactured goods and crops from state owned farms and enterprises.The household plot is primarily cultivated for subsistence and its traditional purpose since the Soviet times has been to provide the family with food.Surplus products from the household plot were sold to neighbors,relatives,and often also in farmer markets in nearby towns for a private which thus by legal terms was considered private enterprises.Thus most agriculture was state run agriculture where the profits went directly to the state and workers were paid a flat wage while each citizen was allowed their own privately owned land on the same land of their home to grow food for themselves and sell for profits which went to them and not the state.They were allowed if not encouraged to grow their own food and sell it for profit as private entrepreneurship to increase disposable income in order to allow them to buy more goods from state run enterprises with the state having no interest in them making a profit with the government aiding in this by guaranteeing markets by buying some of the produce of private farmers and then selling it off to international markets and in some local markets to keep private farmers afloat and them bailed out when they went into trouble with this applied to other private enterprises.Although these private household farms existed before the October Revolution in Czarist Russia the government in the form of Lenin to increase productivity set up laws to not only encourage farmers to set up household plots or maintain them but also in some areas make it mandatory that these existed in order to increase disposable income of farmers and prevent outright famine.Thus laws were set up by Vladimir Lenin that made it mandatory for all citizens especially those living in rural areas to set up private farms that were to act as private business where they grew food to prevent famines and also be sold for profit.After the New Economic Policy was instituted,agricultural production increased greatly not only in household plots but also collectivised and state run farms.In order to stimulate economic growth,farmers were given the opportunity to sell portions of their crops to the government in exchange for monetary compensation.Farmers now had the option to sell some of their produce,giving them a personal economic incentive to produce more grain.This incentive,coupled with the breakup of the quasi-feudal landed estates,surpassed pre-Revolution agricultural production.This revolution in private farms thus led to huge increases in food production never before seen in Russia and was thus emcouraged to lower the death tolls of famines.The agricultural sector became increasingly reliant on small family farms,while heavy industries,banks,and financial institutions remained owned and run by the state.This created an imbalance in the economy where the agricultural sector was growing much faster than heavy industry.To maintain their income,factories raised prices.Due to the rising cost of manufactured goods,peasants had to produce much more wheat to buy these consumer goods,which increased supply and thus lowered the price of these agricultural products.This fall in prices of agricultural goods and sharp rise in prices of industrial products was known as the Scissors Crisis (due to the crossing of graphs of the prices of the two types of product).Peasants began withholding their surpluses in wait for higher prices,or sold them to “NEPmen” (traders and middle-men) who re-sold them at high prices.Many Communist Party members considered this an exploitation of urban consumers.To lower the price of consumer goods,the state took measures to decrease inflation and enact reforms on the internal practices of the factories.Private farmers through the NEPmen were also able to sell their produce to the government for extra disposable income who themselves ate them or sold them to the public or exported them with this done to ensure that they would survive any imbalance in the economy with them at times even bailed out during this and other crises.This is similar to how the government bought produce etc from private farmers and merchants in Maoist China and how the American government buys contracts and provides lucrative markets to private companies in the form of the military industrial complex,big oil and big pharms.Thus the state provided guaranteed markets to the farmers by buying crops and other goods for them and if needed be bailed them out to make sure they stayed afloat.These goods were sold on international markets sometimes with this done to ensure that they increased productivity and under a promised agreement that the private farmers etc and their employees would use the extra disposable income they gained from profits to buy extra produce from state run enterprises in a mutually beneficial relationship.The government also fixed prices,in an attempt to halt the scissor effect.The household plot was the only form of private or family farming allowed during the Soviet era,when household plots of rural people coexisted in a symbiotic relationship with large collective and state run farms.Since 1990,the household plots are classified as one of the two components of the individual farm sector,the other being peasant farms – independent family farms established for commercial production on much larger areas of agricultural land,typically 10 to 50 ha (25 to 124 acres).In terms of legal organization,household plots are natural (physical) persons,whereas peasant farms generally are legal (juridical) persons.In Czarist Russia,the plot was usually adjacent to the peasant’s house.Here the peasants traditionally grew vegetables,hemp (a source of oil and livestock feed) and a little fruit.Gardens varied in size;they could be as much as a hectare (2½ acres), but most were smaller.The plot was normally in the hereditary tenure of the household, and not subject to repartition(unlike the peasants’ holdings in the open fields).In the later 19th century the growth of towns and cities in central Russia encouraged the development of market gardening and truck farming in this region.By the eve of the Revolution the garden economy was developing quickly.A further stimulus was provided in the first years of the Revolution by the Bolshevik policy of requisitioning peasant produce.Fruit and vegetables were exempt from this policy,and this resulted in a strong swing from grain farming to kitchen and market gardening.In the grain-producing regions (Black-Earth belt and North Caucasia) the garden economy increased its share of peasant commodity production from 3.3% in 1913 to 12.2% in 1920,while the state run field economy declined from 62.6% to 39.3% in the same period.Market gardening continued to develop during the 1920s.The mass collectivization decree of January 1930 made no mention of garden plots,and in many areas the local government authorities abolished them.But in March 1930,after the chaos and peasant resistance engendered by the all-out drive,the right of the peasant to have a personal plot was recognised.No maximum size was agreed at this stage,however,and the garden plot remained in a legislative limbo until the kolkhoz model charter of February 1935.This charter specified that plots could vary from 0.25 to 0.5 ha (0.62 to 1.24 acres), and up to 1 ha (2.5 acres) in special districts.The legislation regarded individual peasants as the holders but in practice plots were still in household tenure.The private plots were responsible for a significant fraction of agricultural production,and provided the peasants with a large part of their food and income.In 1938 they accounted for 12.5% of agricultural produce.The average peasant household earned about twice as much from marketings from the private plot as from its work on collective land.By the late 1930s market gardening,with the private plot as its base,was perhaps becoming the dominant part of agriculture in the Black-Sea hinterland and the truck-gardening areas around big cities like Moscow and Leningrad.Fearing that this would eat into their profits the government,alarmed by this resurgence of private capitalism,passed legislation to contain it in 1939,but it continued to play an important role in agriculture right up until the end of the Cold War in 1989 well after the deaths of Stalin and Lenin etc.Even though the NEPmen were abolished in 1931 under Stalin people still were allowed to sell produce from home farms on commercial markets for profit as private businesses well after 1990 after the Fall of the Berlin Wall.Other private businesses existed well after the dissolution of the NEPmen outside of the household plot.The household plots are still present in Russia after the NEP men were shut down and continue to have a significant percentage control of the Russian economy and agricultural sector.The purpose of the household farms started in the Czarist era was to ensure that each home could become self sufficient and feed itself should a drought or bad weather occur or if those managed by the monarchs at the time were not enough and during Lenin’s adminstration it was supported by bailouts and guaranteed markets with him also setting up new private farms to increase productivity in order to balance the economy.The NEPmen were extra private business that were set up by the state in order to keep other private enterprises especially these private farms afloat outside of the government so that the government although providing guaranteed markets was not the only individuals that people could sell their surplus to thus would alleviate economic strains on the state and allow for their to be a second group of private individuals who were private businesses to keep these private farmers afloat in order to ensure they stayed afloat while at the same time ensure that the state would not be the only buyer of agricultural produce thus saving the state money thus the more NEPmen they were the more they could provide guarantee markets to private farmers etc and the more new money they created from scratch and thus this allowed the state to save the money it would otherwise spend in private farmers to be spent on infrastructure etc.The state set up the NEPmen that we’re private businessmen so that the NEPmen could provide guaranteed markets to other private businesses especially private farms through new money created from scratch that would also be added to the economy and the state would no longer have to do this and the money the state normally spent on this could be spent on infrastructure etc.These NEPmen were thus by all legal definitions private enterprises who bought goods from existing private enterprises and them sold them to other private enterprises and private individuals at sometimes lower or higher prices of to international markets thus acting as a middle man.Thus the state by setting up NEPmen could use money it didn’t spend on guaranteed markets for private businesses to pay more for infrastructure and social programmes and ensure private enterprises had other guarenteed markets and thus through state control gateway control theory could create new money from scratch to add to the economy that would end up in the hands of the state treasury.After the October Revolution these private farms in homes were propped in more homes by Lenin and Stalin in order to prevent famine.Stalin did eliminate the NEPmen by 1931 but private farmers and markets for them where they made profits remained until the very end of Soviet Russia with them continuously making profits of them during the entirety of Soviet Russia.These private farmers that were by all legal definitions capitalist enterprises still sold surplus on markets to other citizens outside of the NEPmen on private markets including illegal black markets to make a profit.Stalin despite his wishes to fully eliminate capitalism from Soviet Russia knew that it was impossible to eliminate private farmers and other private enterprise as it would been economic and literal suicide.So as a result capitalist enterprises in the form of private farmers and other private businesses lasted up throughout the Stalin era and throughout the rest of the entirety of Soviet Russia.Other private enterprises such as restaurants,retail,artisans,shoemakers,dressmakers etc existed right throughout the Lenin,Stalin adminstration and afternoon them right up until the fall of the Berlin Wall.Put simply the use of private land and property to allow individuals make a profit through private farms was so successful that even the government that allowed in the first place began to crack down on it as it was afraid that their state capitalist monopoly would be overthrown by a capitalist revolution involving not just farmers but also others wanting to start private capitalist enterprises in the “commanding heights” and all areas of the economy that the state had a monopoly in.It is true that under Stalin he wanted to collectivise all agriculture the main reasons for famines that occurred during his and Lenin’s were each caused by a collection of different factors mainly bad weather such as droughts,the effect of fighting against the Nazis and the western powers and also corruption within the government but this had more to do with their allocation of crops produced to the rural areas and urban areas as well as exporting with the fact that farms were collectivised had nothing to do with the famines.In fact some famines were even caused by greedy private landowners and farmers themselves who refused to hand over their grain to be sold and distributed to the masses purposefully hoarding grain in their sheds and homes and also killing livestock early before they were mature enough to create milk and enough meat to feed people or just didn’t slaughter them at all to prevent the state gaining control of their farms through crackdowns caused by farmers becoming too wealthy and greedy and in protest against the state not allowing other areas of the economy to be privatised which led to food scarcity leading to deaths that could therefore be not attributed to the either the state and Stalin and thus attributed to capitalists.Even though the crops etc from private farms was more than enough to feed those in rural areas to keep them well fed thus preventing food shortages and famine and the farmers were wealthy enough to be brought out of poverty and support the economy well enough by buying produce from state owned enterprises the private farmers got greedy and wanted to expand selling produce into urban areas which would have not only eaten into the states profits but also created further imbalances in the economy similar to the Scissor Crises thus throwing the entire economy into chaos affecting all sectors of the economy including agriculture itself causing hyperinflation and boom and bust cycles that would led to those becoming poor and also mass starvation meaning the state has to intervene as it would have put the entire economy including that of the agricultural sector into chaos.Other private farmers purposefully hijacked collectivised farms by slaughtering the horses they needed to plough fields thus leading to famines.Any crackdowns on private farms that were done on private farms were done primarily to greedy private farmers who wanted to expand into territories that were under the jurisdiction of the state that would eat into its profits and also create imbalances in the economy such as boom and bust cycles similar to the Scissor Crisis – thus the state had to crackdown or else it could cause boom and bust cycles and thus lead to mass starvation.Thus some famines were attributed not only to bad weather out of the control of the state but also due to greedy capitalist farmers.After Stalin had fully collectivised farming in most of the country agricultural productivity increased with areas that private farming was still allowed and flourished were the least hardest hit from where famines were their worst due to the utilisation of private farms with the private farms and household plots allowed to thrive to negate the worst effects of famines particularly in case of shortcomings and corruption in the government.Even though some private household farms did fail due to poor weather etc others did not and thus we’re able to keep people alive by neighbours who created surplus selling them to them through at often times illegal black markets for profit.People through selling surplus crops were thus able to save enough money to them buy crops from neighbours and state run farms when their own crops failed.That is why these farms were propped up and maintained by Lenin,Stalin and all succeeding administrations in Soviet Russia and why every homeowner in rural areas were required by law to have private farms.If one persons private farms crops failed for whatever reason then there was still other people’s farms that would not have failed and thus they could sell surplus.These private farms run by private individuals in Soviet Russia were by all legal definitions private enterprises as the farmers were able to choose what crops and livestock to grow and rear and were allowed to sell them to anyone they wanted to gain profits and earn extra disposable income that they were allowed to keep themselves with the land used to grow them being private property that they owned that was on the land of their homes.Other private enterprises existed in the form of artisans,restaurants and retail etc.Even though the government stated that private business were illegal you could exist as a de-facto private business – a shoemaker, a knife-sharpener, empty alcohol bottles collector, a woman making bespoke suits at home.They were allowed to generate profits and employ only themselves and not others – a person could set up a private enterprise and sell goods and services for a profit kept for themselves but they were not allowed to hire anyone to do the work as this was seen as exploitation and was meant to keep them handicapped that is all work and labour was to be done by the actual entrepreneur themselves and not hired staff that was the illegal and were kept to the side to pick up the slack.In some cases they were allowed to hire family members to help out but that was as far as it went.The benefit was that at least the entrepreneur themselves were allowed to keep 100% of the profits.Loopholes could exist wherein the private business could hire only members of ones family in family run private businesses as labour as it was allowed due to it being a collaborative effort within a family and that technically work done by members of families was not exploitation as it was run by the family collectively and handed down from one generation to the next.All of these private farms in Soviet Russia and other businesses such as the NEPmen and also shoemakers etc were by all legal definitions private enterprises as private individuals reared crops and livestock and provided goods and services of their choice and then sold them for profits that they kept for themselves which increased their disposable income.These were by all legal definition private enterprises which is not allowed in either communism or socialism either the real or bullshit definition.The government both Lenin and Stalin propped these private farm business up and kept them afloat by bailouts and guaranteed markets which again cannot occur in either socialism and communism both the bullshit or proper definition it can only occur within state capitalism.Other private businesses existed such as private restaurants,retailers etc.Soviet Russia cannot be considered socialist or communist since not all of the sectors of society were run for profit by the state that had centralised planning of the economy as their were private industries that were run for profit which is not how socialism or communism works.This is by definition private enterprises which is not allowed in either communism or socialism either the real or bullshit definition.The government propped these private business up and kept them afloat by bailouts and guaranteed markets which again cannot occur in either socialism and communism both the bullshit or proper definition it can only occur within state capitalism.Simply put even though the vast majority of large farms were collectivised state run farms at the same private farms were allowed to function in order to prevent starvation should another drought induced famine occur under Stalin as he although he favoured collectivising all farms he wanted to keep in these private farms running as this increased productivity and thus allowed private farms to function to ensure food security should another famine occur.The state run collectivised farms were used to feed mainly the urbanised areas such as cities thus leaving the rural communities prone to starvation especially should poor weather occur as they were left with very little due to the imbalances in population density with rural areas surviving on scraps of these and primarily on crops reared in private plots of land thus the majority of food eaten by those in rural areas was from private farms.The urban centres got the most food because they were more densly populated than rural areas and thus rural areas were left with scraps and thus were more prone to famines and thus required private farms.Famines and food shortages that occurred were due to not just the weather but also the population demographics and the need to keep the urban areas fed as they were involved in the most important and labour intensive work for the state and private sectors of the economy.Thus were was a tendency to have the majority of not all food produced on state run farms sent to urban centres.State run farms were feeding urban centres while this left the rural areas with nothing so as a result private farms were set up and maintained through guaranteed markets and bailouts to feed rural areas as they were the most prone to famine due to state run farms feeding urban areas with this because those living urban areas worked the important and labour intensive jobs such as construction,banking and in factories and so they were kept fed using the large yields from state run farms and in the time of crop losses caused by bad weather were compensated by private farmers allowed to sell surplus in markets within large cities with them alongside this feeding rural towns and villages.The private farmers were set up and kept afloat to feed primarily rural areas and feed cities when bad weather affected crop yields.Keeping private farming and other private business afloat by providing guaranteed markets and bailouts etc even though they ate into the states profits was pivotal in keeping the economy thriving but also preventing famines occurring and even if they did occur at least lessening the intensity of them.Thus state run farms fed densely populated urban areas while private farms fed rural communities to prevent famines.Food shortages did occur throughout the later half of the Soviet Union after 1947 but through the utilisation of private farms,guaranteed marksts and bailouts that there intensity were significantly lower and less severe in the rural communities which were prone to being affected the most and this did prevented them from descending into famines this is because private farmers were in charge of feeding primarily the rural communities as opposed to the urban centres.These food shortages in the later half of the Soviet Union were always due to the weather which was outside of the governments control alongside greedy private farmers creating artificial scarcity by slaughtering animals early and the state went out of its way to prevent them through importing food from other countries and allowing private farms to flourish.Had the economy been completely deregulated then boom and bust cycles would have caused havoc and lead to skyrocketing food prices with regards to the price of grain meaning the economy had to regulated to the extent that it was.Had private farming being abolished then the economic growth would have been lower and the death toll from the famines been much higher.As a result both Lenin and Stalin did whatever it took to ensure that private industries and especially farming and the NEPmen was retained with them likely only deriding them in person as to look like ”socialists and communists” as it ensured economic and social stability and thus went out of their way to preserve private businesses but keep them tightly regulated.This is why even though they said in person they would crack down on them they never really did actually carry out any real crackdowns.Even Stalin who was more authoritarian than Lenin and wanted complete state control of the economy who even shut down the NEPmen kept private farms afloat because they were necessary in preventing famines or lessening them.They were given bailouts if they fell into economic trouble and guaranteed markets to ensure they stayed afloat as if they went bankrupt,out of business then the economy would have crashed and people would have died due to starvation.Shutting down all private industries would have been economic and political suicide as it would have led to much higher death tolls in future harsher famines and less economic growth than there was.Yes there were food shortages and even famines after the the worst initial ones of the early years of the Soviet Union but the death toll were substantially lower and would have been much higher and economic growth would have been stagnant had the private farms been completely discarded.These food shortages and famines had almost always had to do with the climate of Soviet Russia,pests and other geopolitical and environmental factors outside of the states control.Initial famines were caused by mismanagement,corruption and poor weather before the legalisation of private farmers with private farmers legalised in order to prevent any future famines or alleviate their intensity and increase productivity and feed rural populations that were the worst at risk of them.Like Mao both Lenin and Stalin realised that to prevent future famines private farmers needed to be supported and even propped up by the state and were necessary to prevrmt future famines.The last famine in Russia actually occurred in 1947 under the Stalin as a cumulative effect of consequences of failed collectivised farming brought on by private farmers comprising them,war damage and the severe drought.Most famines and food shortages that did occur were caused by poor weather that was beyond the control of the state and would have occurred in a free market system with the existence of private farmers ensured that any death tolls that occurred were substantially lower than if they did not exist meaning private farmers ensured that death tolls of succeeding famines were low especially in the rural areas with other famines even caused by private capitalist farmers purposely witholding grain and slaughtering animals earlier than normal in protest against the government thus creating artificial food scarcity that was thus caused by capitalism and not socialism and communism.Had private farmers not existed then the death tolls of famines would have been in the tens of millions each year rather than a few thousand or few hundred thus the state went out of its way to ensure they stayed afloat through bailouts and guarenteed markets alongside importing food.Thus private enterprises especially private farmers were allowed to flourish in order to lower the severity of any famines that did occur with them used to feed primarily rural communities that are the most prone to famines due to the collectivised farms feeding urban centres.Thus the existence of private farmers was thus allowed and encouraged and ensured through guarenteed markets and bailouts to prevent severe death tolls during famines.Private business were encouraged to flourish but were regulated to prevent them getting too powerful.Furthermore they needed private farmers and businessmen to sell more products in order to earn more disposable income for themselves and their workers to buy more products from state owned enterprises to stimulate the economy.Thus the state had to go out of its way to keep private farms and businesses running and existing in the first place by encouraging them to be set up but regulated them to prevent them getting too big and powerful that they would become a threat to the state run business.Private enterprises were allowed to flourish in Leninist and Stalinist Russia and in particular adminstrations under Khrushchev and other succeeding administrations because they were key to the growth of the economy and preventing famines just like Maoist China and were key to developing the economy.Shutting down all private enterprises would have both economic and political suicide and would have led to further deaths from famines with them bailed out when they were in trouble and they were given guaranteed markets to ensure economic survival and that they stayed afloat at all times.This was because private enterprises were key to ensuring economic growth and prevent famines in Soviet Russia from start to finish.Lenins communist and socialist revolution was a failure because he purposefully set up the NEPmen,private farms and other private businessmen and Stalins revolution was a failure because he although shut down the NEPmen he allowed private farms and other enterprises to flourish.The fact that the NEPmen existed under Lenin and Stalin abolished them after Lenin died showed that Lenin’s administration west not communist or socialist and the fact that Stalin was attempting to carry out a purge in the remaining capitalist enterprises after he and Lenin were in power for 36 years shows that the “communist” and “socialist “ revolution of both Lenin and Stalin were in fact failures because after 36 years in power capitalist enterprises still existed – if they were successful then capitalism would have been purged within the first few years.They had 36 years wherein they were in control of the economy,society and media with unrestricted power to eliminate all capitalist enterprises with a whims notice and yet they did not do that and the fact that Stalin had to carry out a final purge on capitalism at the end of his life like Mao after he and Lenin were in power for 36 years in the first place shows that their “communist” and “socialist” revolutions were a failure in every successive administrations revolutions were failures as private enterprises continued to flourish through the remaining years of the Soviet Union.The fact that the whole purpose of the final purge of capitalism that lasted during the last ten years of Stalins life which was unsuccessful was to eliminate the very last vestiges of capitalism including private businesses from Soviet Russia thus means that during the entire 36 years of both Lenin’s and Stalins reign wherein they had complete control of all of society such as the media,government and economy private enterprises existed because they were set up by him in the first place and let flourish in order to pick up the slack and also create new money from scratch that was to be added to the economy and then through state control gateway theory was needed to fund the state owned businesses etc.Therefore using actual logic Soviet Russia was neither socialist or communist it was state capitalist since by using actual logic because private enterprises lasted during the entirety of Lenin and Stalins entire 36 years in power and required the final purge of capitalism shows that there country was not socialist if communist.Think about this we both liberals and conservatives and libertarians go on about how the government has control over the media etc and infringing in people rights yet the constitution prevents the state gaining complete control but in Soviet Russia the constitution did not exist and other safeguards did not exist.Lenin and Stalin has complete unrestricted control of the economy and society for 36 years without constitutional safeguards and yet after 36 years private enterprises still existed enough so to warrant the final purge which was the states final purge of capitalist enterprises therefore Soviet Russia was neither socialist or communist it was state capitalist.Both Stalin and Lenin are seen as the poster children for the entirety of the state capitalist Russia but in reality once they both died Nikita Khrushchev began to undo all of their most horrible human rights abuses with for example all citizens imprisoned in the gulags were released and the powers of the KGB laxed significantly.By the end of 1955,thousands of political prisoners had returned home and told their experiences of the Gulag labour camps.Continuing investigation into the abuses brought home the full breadth of Stalin’s crimes to his successors.The vast majority of Russian politicians demonised both Stalin and Lenin for the savages that they well and truly were with Khruschev etc painting them a national shame and stain on the history of Russia.Khrushchev believed that once the stain of Stalinism was removed, the Party would inspire loyalty among the people.Beginning in October 1955, Khrushchev fought to tell the delegates to the upcoming 20th Party Congress Stalin’s crimes.Some of his colleagues,including Molotov and Malenkov,opposed the disclosure and managed to persuade him to make his remarks in a closed session.Both Stalin and Lenin were considered national embarrassments and shames by all successive adminstrations and efforts were made to undo all of their crimes and power with Khrushchev spearheading the destalinisation of Russia.The level of political and economic freedom Soviet citizens had after Stalin’s death waxed and waned in each adminstrations it was certainly better than under Stalin with Khrushchev being the best who made geniune efforts to increase agricultural output by investing heavily in research in both mechanisation and also varieties of seed that actually did increase yields over the coming adminstrations with him sending researchers to Europe and the rest of the world to reverse engineer machinery to improve crop yields and investigate new seed varieties and fertiliser etc to improve yields such as more drought resistant varieties having learned from the famines of the Lenin and Stalin years.Any food shortages and thus food and bread lines that did occur in post Stalin Russia were always the results of drought and again greedy private farmers that was beyond the control of the government that could easily have occurred in a less regulated capitalist country with the state always doing everything it could to lessen them such as importing grain from other countries even at a loss with private farmers also allowed to continue to alleviate shortages – had private farmers been eliminated its likely that these food shortages would have led to famine and mass death by starvation hence why although the state made efforts to eliminate or stunt the growth of private farmers in 1939 they were still needed especially during and after the Khrushchev administration until the fall of the Berlin Wall and is it prevented the country falling in to the same famine experience by Maoist China and to an extent Leninist and Stalinist Russia.Private farmers is what prevented post Stalinist Russia from collapsing into famine alongside the intensive agricultural research spearheaded by Khrushchev with Khrushchev learning this from the adoptions of private farmers from Mao Zedong and from Lenin and Stalin.The interrelationships between Maoist China and Soviet Russia can be seen in their intensive research into agricultural research to prevent more famines and learning from each other’s mistakes to prevent famines,civil unrest and keep private enterprises under tight regulation.Government planning,intervention,programmes in Soviet Russia is what prevent famines.The Koysigen Reforms of 1965 and Food Programme in 1982 which increased grain productivity after shortfalls that were caused by droughts and other climatic factors.It also possible that the policies of Leonid Brezhnev whose administration was marked by rapidly growing technological gaps from the west ,corruption inefficiency,economic stagnation played a factor.So you see government intervention is what actually increased agricultural productivity in 1965 and 1982.The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and thus adoption of a deregulated capitalist economy by Boris Yeltsin allowing for the adoption of a completely deregulated free market economy with little or no government planning led to a decade long exponentional decrease in food production and a decade long decrease in the Russia economy GDP and exponential increase in hyperinflation with it only due to state intervention in the early 2000s that grain production and the economy began to exponentially increase again.Yeltsin transformed Russia’s command economy into a capitalist market economy by implementing economic shock therapy,market exchange of the rubble,nationwide privatisation and lifting of price controls.Economic volatility and inflation ensued.Amid the economic shift, a small number of oligarchs obtained a majority of the national property and wealth,while international monopolies came to dominate the market.As a direct result grain production dropped sharply and exponentially thus leading to food shortages.Corrupt and haphazard privatisation processes turned over major state-owned firms to politically connected “oligarchs”which has left equity ownership highly concentrated.Yeltsin’s program of radical, market-oriented reform came to be known as a “shock therapy” It was based on the policies associated with the Washington Consensus recommendations of the IMF and a group of top American economists, including Larry Summers.With deep corruption afflicting the process, the result was disastrous, with real GDP falling by more than 40% by 1999,hyperinflation which wiped out personal savings, crime and destitution spreading rapidly.The jump in prices from shock therapy wiped out the modest savings accumulated by low to middle class Russians under socialism and resulted in a regressive redistribution of wealth in favor of elites who owned non-monetary assets.Shock therapy was accompanied by a drop in the standard of living, including surging economic inequality and poverty,along with increased excess mortality and a decline in life expectancy.Russia suffered the largest peacetime rise in mortality ever experienced by an industrialized country.Likewise, the consumption of meat decreased: in 1990, an average citizen of the RSFSR consumed 63 kg of meat a year; by 1999, it had decreased to 45 kg.The majority of state enterprises were privatized amid great controversy and subsequently came to be owned by insiders for far less than they were worth.For example, the director of a factory during the Soviet regime would often become the owner of the same enterprise.Under the government’s cover, outrageous financial manipulations were performed that enriched a narrow group of individuals at key positions of business and government.Many of them promptly invested their newfound wealth abroad,producing an enormous capital flight.This rapid privatisation of public assets, and the widespread corruption associated with it, became widely known throughout Russia as “prikhvatizatisiya,” or “grab-itization.”This is where poor of middle class people lost all of assets and rich wealthy people stole it from them making them obscenely wealthy and leaving everyone else poor.They invested money they stole from the poor abroad and them became multi-billionaire.Following the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991 and massive deregulation and massive privatisation caused by Boris Yeltsin both large collective and state farms – the backbone of Soviet Agriculture – had to contend with the sudden loss of state-guaranteed marketing and supply channels and a changing legal environment that created pressure for reorganization and restructuring.In less than ten years,livestock,inventories declined by half, pulling down demand for feed grains, and the area planted to grains dropped by 25%.The use of mineral fertiliser and other purchased inputs plummeted, driving yields down.Most farms could no longer afford to purchase new machinery and other capital investments.This led to an exponentional decrease in agricultural output across the country and led to massive food shortages and bread lines that in the fact the worst in the countries history especially for a country that has had to deal with famine and food shortages due to drought etc with experts claiming the the county was on the verge of famine.The sharp decline in GDP,hyperinflation and food shortages leading to bread lines where people were lining up in long queues for food in post-Soviet Russia in levels that had never been seen since the last famine in 1947 and were caused solely by Boris Yeltsin deregulating the country to fully embrace deregulated capitalism especially unregulated free market capitalism when there were no corresponding droughts that caused these effects is clear enough evidence that Russia cannot operatee a completely unregulated,un planned free market economy – it needs government regulation and command or even planned economies to prevent hyperinflation,boom and bust cycles and ensure stable food prices and prevent famines and food shortages and more imports increased in poverty.It also needs the government’s state capitalist guaranteed markets to ensure the economic survival of private,collective and state run farms.The country that had eliminated famines for the first time in 1947 was again due to deregulation of the economy on the verge famines having more to do with hyperinflation caused by deregulation than drought.This is clear evidence that some countries just cannot have deregulated economy they need either command or planned economies.Complete deregulation with zero reorganisation of the economy especially in agriculture is what led to extensive food shortages and drops in agricultural productivity.It was deregulation and free market capitalism that caused an exponential increase in poverty,bread lines,food shortages and exponential decrease in agricultural productivity with this event known as Black October led to the dissolution of all remaining democratic safeguards in Russia wherein Yeltsin secured unrestricted control of the economy under the guise of a conservative capitalist government and set the ground work for all of the issues we have with Vladamir Putin and Ukraine,Crimea etc in 2022 and its why you have pictures of Boris Yeltsin holding hands and smiling with George Bush Sr of all people – you know that war criminal who son is also a war criminal in front of the White House snd other places.Just days after the dissolution of the Soviet Union,Yeltsin resolved to embark on a programme of radical economic reform.Improving on Gorbachev’s reforms, which sought to expand democracy in the socialist system, the new regime aimed to completely dismantle socialism and fully implement capitalism especially unregulated free market,converting the world’s largest command economy into a free-market one.During early discussions of this transition, Yeltsin’s advisers debated issues of speed and sequencing, with an apparent division between those favoring a rapid approach and those favoring a gradual or slower approach.On 2 January 1992, Yeltsin, acting as his own role minister ordered the liberalisation of foreign trade,prices and currency.At the same time,Yeltsin followed a policy of “macroeconomic stabilisation”, a harsh austerity regime designed to control inflation.Under Yeltsin’s stabilisation programme,interest rates were raised to extremely high levels to tighten money and restrict credit.To bring state spending and revenues into balance,Yeltsin raised new taxes heavily especially on the poor, cut back sharply on government subsidies to industry and construction,and made steep cuts to state welfare spending aimed at the poor.In early 1992, prices skyrocketed throughout Russia especially food prices, and a deep credit crunch shut down many industries and brought about a protracted depression.The reforms devastated the living standards of much of the population,especially the groups dependent on Soviet-era state subsidies and welfare programs namely the poor and middle and lower classes.Through the 1990s, Russia’s GDP fell by 50%,vast sectors of the economy were wiped out, inequality and unemployment grew dramatically, whilst incomes fell.Hyperinflation caused by the Central Bank of Russias loose monetary policy, wiped out many people’s personal savings, and tens of millions of Russia were plunged into poverty.Some economists argue that in the 1990s,Russia suffered an economic downturn more severe than the United States or Germany had undergone six decades earlier in the 1929 Great Depression.Russian commentators and even some Western economists, such as Marshall Goldman widely blamed Yeltsin’s economic programme of massive deregulation for the country’s disastrous economic performance in the 1990s.Hyperinflation skyrocketed by about 2,600% people could not buy any food or anything because of skyrocketing food prices and thus you had people forming long queues for food and at the same time shelves were empty because agricultural productivity plummeted.People were forming long queues for food that did not exist because deregulation had to the agricultural sector collapsing in on itself..Many politicians began to quickly distance themselves from the programme.In February 1992, Russia’s Vice President Alexander Rutskoy denounced the Yeltsin programme of complete deregulation and adoption of free market principles as “economic genocide.”By 1993, conflict over the reform direction escalated between Yeltsin on the one side, and the opposition to radical economic reform in Russia’s parliament on the other.Nearly 70 years of hard work by Lenin,Stalin and in particular Khruschev was wiped out in an instant by Yeltsin all to cater to the free market system and make the 1% even wealthier and the country is still recovering today more than 30 years later despite an exponential increase in agricultural productivity.Poverty was dropping prior to 1991 at a steady exponential rate and was probably going to be eliminated completely by now but due to this deregulation by Yeltsin it rose again in 1991 and spiked in 2000 with it only due to the reforms and government programmes and intervention of Putin was what led to to steadily dropping during the last 20 years.Poverty is still significant in Russia and possibly it could have been eliminated by now had Yeltsin’s reforms not been introduced and had a planned economy been adopted like China.Therefore deregulation and adoption of free market policies in 1991 in post Soviet Russia is the reason that poverty still persists in Russia and was responsible for one one of the worst economic recessions in one country for decades.GDP growth and poverty reduction was stagnant for decades in Russia compareable to Czarist Russia prior to the October Revolution of 1917 with once Lenin and Stalins etc command economies were put into effect GDP then rose exponentially and poverty decreased exponentially every year from 1917-1980 with poverty reduction and GDP peaking in the late 1980s until of course a sharp dip in GDP and sharp rise in poverty in 1990s due to this and due to the reforms of Putin GDP began rising again and poverty began lowering except for another dip in 2007/2008 due to the global recession and then GDP began rising and poverty lowering ever since yet it still has to reach the peak of GDP growth and poverty reduction just before the 1990s.Deregulation and adoption of free market capitalism in 1991 in post Soviet Russia thus led to hyperinflation,skyrocketing food prices,an exponential decrease in agricultural productivity,food shortages and bread lines and millions of Russian citizens who were just rising out poverty due to the exponential growth increase in wages etc from the reforms of Khruschev and due to command economies to be then dragged back into poverty all to benefit the top wealthy elite 1%.This exponential decline in agricultural productivity and increase of poverty created by adoption of free market capitalism lasted nearly over 15-30 years with agricultural productivity only returning to 1990 levels in 2019 and the economy fully recovering to pre 1991 levels in between 2006 – 2011 meaning it took agricultural productivity nearly 30 years to recover and nearly 15-20 years for the economy and the path to end poverty to recover – that’s how bad it was.It was like the Russia economy entered into its own localised Great Depression by eliminating regulation and command econoies.Comand economies and government regulations which protected it from the 1929 Great Depression which when removed in favour free market capitalism led to an exponentially loss in agricultural productivity that took it 30 years to return its former exponential growth and 15-20 years for it to repair its economy..GDP and wages in Soviet Russia was climbing high exponentially from 1917-1990 with only a few slumps coinciding with major famines.Then of course in 1991 GDP and wages took a major slump which it took 10 years to start rising again and thus had been rising ever since but has not reached the 1990 peak yet.Recessions occurred in 2007/2008 due to the Great Recession with the economy picking up again until 2015 coinciding with the oil crash and economic sanctions due to his actions in Ukraine and another dip again 2020 due to the Coronavirus and economic sanctions in response to Ukraine.Poverty was being reduced at a steady rate in Soviet Russia which became exponentially better during the Khruschev years of 1950 onwards and Since 1950 agricultural productivity was going upwards exponentially every year then in 1990 it peaked and after free market reforms in 1991 it declines exponentially and would take 30 years after a decade long slump and 20 years of reforms under Putin to completely recover.Had the reforms never taken place it would have been continuously going upwards for the last 30 years.Poverty reduction in Russia was declining exponentionally up until 1991 and due to deregulation it then it skyrocketed and went up and down until only about 2000-2010 due to Putins reforms.Same goes for agricultural productivity but reverse it was rising exponentionally then in 1991 occurred and the agricultural productivity dropped for nearly 30 years.This disastrous economic policy and him starting the First Chechen War which included him committing war crimes and genocide which was resolved in 1997 but then he started a second war in 1999 that included him committing even more war crimes and genocide and is why he had a meagre 2% approval rating when he left office.At the time the majority of the remaining leaders of the Soviet Union were in charge of the government including the Russian parliament were already transitioning to a more free market economy but they were aiming to adopt one that utilised a planned economy rather than a command economy.In otherwards they were aiming to adopt a free market economy with government planning similar to the one adopted by modern China at the time and today that is increased privatisation of different sectors of the economy but at the same time one that was still dominated by state control and planning to allow private enterprises to exist and news ones be set up all the time but still have government regulations to protect the workers and ensure stable exponential growth in the economy to ensure Russia even after the fall of the Soviet Union could become an economic superpower which is what Mikhail Gorbachev was aiming for not the completely deregulated economy Yeltsin adopted.Had this been adopted then its possible Russia would still have more private corporations in control of the economy but the economic transition would have been more stable without hyperinflation,massive rises in poverty and less billionaires forming by doing nothing in otherwards like modern day China.At the same time the drop in poverty would have continued to drop exponentially.This led to a huge political divide between the parliament and Yeltsin who carried out an unconstitutional coup that was to create a free market capitalist Russia similar to the ones espoused by libertarians and anarcho capitalists with zero democratic institutions created solely for him and his billionaire buddies which in a sign of a big fuck you to the Russian government and the democratic reforms installed by Khruschev and Gorbachev culminated in him bombing the Russian parliament building using a big tank.His illegal coup in the name of the free market system that led to the rise of a tyrannical dictator himself was done in the name of the free market system something which libertarians and anarcho both want and deride at the same time – oh and by the way was exactly the same as the 2021 coup carried by Trump.This why libertarians and anarcho capitalists suffer from cognitive dissonance.All in the name of free market capitalism Yeltsin caused a huge spike in poverty and carried out an illegal coup on par with those carried out by America with you having George Bush Sr the embodiment of capitalism holding hands with him in the White House cheering him on as he quashed what little democratic institutions existed.It was done in a way and orchestrated by Yeltsin to prevent the agricultural sector adapting and in turn prevent the planned economy stabilising and cause the correct imbalances that did occur so that Boris Yeltsin and all of his buddies could seize the assets of the vast majority of the working class population and then become multi billionaires overnight.In otherwards Yeltsin specifically modified the free market reforms put forward by Gorbachev so that it would result in the agricultural sector collapsing,hyperinflation ensuing and that all assets owned by the majority of Russians and the state could be through legal means seized by him and all of his buddies thus making him and all of his buddies billionaires.The economic collapse of the 1990s in post Soviet Russia which was the result of massive deregulation and adoption of free market principles was carefully planned exercise by Yeltsin to steal billions of dollars from the poor as well as middle class and give it to the wealthy making them even more obscenely wealthy.He modified the reforms of a Gorbachev to ensure that what happened did happen – that deregulation led to hyperinflation and in turn a drop in agricultural productivity and increase in poverty and that all the money from this confusion would be seized by him and billionaire buddies.This is free market capitalism especially that espoused by Ayn Rand at its finest.This is not socialism or communism and if you think otherwise you’re a fucking idiot.The wealthy stealing from the poor and getting wealthy from the rest of society and leaving the majority of people poor is the sort of idiotic nonsense espoused by Ayn Rand and her idiots just Coronavirus,2008 and 2020.Furthermore at the same time the entire Soviet Union was undergoing its breakup wherein the Eastern Bloc etc were becoming new Independent nations even though polls showed that the majority of Russians and citizens of Ukraine and the Eastern bloc wanting to remain in the USSR.Gorbachev was not successful in transitioning Russia to a more market orientated but his other reforms were successful which was to install freedom of speech and freedom of press.Although Russia today does not have the most unbiased live news stations it is far better than what it was or could have been if were not for the reforms pushed forward by Gorbachev.That and him playing a role in ending in the Cold War and this any chance of mutual assured nuclear annihilation is why even Americans were showing signs of respect to Mikhail Gorbachev upon news of his death.Gorbachev is considered the most liberal and democratic of the leaders of Soviet a Russia as he was instrumental in developing democratic reforms and free speech reforms that are still present today.Even though Russia is not known for its freedom of speech the level of freedom of speech is much better than what it could have been if Gorbachev never came to power and implemented them.Gorbachev’s negotiations with the U.S. helped bring an end to the Cold War and reduced the threat of nuclear conflict.His decision to allow the Eastern Bloc to break apart prevented significant bloodshed in Central and Eastern Europe; as William Taubman noted, this meant that the “Soviet Empire” ended in a far more peaceful manner than the British Empire several decades before.Similarly, under Gorbachev, the Soviet Union broke apart without falling into civil war, as happened during the breakup of Yugoslavia at the same time.McCauley noted that in facilitating the merger of East and West Germany, Gorbachev was “a co-father of German unification”, assuring him long-term popularity among the German people.Furthermore his proposed reforms should not be blamed as he had to deal with the fact of transitioning a country and the rest of the Soviet Union that comprised of several hundred million people from a command economy to a more planned. market oriented economy which was a difficult task.He was trying to reverse the “era of stagnation” under Leonoid Breshnev that was marked by corruption.The Russian economy needed more privatisation and restructuring in order to expand and develop with the failure of theses a failure due to the outdated economic policies of Brezhnev.The restructuring called “perestroika” was needed as per state control gateway theory could have been more successful and resulted in less economic collapse had the government been more willing to adopt them and give more leeway.Had he chosen more feasible economic plans or was never elected in the first place then Yeltsin still would have carried out the same economic plans that were the exact opposite of this and the same thing would have happened.Russia in the 1980s like China in the 2000s was becoming more stable enough to have a more privatised market economy albeit one still regulated and under control of the state to ensure stable exponentional economic growth with more democratic input from the public alongside his other democratic reforms and was ready to become the same type of economy as China was becoming.That was what’s Gorbachev was trying to create but the rest of the government was against this and Yeltsin seized control of it through an illegal coup and installed his completely unregulated system based in the principles of libertarianism and Ayn Randism.Therefore Yeltsin and not Gorbachev can be blamed.Gorbachev can be somewhat responsible for economic reforms that were detrimental to the economy but these could be blamed on the necessity to introduce much needed free market reforms to increase GDP and economic development as per state control gateway theory that met resistance from the outdated parliament and government but the fact that Yeltsin carried out a coup against Gorbachev and instituted completely deregulated reforms shows that compared to Yeltsin he is the lesser of two evils and the victim of Yeltsin’s illegal coup.Yeltsins actions ended up with him and his buddies becoming multi billionaires while Gorbachev did not gain any money from it being worth only $5 million at the time of his death wheras Yeltsin was worth billions.This fact and the fact that Yeltsin carried out a coup is evident that Gorbachev was not to blame.This disastrous economic policy of Yeltsin led to the rise of the already top wealthy Russians becoming multi billionaires by doing absolutely nothing by taking advantage of the economic collapse with this also creating the current oligarchs in Russia we have today including Vladimir Putin with it also leading indirectly to the current crises in Ukraine as it had a knock on effect on the independence of Ukraine etc.Put simply all of the obscenely wealthy billionaire oligarchs in modern day Russia including Vladamir Putin were created by this mass deregulation for doing nothing but seizing money from the poor.The economic crash led to grabby frenzy wherein the richest of the rich seized the monetary and property assets of all poor and middle class people who were left with nothing and thus formed bread lines and begging in the streets and a large spike in poverty and large decrease in agricultural productivity with the economic system and reforms by default shifting millions of not billions of dollars from the poor the wealthy making the wealthy even more wealthy and the poor even more poor by default.Vladamir Putin is a multi billionaire today because of this economic reforms despite doing everything to reverse this poverty and drop in agricultural productivity.This does not however absolve him of war crimes etc in Ukraine which he will punished for in “that place”.The use of a command economy had protected Russia with this gone leading to Russia’s chance of being an economic superpower gone forever and it also leading to the current crises in Ukraine.This shows that no country especially Russia even in modern times cannot adopt a completely deregulated economy because of it did then it causes society to collapse in on itself.The use of a command economy had protected Russia from recessions etc with Soviet Russia through the use of a command economy was completely uneffected by the 1929 Great Depression while America and the rest of the world struggled financially and poverty increased exponentially for nearly a decade with the rest of the world left behind picking up the pieces and lagging behind until 1939.All global recessions of the early 20th Century that affected the rest of world left Soviet Russia unscathed with Soviet Russia left completely unaffected by the 1929 Great Depression.Any recessions that did occur in its early history were the result of droughts and coinciding famines that impaired its agricultural productivity and thus exports and also internal sales figures.The same economic crash caused by such deregulation would occur in modern day China and North and South Korea and other countries that need to adopt a command or planned economy.This decade long recession,exponential decrease in agricultural productivity,hyperinflation in 1991 that thus led to skyrocketing food prices and food shortages is evidence that there are some countries especially those that adopt command economies such as China,Russia,Korea would face mass starvation and famine etc as a result of hyperinflation etc if the economies were completely deregulated if you don’t understand that your a fucking idiot.Therefore they need to be regulated and adopt planned and command economies.This is the clearest evidence of this especially since there was no drought in the 1990s.There was small droughts in 1995 and 1998 but that was not the cause of these food shortages as there were droughts in 1972,1975,1979,1981 but there were no famines or food shortages from 1947-1991 and the food shortages caused by the adoption of free market principles and deregulation occurred throughout the entirety of 1990s and part of the early to mid 2000s not just in 1995 and 1998.Therefore this proves that both modern Russia and China and even after the time of the Soviet Union Gorbachev and his proposed reforms should not be blamed as he had to deal with the fact of transitioning a country and the rest of the Soviet Union that comprised of several hundred million people from a command economy to a more market oriented economy which was a difficult task.The bread lines in Russia in the 1990s were not caused by bad weather,droughts or “socialism” it was free market capitalism.Russia’s agricultural privatisation programme can be traced back to 1989–1990, when Soviet legislation under Gorbachev allowed, first, the creation of non-state business enterprises in the form of cooperatives; and second, legalized private ownership of land by individuals (the November 1990 Law of Land Reform). While household plots cultivated by employees of collective farms and other rural residents had played a key role in Russian agriculture since the 1930s, legislation enabling independent private farms outside the collectivist framework was passed only in November 1990.Private household plots thus have still played a role in Russia right up to 2022.The new legal environment created expectations among Western scholars and Russian reform-advocates that family farms would emerge in large numbers and the large-scale collective farms would be restructured. But as it turned out, few peasants were interested in establishing individual farms, and management- and operating-practices inside large agricultural enterprises remained largely unchanged despite formal reorganization.The lack of enthusiasm for the creation of private farms was attributed to inadequate rural infrastructure, which did not provide processing and marketing services for small producers, and also to the fear that families striking out on their own might lose eligibility for social services that were traditionally provided by the local corporate farm instead of the municipality. Starting in 1993, privatized kolkhoz and sovkhoz units became corporate farms.These farms were legally reorganized as common-stock companies, limited-liability partnerships, or agricultural-production cooperatives and were turned over, usually in their entirety, to the joint ownership of agricultural workers and pensioners. These farms continued to operate largely as they had done under the Soviet system.Today, the term “corporate farm” is an all-inclusive phrase describing the various organizational forms that arose in the process of privatisation without involving distribution of physical parcels of land to individuals. The land-code reform of 2002, advanced by the administration of President Vladimir Putin called for the ownership of real-estate objects to henceforth follow ownership of the attached land plot; granted exclusive right to purchase or lease state-owned land to the owner of the attached real-estate object; gave to private owners of buildings on land plots owned by other private parties the preemptive right to purchase the land; and prohibited the future privatization of real-estate objects without the concurrent privatization of the attached plot.Russian agriculture today is characterized by three main types of farms.Two of these farm types – corporate farms and household plots – existed all through the Soviet period (the former are basically the successors of the Soviet collective (kolkhoz) and state (sovkhoz) farms).The third type – peasant farms – began to re-emerge only after 1990, during the post-Soviet transition.The evolution of Russian agriculture since 1990 shows a significant change of resources and production from the formerly dominant corporate farms to the individual farming sector.During 2006 private household plots and peasant farms combined controlled about 20% of agricultural land and 48% of cattle,up from 2% of agricultural land and 17% of cattle in 1990.The share of the individual sector in gross agricultural output increased from 26% in 1990 to 59% in 2005. Producing 59% of agricultural output on 20% of land, individual farms achieve a much greater productivity than corporate farms.After the Soviet Union collectivised it’s agriculture sector during the Stalin years and until the 1980s, most agricultural land in Russia was in state ownership, and the transition to a market-oriented economy had to start with privatisation of land and farm assets.Russia’s agricultural privatisation programme can be traced back to 1989–90, when Soviet legislation under Gorbachev allowed, first, the creation of non-state business enterprises in the form of cooperatives; and second, legalized private ownership of land by individuals (the November 1990 Law of Land Reform). While household plots cultivated by employees of collective farms and other rural residents had played a key role in Russian agriculture since the 1930s, legislation enabling independent private farms outside the collectivist framework was passed only in November 1990.The Law on Peasant Farms adopted in December 1990 was followed by laws and decrees that defined the legal organizational forms of large agricultural enterprises, the legal aspects of land ownership, and the procedures for certifying and exercising ownership rights.Specifically, agricultural land was denationalized, and its ownership (together with the ownership of other farm assets) legally transferred from the state to the ownership of kolkhozes.But at the same time the government imposed a ten-year moratorium on buying and selling privately owned land.Agriculture in Russia is despite the vast majority of the economy being a market-oriented economy agriculture is still a sector of the economy that requires government assistance and regulations.Global warming has for example has opened up more areas of arable land that was previously not suitable for growing crops due to the cold weather.Following a nearly ten-year period of decline during the 1990s as a result of the deregulation and adoption of free market capitalism at the behest of Yeltsin.Russian agriculture has experienced gradual ongoing improvement.The 2014 devaluation of the double and imposition of sanctions spurred domestic production; in 2016 Russia exceeded Soviet Russia’s grain production levels, and in that year became the world’s largest exporter of wheat.In the last years Russia has emerged as a big agricultural power again,despite also facing various challenges.Geopolitical analyses of climate change adaptation foresee large opportunities for Russian agriculture during the rest of the 21st century as Siberia’s stability increases.Managing migration flows, internal and international, is expected to be a central aspect of the process.Better mechanisation,improved acces to chemical fertiljsers and better varieties of crops and agricultural research done by the state.In many industries, income tax is 20%.However, the representatives of the agricultural sector belong to the preferential category.Therefore, a reduced tax rate of 6% is provided for them.In addition, business owners in the agro-industrial complex are exempt from transport tax as well as some other fees.Farmers are partially compensated for the cost of seeds, fuel, and fertilizers.There are no other industries like this in Russia where tax conditions would be as favorable as in the agricultural sector.Furthermore the agricultural sector has been the subject of major subsidies since 2000 ranging the hundreds of billions of rubies that is increasing exponentially every year.A gradual increase in agricultural subsidies was expected in Russia, given the data at hand.Following 30,000,000 Russian rubles increase of the subsidy budget from 2016 to 2018, agricultural subsidies were planned to grow further and amount to 377,000,000 billion Russian rubles by 2024.Collective farms still exist today in Russia its just that that they are more democratically run and are thus able to produce more than those in Soviet Russia and produce yields equivalent or better than private farms because the profit motive endured they worked arder.Yes the economy has become more market orientated and command economies and even planned economies have been largely eliminated and numerous factors have increased agricultural productivity but at the same time government intervention is still needed to stabilise the price of food such as tariffs,subsidies,breaks,regulations etc and incentivise farmers to produce food.Russias exponential increase in agriculture productivity has been caused and aided largely by government intervention,government research,government subsidies and regulations etc initiated by Putin in the early 2000s and eliminating this government intervention would cause imbalances in the economy and that could decrease agricultural productivity and increase the incidence of food shortages and bring back famines.Most of the economy is completely deregulated except the oil and other fossil fuels sector is state owned.As stated the agricultural sector is a mixed bag,some of it state owned,some of it is collectivised,some is privatised and some of it household plots.Due to this situation it has to be regulated and the government has to interfere in it more so than other sectors of the economy.Thus because of the wide variety of forms of agricultural production in Russia it can leave the rest of the economy completely deregulated and have zero government interference but the agricultural sector has to regulated and the government has to interfere and come to its aid due to its pivotal nature in the economy because of it doesn’t then it will lead to food scarcity and shortages issues and possibly famine.Even with the exponential growth of agricultural productivity in modern times it still needs to be regulated and have government interference just like China and just every other country especially considering how complex and diverse Russia’s agricultural system is.This is because despite these exponential increases in agricultural productivity Russia is still prone to food shortages due to its climate.No country can ever have complete deregulation or complete abolishing if government interference with regards to agriculture – it is the only sector of the economy that cannot be deregulated and have no government interfere and all government regulations,subsidies must be centered around it,otherwise a single dip in the economy will lead to skyrocking food prices and food shortages or even famine.Food shortages and thus bread lines did occur after Stalin’s death during the later half of the Soviet Union after 1947 but the cause of these were primarily due to the bad weather conditions present in Russia but due to intensive research by the government to make drought resistant varieties and better machinery etc coupled with the tolerance of private farmers and a command economy it did not descend into famine anymore with the government doing everything it could to alleviate the shortages such as importing extra food from Europe etc.Russia throughout its history including both ancient Times and during the Soviet era of the 20th century and even today in the 21st century due to its unpredictable weather and climate and considering large portions of the country are covered in semi arid lands not suitable for large scale intensive farming as well as the presence of birds etc that eat grain,unpredictable weather and lack of enough arable land is and always has been in comparison to other countries not entirely suitable for rearing food for large populations of humans so a sudden change in the weather and increase in pests and the shit hits the fan and famine can set in with during Lenin and Stalins time pesticides and drought resistant strains and also genetic engineering to create varieties of crops to be resistant to bad weather did not exist yet or were not availible with the state having to rely on food imports.Furthermore its climate is unpredictable with droughts,floods,harsh winters and cold snaps frequent.Throughout Russian history before the October Revolution of 1917 in ancient times and during Czarist Rissia etc and during Soviet Russia and modern times food shortages,famines and droughts have been a common feature, often resulting in humanitarian crises traceable to political or economic instability, poor policy, environmental issues and war.Droughts and famines in the Russian Empire prior to the October Revolution of 1917 tended to occur fairly regularly, with famine occurring every 10-13 years and droughts every five to seven years – this was before the October Revolution of 1917,during Soviet Russia and during modern times in the the 21st century..So yes like China in its entire history of Russia even before the October Revolution and even during and after the Soviet Russia,Russia has been prone to food shortages,famines and droughts on a consistent basis something that would have occurred had the Ictober Revolution never happened with droughts being either the cause or a contributing factor in each one much like China.These famines whose main cause was the weather killed routinely tens of millions of people at a time.Golubev and Dronin distinguish three types of drought according to productive areas vulnerable to droughts: Central (the Volga basin,North baron,North Caucasus and the Central Chernozem basin,New Caucasus and the Central Chernozem Region), Southern (Volga and Volga-Vyatka area,the Ural region, and Ukraine)and Eastern (steppe and forest-steppe belts in Western and Eastern Siberia and Kazakhstan).Its true that the Holdomor genocide of was an intentional famine caused by the state with others were caused by resources diverted to war efforts and a secondary byproduct of the push for industrialisation similar to the Great Leap Forward with even the Siege of Leningrad being a famine caused by the Nazis to intentionally kill Russians but drought etc was always the source cause it a contributing factor.Famines were the result of both climatic factors and also a by product of ”war communism”,civil wars and the effects of the October Revolution that affected infrastructure such as trains that were needed to transport food effectively to affected areas.Almost all famines and food shortages in Sovet Russia occurred when coinciding with severe droughts that affected the areas.Mass famines were reported in years of drought in the 1920s and 1930s, and the last one occurred in 1946.This includes famines caused by droughts during the Soviet Russia era that occurred in 1920,1921,1924,1936,1939,1946.These years denote when a drought occurred and the next year a famine occurred – simple cause and effect.When crops and livestock don’t get enough water during a drought they die and have widespread shortages of foods which leads to many people dying to die starvation – also simple cause and effect.About 90-95% of all famines in Soviet Russia were caused by drought and only a handful including thr Holdomor were intentional and used as genocide with others being a combination of drought,war communism and poor infrastructure or side effects of warfare.The Holdomer was when the Soviet Russian government purposefully caused a famine in Ukraine(yeah that country).Others were caused by greedy private farmers purposefully slaughtering livestock before they were mature enough to produce enough meat and milk and even slaughtering horses that were used to plough fields in collectivised farms thus hindering collectivised farms.This was done in protests at collectivisation of farms which is idiotic since it killed their customers.Thus capitalism was the root cause of famines in Russia.The last ever famine in Soviet Russia happened mainly in 1947 as a cumulative effect of consequences of collectivization,war damage, the severe drought in 1946 in over 50 percent of the grain-productive zone of the country and government social policy and mismanagement of grain reserves.It was the reforms by Khrushchev and his intervention and reforms that was responsible for this elimination of famine.Furthermore the Green Revolution that began in the 1950s also played a role in this exponential growth in agricultural productivity.So yes,Russia that for its entire history had had to deal with consistent famine that cost tens of millions of lives was due to the policies of Khrushchev no longer had to deal with them any more.After Stalins death there have been frequent issues of food security and food shortages in Russia but this has always been because of drought,climatic conditions and to a degree corruption caused especially during the administration of Leonoid Breshnev and of course the 1991 deregulation on part of Boris Yeltsin but this was prevented by government regulations,government control of the economy and the existence of private farms.Putins government interference in the 2000s is what has allowed for the exponential increase in agricultural productivity not free market principles.Therefore it was government research,government intervention,government policies and government subsidies and tax breaks etc that has led to the elimination of famine in Russia from 1947 onwards under both Khruschev and Putin.The Green Revolution of the 1950s had a lot to do with this elimination of famine.Food shortages and thus bread lines did occur after 1947 but this was largely caused by droughts which occurred at the same time with them kept at bay by improvements in agricultural techniques especially after the The Green Revolution of the 1950s..Any bread lines and food shortages that occurred in Soviet Russia between 1950 – 1990 had almost always to do with the constant routine droughts that occur there.Every year food shortages and bread lines occurred they were preceded by a severe drought except of course the 1990s.Bread lines during the 1990s were caused primarily with deregulation under Boris Yeltsin which led to hyperinflation and skyrocketing food prices.Most of the country is covered in mountains and tundra which is not suitable for agriculture like China the majority that is suitable for agriculture is protected forests that cannot be used as agriculture because it contains endangered species of plants and animals that exist nowhere else.Floods are also a frequent problem.St Petersburg alone has had over 300 recorded floods since its founding in 1703.Russia experiences extreme temperatures in winter and summer, and summer precipitation is low.Only about 7% of the country’s total landmass is arable, 60% of which is used for cropland and the remainder for pasture for livestock.Like China the arable land is spaced out in small pockets such as near Ukraine and the Eastern block.Many regions of Russia experience six months of snow cover each year and in these places the subsoil can often be frozen permenantly.The most fertile regions are in the southern parts of the country between Kazakhstan and Ukraine called chernozem (“black earth”) in Russian.Furthermore like China not all of the arable land can be used for agriculture because some of it is located in areas where the weather is not favourable meaning even though the land is suitable for agriculture the weather and climate may not be suitable for agriculture complicating things even further.This means land that is arable and this suitable for agriculture cannot be used for agriculture because the weather is also not favourable and conducive to agriculture.Land found in areas where the climate is favourable are also areas that are prone to frequent droughts,floods and frost on a constant basis thus affecting crop yields leaving the country open to food shortages and famines.It may be one of the largest countries in the world but 93% of its land is unsuitable for agriculture and the land is suitable for agriculture is subject to frequent and routine droughts,floods and frost – it is a miracle you can feed its population and still have enough for exports.This is likely a contributing factor as to why population growth in Russia has not exploded or needed government policies to control birth rates as it was kept in check by limited agricultural expansion alongside the fact that life expectancy grew after 1917.The decline in population since 1917 despite increase of life expectancy during Stalinist and post Stalinist Russia was likely due to emigration to other countries in Soviet Union and also western world because food shortages were not a problem there.This was because Russia could not support large populations so they moved up other Soviet countries and other parts of the world where it was not a problem and had little to with civil liberties.A large reason for people leaving Soviet Russia after the deaths of Stalin was likely because food shortages etc were not a problem something that was caused by droughts.In post Stalinist Russia especially during that Khruschev where civil liberties improved people emigrated due to a higher food security and this was because of the lack of ability of the country to be an agricultural powerhouse had Russia had more favourable conditions to grow more food making it self sufficient then its likely emigration would have been a problem.Despite being one of he largest countries in the world it cannot support large populations with its current population being 146,077,407 compared to most other more densely populated countries.Global warning had opened up this restricted land where weather is an issue but however the land contains large amounts of carbon dioxide equivalent to what America would release in 120 years which ploughing it would release it in large amounts within a few years thus making things even more complicated which if disturbed.This if climate change gets worse will likely have to be done since global warming will increase the likelihood of droughts and floods that in turn reduce crop yields and increase the incidence of food shortages and famines in areas that are currently used for cultivation thus creating a positive feedback.It is a net exporter of wheat and oat grain but it still a net importer of most other agricultural goods and and thus is still a net importer of food.Therefore it cannot be a net exporter of food and cannot sustain large populations without importing food thus making it a net importer of food.It therefore has to adopt a command or even planned economy.This has always been the case since agriculture first became a thing and its why private farmers existed in Stalinist and Leninist Russia.This was to change later on when Khrushchev came to power later and instigated intensive agricultural research to increase productivity even further..Russia has always been unable to be self sufficent due to its climate with it only able to do so in the later part of of the 20th century namely the 1980s and 1990s and 21st century due to global warming which has warmed areas previously unable to support agriculture and also government intervention and government research etc under Khruschev and Putin.It is still today a net importer of food.Food shortages also no longer exist due to it importing more food and of course huge leaps and bounds in agricultural production due to genetic engineering,improved research into new varieties and also improved mechanisation which only occurred during and after Khrushchevs administration.Any food shortages that did exist were the result of the climate and its inability to be self sufficient.Even as productivity had increased under Khrushev and Putin Russia still has frequent food shortages in the 21st century due to the weather and these food shortages have had to do the countries climate.Both Russia and Ukraine were subject to a series of severe droughts from July 2010 to 2015.The 2010 drought saw wheat production fall by 20% in Russia and subsequently resulted in a temporary ban on grain exports had the government not intervened in the 200s and maintained farms and agriculture then its likely that famine would have settled in Russia and Ukraine in both 2010 and 2015.Even despite the exponential yield increases under Putin and since 1947 the country is still prone to food shortages and even bread lines due to its climate and as a result it needs a command or planned economy or at least stringent regulations and incentives etc to keep productivity high in terms of the agriculture sector – deregulation of the agricultural sector and not keeping some semblance of a planned economy especially since the countries GDP and economy went into recessions after 2010 and 2015 will result in frequent recessions and also frequent bread lines..This shows that food shortages do occur even in modern day Russia after the fall of the Soviet Russia and after the adoption of private farmers and after the adoption of a free market economy and the reason is always has been because of the country being prone to droughts.The country no matter what even after the end of “communism” is still prone to food shortages and bread lines for the same reasons of why they occurred during the Soviet Russia – droughts..The country can never be a net exporter of food and can never adopt a deregulated economy.Therefore deregulation in the rest of the economy caused recessions etc that were linked to these droughts and reduced agricultural productivity with the reduced agricultural productivity being a contributing factor to these recessions.Therefore Putins deregulation of the rest of the economy is a threat to the economy due to recessions caused by droughts and decreased agricultural productivity in 2010 and 2015 with this increasing the likelihood of boom and bust cycles,food shortages,famines and it losing its status as a economic superpower.To prevent future recessions command or planned economies must be adopted.This likely why Putin in 2020-2022 has sought to reinstall planned or even command economies similar to Soviet Russia because the last 30 years of deregulation has hampered economic growth and agricultural productivity and increased poverty in Russia.Economic growth and elimination of poverty in Russia has been held back for roughly 30 years by dergregulation something which has not effected China.So yeah Putin an oligarchic multi-billionaire estimated to be worth $200,000,000,000 worth more than Bill Gates,Mark Zuckerberg and even Donald Trump etc the very symbol and embodiment of Russian free market economics and oligarchy who gained his wealth due to the 1991 reforms is returning to Soviet Russia era command or planned economies known by you yanke doodles as “socialism” and “communism” because it fucking works – it is the only way to eliminate poverty and the only way to become and remain an economic superpower in a capitalist economic system.This is because after cleaning up the economic and agricultural chaotic mess left by adopting a free market system of complete deregulation by Boris Yeltsin they completely thrashed the economy,led to massive bread lines and caused more chaos than its worth thus ruining Russias chance of becoming and maintaining Russia as an economic superpower and also to eliminate poverty in Russia as well eliminate food shortages and famine etc due to skyrocketing food prices just like China did.Putin has done every thing in the book to eliminate poverty and increase Russia’s GDP and eliminated food shortages that can be done in a capitalist system especially with Russia’s unique geopolitical etc situation that can be done and thus doesn’t work – it’s too volite and unpredictable with the only solution left being command economies similar to that employed in Soviet Russia which was responsible for exponential GDP growth,expontional increases in agricultural productivity,exponential rises in wages and exponential drops in poverty from 1917-1991 until free market deregulation was adopted which caused GDP,wages and agricultural productivity to decline exponentially and poverty to increase exponentially which Putin has done every thing he can to prevent that occuring again and reverse it except of course doing the one thong that actually works which is adopting command economies.But that doesn’t excuse him carrying out illegal wars and war crimes etc in Ukraine.The only way to become an economic superpower is to have a planned or command economy where economic growth continues rising exponentially forever at a stable rate while everyone else’s who doesn’t do this has constant cycles of boom and bust cycles thus ensuring they are constantly lagging behind.It is also is the only way to eliminate poverty as it prevents boom and bust cycles and prevents hyperinflation and ensures that GDP,wages and ones incomes rises exponentially every year.China has all but eliminated poverty but Russia has a good percentage 13-20% of the population living in poverty despite the best efforts of him which has been hampered by constant recessions and bust cycles.Thus its climate,soil types etc has always restricted Russia from being a agricultural powerhouse and thus private farms prevented or lessened famines thus food shortage and famines were thus always a result of the weather during the 20th century state capitalism under Lenin,Stalin etc it always relied on importing food.As a result both private farmers and command economies has to be adopted or you would have consistent famines.Had private farmers been eliminated during the Soviet era of Lenin,Stalin and all successive administrations or even then the country would have fallen into famine leading to mass starvation during the post Stalinist era during the succeeding adminstrations with them keeping the country afloat in terms of agriculture alongside the succeeding administrations importation of crops in order to prevent another famine.Therefore food scarcity in Russia is always an issue and can be resolved by importing foods or utilisation of private farmers.Even though food shortages existed after 1947 this did not lead to famine and mass starvation as before under Lenin and Stalin due to the adoption of private farmers,improved mechanisation and also the Green Revolution.This improved freedoms and research into agriculture was done to improve state the populace’s loyalty to the state.Krushev was unlike all other adminstrations overthrown in a coup due to his more radical liberalisation of the economy by increasing the democratic powers of the average citizens such as sealing the powers of the KGB,allowing more freedom of speech of the media such as allowing critical dissent of the state to be more pronounced and allow private enterprises to be opened in all sectors of the economy including the commanding heights as described by Lenin as private enterprises in banks,foreign trade and industry were allowed to flourish albeit with some restrictions with these and other democratic policies is what led to him being overthrown by Leonoid Breshnev.Under Khruschev to a degree and in particular under Gorbachev the commanding heights as detailed by Lenin such as banks,communications,foreign trade,light and heavy industry as well as agriculture were now open to private entrepreneurship with this continuing right up until the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Berlin Wall with private entrepreneurs allowed to branch into these areas of the economy despite being still being tightly regulated.Private entrepeneurs were now allowed to set up private businesses in any area of the economy including those previously restricted under both Lenin and Stalin with private farming still consisting of a growing percentage of the agricultural sector.Like the agricultural sector private entrepreneurs were allowed to be set up,meet quotas but were taxed and regulated preventing them becoming absurdly wealthy and were punished if they treated their workers harshly and were still kept in check to prevent them becoming too powerful to ensure the state still had majority power in these areas.This included banks,retail,restaurants and companies that created manufactured goods.Khruschevs administration was considered the most liberalised and open of the post Stalin adminstrations due to him opening up the economy to private enterprises and also even opening up the country to both Western ideals,popular culture and even allowing the media and arts be more critical of the government and allowed to praise the Western world with their being an instant explosion of the entertainment of such as music,film and novels that were either imported from the West or were homegrown Russia media with this known as the “Khrushchev Thaw”.During his administration western in particular American pop culture such as movies,music and food and drinks such as Pepsi and eventually Mcdonslds etc were allowed to be set up in Russia.Despite these liberalizing reforms in music etc many argue that Khrushchev’s legislation of the arts was based,not enough on freedom of expression of the Soviet people per se,and too much on his own personal tastes with the media such as music,movies and literature were still despite not being outright censored they were controlled to a degree – a smaller more liberalised degree than under Lenin and Stalin.Under Leonoid Breshnev the KGB did regain its place in society but not all of its powers with it not as pervasive as under both Stalin and Lenin.Criticism of the state and popular culture from the West were allowed but regulated.Yes people were imprisoned and were left malnourished but they were not treated as badly as under Lenin and Stalin with them usually deported and transferred to psychiatric wards where they were treated to the same treatments as homosexuals and schizophrenic patients at the time such as being kept in bedrooms,drugged and undergoing shock therapy or even exiled from the Soviet Bloc but they were not outright massacared etc as they did not want to return to the brutality of Stalin and Lenin who were considered national embarrassments by Khrushchev and all succesive governments.The KGB under Breshnev and all future administrations were lenient in comparison to what they were under both Stalin and Lenin.By the mid-1970s, there were an estimated 10,000 political and religious prisoners across the Soviet Union,living in grievous conditions and suffering from malnutrition.Many of these prisoners were considered by the Soviet state to be mentally unstable and were hospitalized in mental asylums across the Soviet Union.Under Brezhnev’s rule,the KGB infiltrated most,if not all,anti-government organisations,which ensured that there was little to no opposition against him or his power base.However,Brezhnev refrained from the all-out violence seen under Stalin’s and Lenin’s rule.This was done to prevent riots and disincentivise dissent as having the KGB be less brutal would encourage citizens to be loyal and believe they were free.Khruschevs policies were slightly made less democratic but not reversed outright as people’s criticism of the state were still alllowed but controlled with private enterprises allowed in all sectors of the economy but still regulated.People could criticise the state but with certain restrictions.Brezhnevs administration is known as the Era of Stagnation by Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev who is considered one of the most liberal of the post Stalinist Soviet leaders.The level of power the state had in censorship and alllowing economic freedom varied under each post Stalin adminstration and was done to improve the look of the Soviet government to western eyes and maintain loyalty to the state from Soviet citizens while still ensuring the state capitalist economic system prevailed and that the state still had control and monopoly of the economy.Even the worst of the state capitalists in the administration’s after Khrushchev were nowhere near as bad as Lenin or Stalin through simple being less sociopaths and also through them also wanting to maintain loyalty to the state from the citizens to and that was political and economic suicide especially due to the policies of Khrushchev especially after the death of Mao Zedong and the fall of both the Nazis and emergence of the Cold War left the administration of Soviet Russia little to no choice to abandon the policies of Stalin and Lenin in order to compete against their western counterparts.Khruschevs thawing of the censorship of Stalins and Lenins adminstration was a key factor in all successive administrations retaining some of his policies to retain state loyalty as had they returned to anything near that of Lenin and Stalin or indeed what they personally wanted it which was tighter restrictions on civil liberties without outright murder etc it would have then led to revolts and rebellion in the streets and thus would make Russia look terrible in the eyes of the west so they allowed entrepreneurs to start business in the commanding heights,retained the private farmers and relaxed censorship laws and allowed music and media from the west to be aired as well as allowed some criticism of the state to exist and more importantly they downgraded the KGB.The Communist Party of Soviet Russia was not a hive mind collective it never has been.Much like that of China the Communist Party of Soviet Russia contained people of different thought processes and levels of extremes of communist ideals that were constantly at odds with each other over how much power should be placed in the power of its citizens and the state even during Lenins and Stalins administrations.With regards to Lenin and Stalin they were publicity demonised as savages but only the most ardent and fanatical supporters who were a threat of staging a counter coup to reinstate the policies of Lenin and Stalin were imprisoned or censored with more less fanatical moderate supporters allowed to celebrate them publicly.Statues and murals etc of them were retained in public areas and people were allowed to venerate them publicly to a degree to ensure public loyalty to the state from their supporters and ensure obedience.Cracking down outright on supporters of Lenin and Stalin was not done as it was done to ensure state loyalty from their remaining public supporters who were allowed to venerate them through parades,statues and murals and was allowed by the more moderate members of government to ensure stability in the government.As stated only the most fanatical fans of Lenin and Stalin in both the government and public were imprisoned as they were the most likely to stage a counter coup against Leonoid Brezhnev and install someone just as bad as Lenin or Stalin something that they did want to return to.This post Stalinist and Leninist Russia under Brezhnev etc although not as completely free and liberalised as Khrushchevs adminstrations were much better than that of Lenin and Stalin.There were secret police and censorship but it was nowhere near as bad as that under Lenin and Stalin as they were both considered a national stain and embarrassment.The liberalisation of civil liberties by Khrushchev were kept but regulated to prevent revolt from the public who benifitted from these liberalisations but to also look good in the eyes of foreign governments In otherwards the civil liberties of the average citizens were improved to ensure state loyalty from the populace especially after the radical liberalisation of Khrushchev and to look good in the eyes of the western world especially due to the advancement of tellocomunications such as televisions and phones which allowed images of live of the average citizen to be broadcast across the world and people could communicate more easily.The rise of television,tellocomunications played a role in the retaining of the relaxation of laws that infringed on the rights of citizens as it was now possible for the average citizens to broadcast live in the Soviet Union to the rest of the world life in the Eastern Bloc and Soviet Russia via newspapers,tellocomunications and television with it forcing the state to rather than orchestrate fake parades celebrating Lenin and fake improvements in the lives of citizens were able to be televised as they were.If the administrations after Khrushchev did what they wanted to do and tightened their grip further then it would have led to riots on the streets and further dissenting groups to form due to the liberalisation of Khrushchevs adminstration.What Leonid and the rest of Russian politicians wanted was not a return to the brutal regimes of Stalin and Lenin who were considered a stain on the country but rather a middle ground between the brutality of Lenin and Stalin and what Khrushchev installed which was the economy controlled by the state and the commanding heights off limits – in otherwards a more relaxed form of what Stalin and Lenin installed with the commanding heights off limits,key areas under private sector control with the government in control of the media but still eliminating the brutality of the two dictators however due to Khrushchevs reforms and rise tellocomunications they had no choice but to keep his reforms.The average citizen was now due to the efforts of Khrushchev allowed to set up private business in all sectors of society including the commanding heights and was allowed access to foreign media and popular culture after Khrushchev even though this was the exact opposite of what his successors wanted who wanted to keep them under a more less radicalised version of what was present in Lenin and Stalins Russia.The rise of tellocomunications and the popularity of Khrushchev amongst citizens is why private enterprises were continued to be allowed to be set up and why certain liberal reforms of his were kept but modified.Thus adminstrations after Khrushchev did keep some of Khrushchevs liberalised reforms to a degree rather than going to what they preferred which were more draconian measures(that were still nowhere near as bad as Lenin and Stalin) to ensure that the populace would maintain loyalty to them and prevent the formation of dissident groups and revolts.Had Khrushchev never been in office the states control of society would still be draconian but not nearly as bad as that of Stalin and Lenin.The commanding heights would be still off limits and popular music and media from the West would still be censored.Khruschev was overthrown because had he stayed in offices he would have likely introduced more radical reforms that would have the states monopoly overthrown by eliminating censorship completely and allowing more liberal pro free market reforms to be instigated alongside more democratic reforms that would have allowed the populace to have more democratic control.Lenin and Stalin were a national stain on Soviet Russia after their deaths and even the most draconian of adminstrations did not want to return to the savage brutality of them.People were imprisoned rather than killed or sent to the gulags which were shut down for good.Even still those who were imprisoned were usually extremists who had a propensity towards terrorism with less radical critics of the state allowed to go free.They were those likely to carry out acts of terror on par with 9/11 etc as well as similar acts of terrorism and thus had to imprisoned not to preserve the safety of the state but to ensure the safety of the Russian people.Its like this – if it was 1999 or 2000 and you knew Osama Bin laden was planning to carry out 9/11 and he was in your country would you imprison him or let him carry it out.Same goes for lone wolf attacks such as this me responsible for Colombians,La Isla Vista,Virgina Tech and so on.The people they imprisoned in post Stalinist Russia under Khruschev etc were those most likely to carry out mass shootings and terrorist attacks on the Russian citizens and most likely to overthrow the government and install an authoritarian system on par with or worse than both Stalin and Lenin.It was a necessary evil that was done to prevent Soviet Russia going back to the chaos of Lenin and Stalin.The vast majority of critics were allowed to be set free to ensure loyalty to the state especially after the radical liberalisations of Khrushchev – only the most extremist citizens were imprisoned and their conditions in prison were way better than the gulags.Conditions in prisons in post Stalin Russia was way better than in the administrations of Lenin and Stalin as torture was almost non existent.The effect of imprisonments for only the most extreme dissidents had the knock on effect of keeping the less radical citizens under control without the state having to go the extremes of Stalinist and Leninist Russia.The state by imprisoning only extremist who were a real threat and were prone to terrorism etc were able to keep the rest of society in control without outright control.To ensure state loyalty Leonoid etc and all administrations after Khrushchev had to tread lightly in applications of new laws in terms of what they wanted to impose on the public and what was needed to ensure state loyalty and prevent riots and rebellion from the general public.If they went too far in restricting civil and economic liberties they would have protests and rebellion and too much economic and political freedom would lead to people demanding more liberties and this would also lead to protests and rebellion.Therefore after Khrushchevs reforms more privatisation and civil liberty reforms was allowed to occur but this was carefully planned to prevent the state losing all of its power thus the state in post Khrushchev Russia had to give the populace the illusion of freedom to keep themselves docile.This is no different than Bush,Obama and Trump era America through the Patriot Act and the treatment of Julian Assange,Edward Snowden,Chelsea Manning at the gand of both RNC/DNC.The Republicans and corporate democrats both capitalists by the way torturing people,carrying out war crimes and censoring progressives on YouTube and distorting the facts through mainstream media is no different than what was in Soviet Russia,Maoist China and Cuba by the state.Teapot calling kettle black anyone?Each adminstration after Lenin and Stalin were different in their level of economic and political freedom they allowed for Soviet citizens and this changed after the fall of the Soviet Union especially once Boris Yeltsin deregulated the economy and installed free market reforms and scrapped constitutional safeguards and that’s why we have Putin carrying out an illegal war and war crimes with Ukraine.Khruschev and Gorbachev were considered the most democratic and liberal administrations.Both Nikita Khrushchev and Milkhail Gorbachev are examples that the Soviet could have existed after 1989 up until 2022 with the Berlin Wall demolished and still have retained democratic institutions.You can still have a state capitalist system.Private industry,co-ops and state run enterprises thus existed in Soviet Russia which cannot occur in either socialism or communism,it can only occur in capitalism namely state capitalism.All of the Eastern blocs economies were modelled on that of Soviet Russia since they were technically the same country during the entirety of of 1917-1989 all under the governing power of the Soviet Union.In reality Lenin,Stalin,Khrushchev and all administrations of the Soviet Russia like Mao were not communists or socialists they were capitalists they just believed that like Mao it should be highly regulated and not corrupt with instances of imprisonments and mass murder in Leninist and Stalinist Russia was done to deal with those who were corrupt,refused to be regulated and treated their workers and tenants and thus got absurdly wealthy through corrupt means with those who towed the line were ignored completely.Soviet Russia was from its very beginnings during the reign of Lenin,Stalin as well Khruschev and all remaining administrations up until th fall of the Berlin Wall and continued to be so during the 1990s with it still being state capitalist under the Putin administration.Hardly the actions of a socialist or communist government that wants to quash out all private enterprises.In fact it’s the same as what goes on in the land of the free America under a Republican or corporate Democrat.If Stalinist and Lenist Russia was socialist or communist country then America is and always has been either communist or socialist.How can a country be considered communist or socialist when the government encourages the formation of private businesses and does everything it can and go out of its way to keeps them afloat through bailouts and guaranteed markets?If they are communist or socialist then American under the rule of the corporate Democrats,Republicans and both Bush,Obama and Trump administrations are communist and socialist The rate of economic growth for private farmers was rising but at a stable rate but greedy private farmers wanted to get more money more quickly and this would cause imbalances and recessions in the economy that would even eventually cause these greedy private farmers to lose all of their wealth or would put workers in state run farms and factories out of work and thus lead to poverty and thus famines which the state did not want.Thus the state had to regulate them.Had the economy been completely degregulated then boom and bust cycles would have caused havoc with regards to the price of grain meaning the economy had to regulated to the extent that it was.Regulation thus kept the Soviet economy growing and the wealth of private entrepreneurs rising at a stable sustainable rate and prevented boom and bust cycles that the economy could not handle as if it occurred then it lead to mass unemployment,poverty and famine which was done to encourage state loyalty.Growth in the private sector would still have occurred and was occurring and increasing every year exponentially but at a stable and sustainable rate rather than happening to fast to the point that it would cause imbalances like the Scissor Crises and boom and bust cycles.At the same time growth in the state sector was also undergoing stable sustainable exponential growth.The rate of growth in income and wages for both private and state sector workers and entrepreneurs was rising exponentially every year at a stable and sustainable rate.Considering Soviet Russia was prone to famine due to poor weather and an unpredictable climate as well as pests etc as well as other environmental and geopolitical factors outside of the states control it could not handle a boom or bust cycle and thus regulated business to prevent them getting too powerful too quickly that would plunge the economy into a boom and bust cycle something it could not afford to occur at otherwise it would lead to poverty and famine.A boom and bust cycle and similar imbalances similar to the Scissor Crises would increase the chance of famines occurring due to rises in the price of food something they wanted to avoid.Furthermore if America etc on the other hand suffered a recession in a boom and bust cycle due to deregulation of the economy due to the American governments tendencies towards deregulation it would ensure that Soviet Russia would become an economic superpower which was what Lenin and Stalin wanted.The only way to become an economic superpower and remain an economic superpower indefinitely is to have the economy regulated through a command economy which can only occur in state capitalism not socialism or communism(but a planned economy in socialism and other types of capitalism can suffice)while all of the other competitor economies worldwide are unregulated markets that allow for the economy to continuously go through boom and bust cycles that even when they reach their height of each boom it is also different and not static and the higher it goes the greater the recession while your economy through regulation constantly goes upwards forever into infinity while everyone else economy stays in constant state of boom and bust.It is also is the only way to eliminate poverty as it prevents boom and bust cycles and prevents hyperinflation and ensures that GDP,wages and ones incomes rises exponentially every year.This guarentees that the GDP,income both private and state workers increases exponentially each year.Guarenteed markets,private businessesmen using extra disposable income combined with stable economic growth allowed the state to save enough money or at least go into small amounts of debt to carry out bailouts and buy crops etc from countries across the world to prevent or at least lessen famines and also ensure people survived to then produce and buy more to then pay back and cancel debts through extra profits to ensure stability.Soviet Russia like Maoist China through this saw one of the greatest rises in GDP of any other country in the mid to late 20th century.If a boom or bust cycle and recession occurred due to greedy entrepreneurs then the government could not afford to buy food etc from international markets and this would lead to starvation and further recessions.The type of economy was a command economy where the state had complete control of the economy which cannot occur in socialism or communism only state capitalism as a planned economy would allow the workers and citizens including private entrepreneurs to have a democratic say in the planning something which would lead to deregulation and thus boom and bust cycles.The government wanted the economy to be strong and have strong growth by creating a balance between the growth of both the state run sectors and private sectors but regulated them much like Maoist China as too much growth in either state run sectors and private sectors would lead to imbalances and push the economy into chaos like the Scissor Crises and thus stunt economic growth and even lead to recessions,crashes and then boom and bust cycles.The Soviet government tried to avoid boom and bust cycles and recessions by regulating the private sector and stabilising growth in both the state run and private sector because if they did then their economy would outcompete and grow faster and have a higher GDP than the West particularly America where government regulation didn’t exist and thus was prone to boom and bust cycles,recessions etc which would allow the Soviet economy to grow faster and outcompete that of the its western competitors as a recession caused by lack of government regulation in America etc would cause their economy to nosedive while the Soviet economy would continue to rise continuously thus allowing it to become a global superpower.The government can only do this in state capitalism and not communism or socialism.This why the state still tries to regulate the economy in modern times especially in modern state capitalist economies including Brazil,America,Norway,Finland etc its to ensure stable contionous growth,prevent recessions and boom and bust cycles and why countries with more sensible government regulations in Europe,Austrailia were virtually uneffected by the 2008 Global Recession and 2020 recession while Americas etc economies tanked and are still recovering after more than a decade.It is also which you have many middle class and poor people in modern China still revering Soviet Russia and want to return to the days of Soviet Russia primarily post Stalinist and Leninist Russia and why a small percentage still revere Lenin and Stalin or at least a less tyrannical version of them through post Stalinist administrations as you have alot of entrepreneurs in modern Russia getting absurdly wealthy through unethical means and many people getting screwed over and unable to gain an economic advantage.They want private enterprises to exist but want them to be regulated to prevent them getting too powerful preventing the rise of cronyism and eliminate boom and bust cycles.Regulations that existed in countries such as Soviet Russia that stunted the growth of small emergent businesses was the result of cronyism on part of state capitalism similar to America,Maoist China in order to ensure that a small number of private business that were key to the functioning of the economy stay afloat through bailouts and guarenteed markets as they contribute billions of dollars to the economy every year with the government doing everything to ensure they stay afloat including putting in regulations that shut down competitors in the form of any new or existing small companies.This why the myth that Soviet Russia was shutting down all private business and killing all of them existed when it wasn’t private businesses were allowed to flourish but only those that were key to the economy and not ones that state wanted infringing on its territory and profits and stability of the economy with the state deciding which ones to allow to be set up with them deciding which ones could be set up and what they sell and what limitations they had to prevent the economy going out of control.Allowing them to be set up without regulation and control would have caused an endless cycles of boom and bust cycles something Russia could not afford due to its geopolitical and environmental factors that would cause another famine and also to ensure economic growth would rise exponentially forever in a stable growth curve in order to surpass America and Europe as an economic superpower.Allowing for the economy to be completely degregulated would have caused more and even greater famines causing the deaths of millions of more lives due to unsustainable fluctuations in the price of grain,meat etc.Famines and food shortages did occur throughout the entirety of Soviet Russia but it was always due to due to poor,weather,pests and also limited arable land in the country which was out of the control of Lenin and Stalin with the existence of private farms alongside importing food ensuring that any food shortages and famines that occurred resulted in significantly lower death tolls that would have occurred without their existence or in an completely unregulated economy.Command economies were necessary over planned economies and unregulated free market economies as at the time given the geopolitical and environmental factors and to an extent technological capacity of Soviet Russia as it was necessary to tightly control the economy as any imbalances and boom and bust cycles would lead to hyperinflation,skyrocking prices for grain and meat and thus lead to poverty and consistent famine.Without regulation the price of grain and meat would have skyrocketed and other economic effects would have plunged Soviet Russia into even worse famines.Adopting a completely degregulated free market,anarcho capitalist,libertarian economy would have caused hyperinflation,imbalances in the economy and continuous cycles of boom and bust cycles which would have severely exacerbated food shortages leading to outright famine due to skyrocking food prices and existing famines would have been much worse leading to exponentially higher death tolls.It would have negatively affected the countries ability to import food thus exacerbating food shortages and famines leading to consistent famines year after year..Considering Soviet Russia was already prone to famines due to poor weather and lack of arable land it had to install command economies to prevent boom and bust cycles and inflation which would exacerbated the problem.This is why private farmers were also given bailouts and guarenteed markets as they were key to the stability of both the economy and society should they go bankrupt then then the entire economy and society would collapse in on itself.Even today in Russia agriculture and the economy is still heavily regulated and controlled by the state for the same reason.Despite their savagery and brutality Lenin and Stalin and being agricultural idiots and savages they were economic geniuses.Private enterprises had to meet certain prequisites in order to be allowed to function.The relationship of guarenteed markets,bailouts and also corruption that exists in modern day state capitalist America is exactly the same as Soviet Russia as you had a small number of private corporate monopolies that were key to the economies functioning and they were given guarenteed markets and bailouts because of they failed and went bankrupt then the Soviet Russian economy would also nosedive and famines would become rampant with these corporations being kept afloat through whatever means even corruption in order to prevent poverty and famine with it thus a good form of corruption that was necessary to prevent outright famines and economic collapse unlike that modern America that is used to ensure perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and needless deaths every year.Thus private business especially farmers encouraged by the state were set up,funded and kept afloat by the state in order to prevent severe death tolls during famines through guarenteed markets and bailouts.Yes Stalin and Lenin were corrupt but it was necessary to save lives of the average citizen with their genocide and imprionment of dissenters and corrupt businessesmen done against those they feared would endanger the economic growth that beniffited the prolitariet with racial undertones also forming the basis of their genocide.Corruption that existed was done to keep private industries afloat and was no different than the corruption by the RNC/DNC involving Congress,big pharma,big oil and the military industrial complex.Most if not all scholars state that in all of these “socialist” hellholes such as Soviet Russia the majority of the workers had no real meaningful control over the workplace but rather the state did with them all having visible private enterprises.Furthermore the actions of the state were not democratically decided upon as all taxes,regulations and laws were decided by the state without democratic input.A command economy was used which is undemocratic in nature and thus not socialism.This is not how socialism works this is how state capitalism workers.Democratic control was only relegated to the small number of cooperatives that existed in otherwards democratic control by workers was only confined to cooperatives and how they ran which were a small percentage of businesses and not within the confines of state run corporations and of course not within the confines of private corporations with all actions of the state being authoritarian undemocratic control meaning the workers or population could not vote on any taxes,regulations etc.Since the workers had no democratic control of their workplace and no democratic role in the decisions made by the government and cooperatives were a small percentage of the economy and the economy was controlled predominantly by both state run corporations and private corporations run by private entrepreneurs it could not be termed socialism.It was not communism due to the presence of private enterprises,state control and money.The use of the term collectivised and working together with in terms of propaganda and also state run industries such as farms and factories in Soviet Russia etc was likely used to brainwash people especially the ignorant or used in the context of working together against other state run enterprises,cooperatives and private enterprises with if possible the term collectivised used in the context of collectivised working rather than collectively run and operated wherein they were still operated by state run buerocrats in place of a CEO but the work was collectivised but the profits were not shared equally between all workers as in cooperatives rather they were paid according to their time spent each week etc similar to how large private farmers in modern times pay immigrants and other labourers etc fixed prices to harvest crops etc rather than sharing profits.Using the term communism and socialism was used to pull the wool over the eyes of its citizens and believe that they would one day get fully classless communism or socialism buy in reality they got state capitalism.The use of the terms working together etc was propaganda to instill morale and increase state loyalty and productivity like how modern day private corporations organise corporate get togethers,meeting,seminars,retreates and events to promote teamwork and improve worker morale you know those cheesy events,seminary’s etc that use slogans like “theres no I in Team” to improve productivity and about working together for the common good within ones corporation with it the same collectivised mentality propaganda in oother state propaganda in corporate America etc is exactly the same groupthink collectivised mentality propaganda as in Soviet Russia and Maoist China.By definition the private farms that were present throughput the entire history of Soviet Russia was private farming and thus private enterprises and private businesses allowed to all citizens by law where they were allowed if not encouraged to sell surplus for a profit to ensure that profits were spent on state owned business..Furthermore all other private business such as retailers,banks,restaurants etc alongside the private farms during both periods of Soviet Russia that is early Soviet Russia during the administration of both Lenin and Stalin and also late Soviet Russia under the administration of Khrushchev etc were private business – something which is not allowed in ether socialism or communism either the bullshit definition or proper definition.The evidence that Soviet Russia was communist or socialist does not exist its pure fantasy.The evidence that it was state capitalist does exist therefore it was state capitalist.The economies of Eastern Bloc were modelled in that of Soviet Russia thus making them state capitalist

State Capitalism in Maoist China:
This system of private land ownership and private farms where peasants were allowed to own private land to grow food for themselves and sell on markets was adopted by Maoist China during the 1960s after the Great Famine of 1959-1961 where 5% of the communal agricultural land was given to private farmers who could grown any crop any rear and livestock and sell it for personal profit.The land was still collectively owned to a degree by the state but it was leased to the private farmers and farmers had to meet quotas however what crops and livestock they reared and grew was up to them and all profits were kept by farmers themselves.In otherwards despite land being collectively owned private farmers that were private business were allowed if not encouraged to exist.Mao allowed other private business to exist in China once he came to power during his entire administration even before the Great famine but they were heavily regulated and controlled by laws,taxes etc to prevent them overthrowing the state monopoly and releated to the rural communities of the country but these individuals that owned private industry,farms and businesses were allowed to make profits for themselves and not anyone else either the the state or other workers which is not allowed in socialism or communism only capitalism.In as much as private enterprise remained indispensable in light industry and trade, it was logical for the government to foster it.Since, however,private capitalism,if unrestricted,might interfere with the over-all plan for economic de-velopment,the government retained tight control over its activities to ensure that they benefited the national economy.Government control of private enterprises was intended to subject them wholly to the government and to the state-owned sector of the economy.It achieved this aim by measures which (1) demonstrate the economic as well as the political power of the government,(2) show the readiness of the government and/or the state-owned sector to help private enterprise, and (3) organize the latter so as to facilitate government control.The outstanding demonstration of the government’s economic power was afforded by its price-stabilization program,which employed the superior financial strength of the state trading companies to drive speculative business- men into bankruptcy.Its political power was best illustrated by its relentless persecution of private entrepreneurs during the “five-anti” campaign,which was essentially intended to bring private businessmen to heel and to keep them in line with the government’s schemes.By and large private businessmen found guilty of any of the “five evils”—i.e., bribery, tax evasion,fraud,theft of state assets,or leakage of state economic secrets—suffered punishment designed to sap their financial resources sufficiently to make them dependent on the state owned sector of the economy.At the same time,the government had showed readiness to come to the rescue of private entrepreneurs whenever they found themselves in difficulty through government programmes and bailout programmes as well as buying products from private markets and farmers providing a guaranteed lucrative market for capitalist enterprises similar to the 2008/2020 bailouts and the way big oil,big pharma and the military industrial complex are guaranteed lucrative business deals- hence why the United States is considered state capitalist by some philosophers and economists.The guaranteed markets were done on the promise that both private farmers and merchants and their workers would buy produce from state owned enterprises with their extra disposable incomes in an mutually beneficial relationship with the produce sold to international markets or fed to government workers and even the poor to prevent starvation at a loss.Mao through passing these laws to set up and to regulate private enterprises did it to keep private enterprises under strict control of the state something that does not happen in socialism and communism.By this very act of passing these laws to regulate private enterprises rather than shut them down completely Mao was admitting and showing it was state capitalism and not socialism and communism by the fact that these laws proved that private enterprises existed in the first place because laws to regulate private business can only occur when private businesses exist in the first place which can only occur in state capitalism not socialism or communism.Government regulations to regulate private businesses can only occur when private business exist in the first place which cannot occur in socialism or communism either the proper or bullshit definition.They cannot exist when private enterprises do not exist.Why would a communist and socialist government enact laws to set up and regulate private enterprises if they are not allowed to exist in either communism or socialism in the first place?Maoist China allowed private business to exist during his tenure roughly 10-20% but modern day China has almost 40% of the economy privately run.Private industry and commerce were allowed to flourish under Mao from the very start because the state was unable to carry the burden of building the entire economy and thus light industry was left to private corporations and commerce particularly urban-rural commerce was left to private merchants.This is the exact opposite of socialism or communism.The state was allowed control of commodities that are essential to price stability and people’s livelihoods such as agriculture,construction and heavy industry with private enterprises picking up the slack and dealing in areas the state could not control or develop.They were not communist because communism requires the complete dissolution of the state while they were not socialist because they were state owned corporations that sold goods and services for a profit to fund social programmes and infrastructure and increase GDP not publicly owned industries which are two completely different things.State owned corporations like the ones that existed in Maoist China can only exist in state capitalism.State owned corporations existed in Maoist China because due to the profit nature of state owned corporations the money generated by profits was fed directly into the states treasury to be used for GDP,investing in infrastructure and social welfare which cannot occur in nationalisation and socialism.Thus although the state controlled the main sectors of the economy and the majority of these sectors primarily in urban areas the private enterprises controlled by private entrepreneur individuals were needed to pick up the slack on a small scale from the grounds up particularly in rural areas and increase production where the state couldn’t do it.All sectors of the economy whether it was agriculture,trade,artisans,light and heavy industry,restaurants and retail etc were open to private entrepreneurs in Maoist China its just that they were sidelined to rural communities in order to pick up the slack where the government could not develop the economy.Private enterprises were pivotal in developing the economy of Maoist China before the disastrous Great Leap Forward and even before it but it was allowed to flourish even more after the recession caused by the Great Leak Forward.Collectivisation was only adopted because it was believed that combined with the disastrous agricultural practices would increase profits.In fact the need for private farmers was done to prevent another famine caused by the Great Leap Forward in rural areas which was hardest hit.Like Stalin and Lenin private farming was encouraged and relegated to feeding primarily the rural communities as these were the hardest hit by famines with like Soviet Russia large collectivised farms were used to fed urbanised centres while small private farms were used to feed primarily rural communities that were the most prone to famines.This system allowed large farms to feed large populations in urban centres and small farms fed small populations in rural areas.Like Soviet Russia several smaller famines and food shortages occurred but they were much less severe due to the legalisation of private farmers as the death tolls were significantly lower than in the Great Famine with at most only a few thousand or few hundred people dying compared to several tens of millions and were again the result of bad weather outside the control of the state.The state did everything it could to eliminate famines to ensure state loyalty such as importing food from Europe etc.Simply put even though the vast majority of large farms were collectivised private farms were allowed to function in order to prevent starvation should another drought induced famine occur under Mao as he although collectivising all farms and this increased productivity allowed private farms to function to ensure food security should another famine occur.The state run collectivised farms were used to feed mainly the urbanised areas such as cities thus leaving the rural communities prone to starvation especially should poor weather occur as they were left with very little due to the imbalances in population density with rural areas surviving on scraps of these and primarily on crops reared in private plots of land thus the majority of food eaten by those in rural areas was from private farms.The urban centres got the most food because they were more densely populated than rural areas and thus rural areas were left with scraps and thus were more prone to famines and thus required private farms to survive..Famines and food shortages that occurred were due to not just due to the weather but also the population demographics and the need to keep the urban areas fed as they were involved in the most important and labour intensive work for the state and private sectors of the economy.Thus there was a tendency to have the majority of not all food produced on state run farms sent to urban centres.State run farms were feeding urban centres while this left the rural areas with nothing so as a result private farms were set up and maintained through guaranteed markets and bailouts to feed rural areas as they were the most prone to famine due to state run farms feeding urban areas with this because those living urban areas worked the important and labour intensive jobs such as construction,banking and in factories and so they were kept fed using the large yields from state run farms and in the time of crop losses caused by bad weather were compensated by private farmers allowed to sell surplus in markets within large cities with them alongside this feeding rural towns and villages.The private farmers were set up and kept afloat to feed primarily rural areas and feed cities when bad weather affected crop yields.Keeping private farming and other private business afloat by providing guaranteed markets and bailouts etc even though they ate into the states profits was pivotal in keeping the economy thriving but also preventing famines occurring especially in the rural communities that needed them and even if they did occur at least lessening the intensity of them.Thus state run farms fed densely populated urban areas while private farms fed rural communities to prevent famines.Food shortages did occur after the first few deadly ones especially the Great Famine of 1959-1961 but it was through the utilisation of private farms that death tolls were significantly lower and less severe in the rural communities which were prone to being affected the most this is because private farmers were in charge of feeding primarily the rural communities a opposed to the urban centres.These food shortages and famines were always due to the weather which was outside of the governments control and the state went out of its way to prevent them through importing food from other countries and allowing private farms to flourish.China due to its unpredictable weather and climate and considering large portions of the country are covered in deserts and semi arid lands as well as the presence of locusts,birds etc that eat grain is and always has been in comparison to other countries not entirely suitable for rearing food for large populations of humans so a sudden change in the weather and increase in pests and the shit hits the fan and famine can set in with during Maos time pesticides and drought resistant strains and also genetic engineering to create varieties of crops to be resistant to bad weather did not exist yet or were not availible with the state having to rely on food imports.China is and always has been unable to be self sufficient in terms of agriculture due to large sections of its country housing land not suitable for agriculture and it having very little arable land even in modern times China is still a net importer of food with its budget on food imports increasing from $14,000,000,000 to $104,600,000,000 between 2003-2017 – only 7-10% of its massive land is good enough to be arable for localised food production and thus conducive to agriculture with it having roughly 18-22% of the worlds population.Although China’s is one of the biggest countries in the world and its agricultural output of in particular rice is the largest in the world, only 10% of its total land area can be cultivated.China’s arable land, which represents 10% of the total arable land in the world, supports over 20% of the world’s population.Of this approximately 1.4 million square kilometers of arable land, only about 1.2% (116,580 square kilometers) permanently supports crops and 525,800 square kilometers are irrigated.The land is divided into approximately 200 million households, with an average land allocation of just 0.65 hectares (1.6 acres).This compares with more than 20 percent for the continental United States which is around the same size as China, despite having one billion fewer people China’s limited space for farming has been a problem throughout its history, leading to chronic food shortage and famine.While the production efficiency of farmland has grown over time, efforts to expand to the west and the north have met with limited success, as such land is generally colder and drier than traditional farmlands to the east and thus despite the land itself is suitable for growing crops the climate is not suitable for crops.Thus while the land in certain areas of China is suitable for agriculture the climate is not suitable for agriculture thus complicating things even further.Like Russia some areas with arable land cannot grow crops because of the weather is not conducive to agriculture.Even the areas that have the climate favourable to agriculture are prone to frequent droughts,floods and frost thus leaving the country open to food shortages and famine in a constant basis.Since the 1950s, farm space has also been pressured by the increasing land needs of industry and cities.Most of China is comprised of deserts including the Gobi desert(the sixth largest desert in the world),mountain ranges(a large chunk of the country is taken up by the Himalayas)and swamps etc very little land is suitable for agriculture and the majority of that which is suitable for agriculture is protected wilderness usually because it land that is unique to China or houses endangered species that cannot live anywhere else in the world.The vast majority of China both in ancient times,Maos time and even modern times is simply unsuitable to large scale agriculture.It is one of the largest countries in the world yet 90% of its land is unsuitable for agriculture,a good chunk of the arable land is in areas with weather that is simply not conducive for agriculture and most of the land that is conducive for agriculture is in areas that have frequent droughts,floods etc – it is a miracle you can grow anything there especially to feed its high population since 1949 and still have enough for exports.You cannot feed 18-22% of the worlds population in less than 10% of the worlds arable land.Not today,not in ancient times and certainly not in Maoist China.It may be one of the largest countries in the world but it has less than 10% of the worlds arable land.This fact was probably the reason why the one child policy was started in the 1970s because it was unable to feed itself and was reliant on imports.Furthefmore it’s probably the reason the Great Leap Forward was put through without foresight as there was a desire to increase grain production to make it cheaper and thus pseudoscience was adopted and at the same time increase steel production and exports in order to increase GDP to the point that China could increase the amounts of money availible to import more crops to feed its growing population preceding the one child policy.China today despite huge exponential gains in agricultural productivity is still a net importer of food and still has challenges to meet.You could convert all availible arable land in China into private farms and it still wouldn’t be able to feed itself and would still be a net importer of food.Then of course there is the fact that China’s has an unpredictable climate unlike Europe and America as freak droughts,heatwaves etc can arise out of nowhere and simply decimate entire years with of crops.Due to these factors the agricultural sector has to be subsidised by the government,it needs government intervention,government research and it needs to import food from other countries and it needs planned or command economies otherwise it would plunge into consistant famines killing tens of millions every year.China has consistantly since ancient times been victim to some of the worst droughts,floods and typhoons throughtout human history with them lasting months if not years and killing hundreds of thousands or even millions of people at a time with both the El Niño–Southern Oscillation and La Niña being a primary cause of these.Like Russia in ancient times and before Mao came to power or was even born there were consistant famines caused by droughts,floods,storms which killed tens of millions of people almost near to the death toll of the Great Chines Famine 1959-1961.Even though these two phenomena are predictable in modern times they are still at times complex and unpredictable at times especially when factoring In anthropogenic climate change but in ancient times and even in Maoist China they were not understood at all.On average, southern Xinjiang has the longest mean duration of drought, more than 250 days per year.Qinghai and northern Gansu Province have the second-longest mean duration of drought.For China as a whole, the average occurrence of severe and nationwide drought has been 7.5 times each year from 1951 before the Great Famine of 1959-1961 to 1990.Heatwaves in 2022 similar to that that struck the rest of the world wiped out huge tracts of both private and state run farms by starting wildfires that burnt out huge tracts of crops.Therefore food scarcity is always an issue inherent in Chinas geopolitics no matter what and can be resolved by importing foods,command economies or encourageing private farmers.Even today food insecurity and shortages are an issue in China due to the weather and thus it had to be a net importer.As a result both private farmers and command economies has to be adopted or you would have consistent famines.Like Russia collective farms still exist in China is just that they are now more democratically run and not enforced upon meaning they now have yields in par with private farms.Collective farms still exist today in China its just that that they are more democratically run and are thus able to produce more than those in Maoist China and produce yields equivalent or better than private farms.Had private’s farmers not existed then the death toll of succeeding famines after 1961 would have been just as bad as the Great Famine of 1959-1961 if not worse.Mao and his entire administration realised after the disastrous Great Leap Forward policy that to prevent another famine private farmers were needed to intervene in order to increase productivity in especially rural farms that were the hardest hit by the Great Famine with rural areas also benifitting the most from other private entrepreneurs in commerce etc.Therefore he set up private farmers and kept them afloat through guaranteed markets and bailouts in order to ensure that productivity was consistently high.He did this in order to save face and make his state capitalist economy and administration look good in the eyes of western governments and ensure state loyalty by the Chinese citizens and to ensure strong economic growth as well as of course prevent famines.The desire in not wanting to have another famine is also evident in the fact that he reversed laws to eliminate Eurasian tree sparrow (Passer montanus) as these originally were eliminated as part of the Four Pests campaign as each bird was believed to eat at least 4.5kg of grain per bird with Mao overlooking the fact that they also ate agricultural pests such as beetles and locusts.With the birds population declining the locust population grew substantially enough that they became a bigger threat to crop yields than the birds decimating large amounts of crops exacerbating the famine when combined by poor weather and bad government mismanagement and relying on state run agricultural production.Since he could not control the weather he could reverse laws that encouraged the killing of the birds(instead focusing on killing bed bugs)allowing the birds to thrive again to kill agricultural pests and allowed private farmers to have increased control of the agricultural sector to increase productivity.He did this to prevent another famine to make China look good in the eyes of the west and maintain state loyalty to the Chinese showing to them that he did it want a repeat of the the famine.Had the weather been stable and had the locusts never came it would have been possible for the famine to not have been as bad or not occurred at all as the role of government mismanagement came from the fact that Mao moved grain away from the worst affected rural areas because he was being lied to by his officials who were exaggerating yields of grain etc thus making him think that the farmers etc in rural China had more than enough to eat due to exaggerated yields and thus shipped more grain to the cities more than what was needed by city dwellers and also exported more and imported less than usual to nearby countries.Had he known the extent that how bad yields were due to drought and the locusts its likely he would have left more to the peasants and imported more from neighbouring countries and exported less or none.This is how government mismanagement made things worse and played a role in exacerbating the famine as had Mao knew the extent of the poor yields due to the locusts and poor weather he could have kept enough grain for the rural communities and also exported less and imported more thus preventing most of not all deaths that occurred.The country was struck by a series of natural disasters both a drought that struck the country and a flood in 1958.This flood affected 741,000 people, submerged over half a million acres of crops (3.04 million mu), and destroyed over 300,000 houses in 1,708 villages.There seems to be this notion that the Great Famine of 1959-1961 was a thing that occurred throughout the entirity of Maoist China as it was responsible for about 90-95% of Mao supposed death toll but it took place only once over a three year period and there is also it was also a grand scheme by him to purposefully create a famine when in reality the base causes of the famine such as severe droughts(the weather),locusts etc were due to factors completely out of his control.It was government mismanagement likely due to him being lied to by his officials that excerabated the problem even further.Furthermore the base concept of the Great Leap Forward was flawed and not thought out throughly with it possible if he had kept farmers growing food and trained others into the steel industry then its likely it would have been more successful.Governmemt mismanagement, as well as misguided agricultural sciences and policies and purposefully wanting a famine to occur are two completely different things.Remember the purpose of the Great Leap Forward was to increase both steel and rice production exponentially in order to increase GDP and make China an economic superpower.Mao was using agricultural theories proposed by Trofim Lysenko which were discredited as pseudoscience much later after the famine took place.One of these ideas was deep ploughing the idea that ploughing the soil deeper than normal would lead to better yields under the idea that the deeper one went the richer the soil was.This was based on the ideas of Lysenko’s colleague Terentiy Maltsev, who encouraged peasants across China to eschew normal ploughing depths of 15–20 centimeters and instead plow deeply into the soil (1 to 2 Chinese feet or 33 to 66 cm). The deep plowing theory stated that the most fertile soil was deep in the earth, and plowing unusually deeply would allow extra-strong root growth. While deep plowing can increase yields in some contexts, the policy is generally considered to have hindered yields in China.Secondly there was the idea that planting seeds closer than normal would not cause a crop of the same species to compete for resources.This was known as close planting, whereby the density of seedlings was at first tripled and then doubled again.The theory was that plants of the same species would not compete with each other.In natural cycles they did fully compete, which actually stunted growth and resulted in lower yields.Both of these were debunked as pseudoscience years later after the famine.Then of course there was the four pests campaign.The degree to which people’s communes lessened or worsened the famine is controversial.Each region dealt with the famine differently, and timelines of the famine are not uniform across China.All regions did not produce the exaggerated yields,some had higher exaggerations and the level of actual yields varied from region to region.At first, the famine didn’t touch the 90 million privileged people living in the cities.Their grain was ”guaranteed” by the state.But when the farmers got too weak to farm out of hunger, the state’s grain ran out, too, and the famine spread to the cities.Its possible if better agronomists and agricultural scientists were employed then its possible that the death toll would not exist..If they had adopted hydroponics/Aquaponics that was available at the time then they could have increased yields exponentially without fear from the poor weather and and also government mismanagement etc.Mass collectivisation was at first successful but when combined with the other factors it contributed to it.China’s Communist Party leader, Mao Tse-tung, had read Russian press reports about new farming systems, such as ”deep plowing” and ”close planting,” that supposedly were producing record yields on Russian state farms.Mao was busily forcing his millions of peasants into collective farms, reneging on his promise to give them their own land.He hoped ample harvests would keep the farmers content even if they didn’t own their land.But the Russian reports were lies: Plowing too deep turns up subsoil with few nutrients, few soil bacteria and little capacity to nurture crops.And planting 10 times as many seedlings per acre, without fear from the poor weather and also government mismanagement etc.China’s Communist Party leader, Mao Tse-tung, had read Russian press reports about new farming systems, such as ”deep plowing” and ”close planting,” that supposedly were producing record yields on Russian state farms.Mao was busily forcing his millions of peasants into collective farms, reneging on his promise to give them their own land.He hoped ample harvests would keep the farmers content even if they didn’t own their land.But the Russian reports were lies: Plowing too deep turns up subsoil with few nutrients, few soil bacteria and little capacity to nurture crops.And planting 10 times as many seedlings per acre, without fertilizer, starves all the plants. (Mao refused to spend scarce capital on chemical fertilizers.)Rural officials didn’t dare oppose the chairman, so they followed his instructions.They didn’t want to tell him about failure, so they claimed his new methods had tripled the harvests.When Mao toured model collective farms, they showed him flourishing rice fields so densely planted that small children stood atop the growing grain stalks! (Huge numbers of rice plants had been laboriously transplanted just for his visit, and the children were standing on hidden benches.)He was driven past miles of piled-up vegetables.Officials said the communes had more food than they could eat, even with five meals a day.Historically, the government had taken about 30 percent of the harvest for the cities and the army.And since the countryside was reporting three times as much grain production,Beijing demanded three times as much grain, too.But that left only 10 percent of the harvest to feed the farm workers and their families.Local party leaders, for their part, conspired to cover up shortfalls and reassign blame in order to protect their own lives and positions.Mao was kept unaware of some of the starvation of villagers in the rural areas who were suffering, as the birth rate began to plummet and deaths increased in 1958 and 1959.In 1960, as gestures of solidarity,Mao ate no meat for seven months and Zhou Enlai cut his monthly grain consumption.In visits to Henan province in 1958, Mao observed what local officials claimed was increases in crop yield of one thousand to three thousand percent achieved, supposedly, in massive 24-hour pushes organized by the officials which they called “sputnik launches”.But the numbers were faked, and so were the fields that Mao observed, which had been carefully prepared in advance of Mao’s visit by local officials, who removed shoots of grain from various fields and carefully transplanted them into a field prepared especially for Mao, which appeared to be a bumper crop.The local officials became trapped by these sham demonstrations to Mao, and exhorted the peasants to reach unattainable goals, by “deep ploughing and close planting”, among other techniques.This ended up making things much worse; the crop failed completely, leaving barren fields.No one was in a position to challenge Mao’s ideas as incorrect, so peasants went to extreme lengths to keep up the charade; some grew seedlings in their bedding and coats and, after the seedlings quickly sprouted, “planted” them in fields—the bedding made the plants look high and healthy.Like in the massive Soviet-created famine in Ukraine (the Holodomer), doctors were prohibited from listing “starvation” as a cause of death on death certificates.This kind of deception was far from uncommon; a famous propaganda proganda picture of the famine shows Chinese children from Shandong province ostensibly standing atop a field of wheat, so densely grown that it could apparently support their weight. In reality, they were standing on a bench concealed beneath the plants, and the “field” was again entirely composed of individually transplanted stalks.Instances did occur where houses did house grain enough to feed people in a village but were blocked from entering or even executed but since each region had different government administraters these and other instances were likely carried out by them without Maos direct instruction or misinterpretation of his intructions.It is known that low level of yields and level of the suffering and death tolls were carried from the ground up to the highest officials but stop just short of them right under Mao meaning the highest officials just under Mao knew of this but to avoid an appearance of failure and be executed they likely kept this information from Mao this to a degree he was again lied to or made ignorant of the truth.The agricultural economy was centrally planned, and regional Party leaders were given production quotas for the communes under their control.Each communes had different quotas.Their output was then appropriated by the state and distributed at its discretion.In 2008, former deputy editor of Yanuang Chunqui and author Yang Jisheng would summarize his perspective of the effect of the production targets as an inability for supply to be redirected to where it was most demanded:In Xinyang people starved at the doors of the grain warehouses.As they died, they shouted, “Communist Party, Chairman Mao, save us”.If the granaries of Henan and Hebei had been opened, no one need have died.As people were dying in large numbers around them, officials did not think to save them.Their only concern was how to fulfill the delivery of grain quotas and then open those doors to peasants once the quotas had been meet..Its likely Mao did not know of this and thus guards simply ignored pleas from peasants as they were following direct not to give food until quotas were meet.Had Mao known of the level of suffering and correct level of yields then it is likely he would have made efforts to have what was availible be made availible to the peasants to ensure state loyalty.The policy set up was to only have grain appropriated to the peasants only when the quotas were met – and since quotas were not met due to low yields then it lay uneaten in the graineries.What was present in the grainieries was by actual records enough to have fed towns,villages and cities provided it was distributed not only to people in the same area but in different areas or grainieries with large surplus amounts of grain could have been destributed to areas that had lower yields which did not occur due to a breakdown in communications between the leaders in each region.Had a proper system had been set up to distribute grain evenly across the country then each regions harvests stored in each grainieries could have been distributed not just to people in the same region but also to other regions across the country so that grainieries that had more than enough to feed their area could give enough to feed that area and then excess could be transferred to areas where it was in short supply to keep populations alive and probably reduce the death toll by half.One argument is that excessive eating took place in the mess halls, and that this directly led to a worsening of the famine.If excessive eating had not taken place, one scholar argued, “the worst of the Great Chinese Famine could still have been avoided in mid-1959”.Thus people being greedy assholes and eating too much of their own fair share or what they needed when they were lied to about levels of supplies likely led to to supplies running out very quickly exponentially quicker than it would have normally had.The overeating was likely carried out due because people were lied to about the amount of food – the over exaggerated yields made people believe in superabundance and thus ate more than their fair share to the point that they got fatty and overstuffed meaning supplies ran out exponentionally quicker.Had the true yields been known its likely that people would have eaten less – enough to get by but not at starvation level.Its possible that people not over eating and had people given access to food in graineries then the death toll would have been reduced by at least 70-80%.However, dire hunger did not set in to places like Da Fo village until 1960,and the public dining hall participation rate was found not to be a meaningful cause of famine in Anhui and Joangxi In Da Fo village, “food output did not decline in reality, but there was an astonishing loss of food availability associated with Maoist state appropriation”.If these two things had been rectified the death toll could have been reduced by 74%.If the weather was more favourable and did not have a flood and drought in the years before it the death toll could have been reduced by an extra 10% thus 84% in total.Not killing off the birds and Mao being told the truth and thus not exporting grains etc and redistributing it much better would have reduced the death toll by another 10% thus reducing it by 94% meaning as much as 51,700,000 deaths could have been prevented and only a mere 3,300,000 people may only have perished.This level of complexity could only occur in a modern world where AI and automation are possible.Capitalists quote the 55,000,000 deaths as if it’s the entire death toll and think that a famine would not have occurred had a capitalist been in charge.It was caused by a surprise droughts and change in the weather and locusts something that was out of his control or anyone’s control – with government mismanagement exacerbating it,it would have occurred regardless of who was in charge.Mao set out idealistic and high goals for agriculture with his officials fearing they would be killed for reporting the true lower than expected yields caused by the drought etc likely over exaggerated the yields thus leading him without knowing it make the famine worse by exporting more and importing less and also ignoring the rural areas as it is believed he was completely unaware of the suffering in the rural areas if the country who were hardest hit.Many historians are polarised as to how much Mao knew of the extent of how bad the weather and locusts affected the crop yields.Some believe he was clueless due to being lied to by his officials who wanted to please him at the fear of being imprisoned or killed themselves for reporting the true lower than expected yields and thus over exaggerated yields thus making him non complicit in the increased death toll while others believe otherwise thinking he knew full well of its extent and purposefully allowed the famine to happen.Although actual harvests were reduced, local officials, under tremendous pressure to report record harvests to central authorities in response to the innovations, competed with each other to announce increasingly exaggerated results.These results were used as the basis for determining the amount of grain which would be taken by the State, supplied to the towns and cities and exported.This barely left enough grain for the peasants, and in some areas, starvation set in.Mao’s efforts to cool the Leap in late 1958 met resistance within the Party and when Mao proposed a scaling down of steel targets, “many people just wouldn’t change and wouldn’t accept it”.Thus, according to historian Tao Kai, the Leap “wasn’t the problem of a single person, but that many people had ideological problems”. Tao also pointed out that “everyone was together” on the anti-rightist campaign and only a minority didn’t approve of the Great Leap’s policies or put forth different opinions. Jean-Louis Margolin suggests that the actions of the Chinese Communist Party under Mao in the face of widespread famine imitated the policies of the Soviet Communist Party under Joseph Stalin (whom Mao greatly admired) nearly three decades earlier during the Soviet famine of 1932-1933.At that time, the U.S.S.R. exported grain for international propaganda purposes despite millions dying of starvation across southern areas of the Soviet Union.Ashton, et al. write that policies leading to food shortages, natural disasters, and a slow response to initial indications of food shortages were to blame for the famine.Policies leading to food shortages included the implementation of the imporoper commune system and an emphasis on non-agricultural activities such as backyard steel production.Natural disasters that excaerbated this included drought,flood,typhoon,plant disease, and insect pest.Droughts and flooding cannot be the sole reason they account for at least 40% of the blame but they were a contributing factor to the famine with the interrelationships between floods and droughts as well as government mismanagement creating a positive feedback wherein they exacerbated each other.Policy changes affecting how farming was organized coincided with droughts and floods.As a result, year-over-year grain production fell dramatically in China.The harvest was down by 15% in 1959 compared to 1958, and by 1960, it was at 70% of its 1958 level.The slow response was in part due to a lack of objective reporting on the agricultural situation, including a “nearly complete breakdown in the agricultural reporting system”. This was partly caused by strong incentives for officials to over-report crop yields.The unwillingness of the Central Government to seek international aid was a major factor; China’s net grain exports in 1959 and 1960 would have been enough to feed 16 million people 2000 calories per day.Ashton, et al. conclude that “It would not be inaccurate to say that 30 million people died prematurely as a result of errors of internal policy and flawed international relations.”.Through simply preventing overeating the death toll of the famine could have reduced by 54%.Mobo Gao suggested that the Great Leap Forward’s terrible effects came not from malignant intent on the part of the Chinese leadership at the time, but instead related to the structural nature of its rule, and the vastness of China as a country.Gao says “the terrible lesson learnt is that China is so huge and when it is uniformly ruled, follies or wrong policies will have grave implications of tremendous magnitude.It is true to some extent Mao did purposefully restrict aid and grain to specific individuals and groups mainly his enemies.Benjamin Valentino writes that like in the USSR during the famine of 1932-1933, peasants were confined to their starving villages by a system of household registration and the worst effects of the famine were directed against enemies of the regime Those labeled as “black elements” (religious leaders, rightists, rich peasants, etc.) in any previous campaign were given the lowest priority in the allocation of food, and therefore died in the greatest numbers.Drawing from Jasper Becker’s book Hungry Ghosts,genocide scholar Adam Jones states that “no group suffered more than the Tibetans” from 1959 to 1962.The production targets were not accompanied by a sufficient amount of capital and modern inputs such as fertiliser rather, they were to be reached in large measure by heroic efforts on the part of the peasants, often beaten into submission by overzealous party cadres.Substantial effort was expended during the Great Leap Forward on large-scale but often poorly planned capital construction projects, such as irrigation works and ‘backyard furnaces’. Because of the intense pressure for results, the rapidity of the change, and the inexperience and resistance of many cadres and peasants, the Great Leap Forward soon ran into massive difficulties.The peasants became exhausted from the unremitting pressure to produce.The inflation of production statistics, on the theory that accuracy mattered less than political effect, resulted in extravagant claims. Disruption of agricultural activity and transportation produced food shortages. In addition, the weather in 1959–61 was unfavorable – though this took a minor role compared to governmental inefficiency and overambitious campaigns, and agricultural production declined sharply.Cooperative members retained ownership of their land but secured a share in the cooperative by staking their plots along with those of other members in the common land pool. By 1956 the transformation of mutual aid teams into agricultural cooperatives was nearly complete. By the end of that year, moreover, the great majority of cooperatives had moved to a still higher stage of collectivism having become advanced producers’ cooperatives.These cooperatives contrasted with those of the earlier stage in that members no longer earned income based on shares of land owned.Instead,collective farm profits were distributed to members primarily on the basis of labor contributions.The fact that profits were not equally shared discentivised them to work harder and also technically they did not qualify as actual cooperative farms.Furthernore collectivised farms were forced upon farmers and thus this demoralised them..The average cooperative was made up of 170 families and more than 700 people.Although small private plots and thus private farms were permitted, most of the land was owned collectively by the cooperative.Therefore private farms still existed in Maoist China during the Great Leap Forward and the resulting Great Famine of 1959-1961 which then means that it was neither communism or socialism but rather state capitalism that caused the famine.Collectivised farms were forced upon the populace which coupled with the presence of private farms and the lack of equal shared profits and lack of democracy means that there’s were not actual collectivised farms and thus collectivisation cannot be a contributing factor.Once collectivisation was achieved and agricultural output per capita began to increase, the leadership embarked on the extremely ambitious programs of the Great Leap Forward of 1958–60. In agriculture this meant unrealistically high production goals and an even higher degree of collectivization than had already been achieved.The collectivisation was not successful as there was still private farms in existence during the Great Leap Forward.The existing collectives were organized very rapidly into people communes much larger units with an average of 5,400 households and a total of 20,000 to 30,000 members on average.The production targets were not accompanied by a sufficient amount of capital and modern inputs such as fertiliser rather, they were to be reached in large measure by heroic efforts on the part of the peasants,often beaten into submission by overzealous party cadres.This shows that the farms were undemocratic and not actual collectively owned farms but rather quasi state owned farms with this demoralising workers alongside the fact that large amounts of farmers were diverted to work in steel production.Had Maoist China has access to chemical fertilisers and machinery that replaced horses then its possible that yields could have been enough to produce enough to prevent famine even in the face of all the other factors..After the Great Famine of 1959-1961 genuine efforts were thus made to increase agricultural productivity including allowing and encouraging private farmers to be set up and flourish and be sidelined to especially the rural areas that were hardest hit with it noted that Mao had decided to give up red meat when he heard rumour of more people going hungry in order to allow said meat to be spared for them or to stop meat production in order to allow the grain usually fed to livestock to be fed to humans.The government began distributing food substitutes: ground-up banana tree roots and stems to be mixed with steamed rice, cakes made of rice husks, sugar-cane fiber and turnip tops.People hunted rats and sparrows. Finally, in 1961, Mao’s senior lieutenants assembled conclusive evidence of the massive death toll.Mao was forced to reverse his farming policies.Peasants were allowed to plant grain for themselves and the Chinese government began to make big investments in chemical fertilizers,encouraging the growth of private farms..In 1962, the Chinese government even bought grain from the hated capitalists in Canada and Australia.People were encouraged to write relatives overseas for food parcels.In fact asides from that dip in 1959-1961 after the Great Chinese Famine the amount of grain produced by China actually exponentially increased every year after 1961 even during the last remaining 15 years of Maos administration and life and has been doing so exponentially since his death in 1976 except for a few drops which coincide with major droughts.In fact the Great Famine of 1959-1961 was in fact the very last famine ever in a country that has had consistently had to deal with famines caused by floods and drought etc since Ancient Times.So yes in China a country that had since Ancient Times frequently had to deal with famines that were the result of droughts and floods etc was after Great Fame of 1959-1961 had from then on no longer to deal with it due to the reformed policies of Mao.This was the only famine to occur under Mao and was the result of drought,floods and a very bad government plan.Fear was also a contributing factor.Mao had built up a reputation from the initial genocide of capitalists and dissenters as someone not to dissapoint etc or else you get executed that the entire government on local to federal level during the famine and the previous years during the implementation of the Great Leap Forward led to the entire communist party and rest of the government on a local level to overreport yields,under report deaths and follow vague policies that they decided to keep him the dark about everything and this exacerbated the problem further.Furthermore prior to the Great Famine of 1959-1961 the levels of grain production were in fact increasing exponentially every year from 1943-1959 right up to before the disastrous Great Leap Forward.So yes Maos policies after the disastrous Great Leap forward and subsequent famine is what has led China a country that has had consistently had to deal with famine since Ancient Times to one that has have never had to deal with famine ever again.It was the only famine to occur in Maoist China.Its causes were a combination of natural disasters pandemic a misstep in government policy.Its not like Mao intentionally set out to create the greatest famine in human hostory or in Chinese history because his aim and the whole purpose of the Great Leap Forward was to increase agricultural productivity and steel production in order to increase exports and thus GDP to make China an economic superpower and lift it out of the Middle Ages into the 20th century.How would purposefully starting a famine turn China into an economic superpower.Misinformation in the form of pseudoscience,his officials over exaggerating crop yields and under reporting the extent of the famine alongside floods and droughts led to the high death toll.This famine which accounts for half of the supposed 100,000,000 death toll of communism could have occurred if China was not “socialist” or “communism” but rather gung ho capitalist and if an actual capitalist entrepreneur,libertarian etc was in charge with the same authoritarian and economic illiteracy as Mao due to the geopolitical factors of the time.If Mao never came to power in 1949 and China was still under the through of capitalism and a capitalist was in power and the same industrial capitalist was given the same pseudoscience,had diverted farmers into the steel industry etc and was just as authoritarian as him and initiated the same policy to bring the country forward then the same famine would have occurred.It was less about “socialism” or “communism” and more about a mistake meaning a capitalist with the same gung ho capitalist conservative fervour as say Donald Trump in China in 1959 could have just as easily adopted the Great Leap Forward in the same manner for the same reasons then resulting in the same death toll.In otherwards even if Mao never came to power and a capitalist just as fervereant and authoritarian as Donald Trump came to power in 1949 and the country was still capitalist and needed to increase agricultural productivity and steel production and he was given the same pseudoscience and bad ideas then its likely the Great Leap Forward and the resulting Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961 would have been just as bad as it was in our timeline and universe.It wasn’t a case of it being the result of bad government policy as it was just badly thought out any politician whether a libertarian and conservative capitalist could have carried out the Great Leap Forward with such disastrous result.If the Great Leal Forward was applied by anarcho capitalists,libertarians with zero state control and allowed the machination s of the free market system then the same outcome in the form of the Great Chinese Famine would have occurred in 1959-1961.The point is that considering the geopolitical conditions of China in the 1950s anyone if they were a socialist,communist or even capitalist could have made the same mistake in the form of the Great Leap Forward and had the same terrible famine.There was so many ways the Great Leap Forward could have gone better by first not diverting farmers to steel work and not adopting pseudoscience.The farmers could have been given mechanisation in the form of tractors etc and chemical fertilisers.Keep in mind like Soviet Russia,Maoist China was still several centuries behind the rest of the world and was still using horses and manure from them etc which the rest of the world has outgrown since the 1700s.The lack of development in the economy probably made these expensive.Furthermore they were up until then exempt from the Green Revolution which was occurring in the rest if the world.Then of course hydroponics,aquaponics etc could have been utilised you improve yields which was at least 2,000 years at that point.Then of course the pseudoscience of Trofim Lysenko could have been ignored alongside the four pests campaign focusing on locusts rather than sparrows.The deep ploughing method etc could have been tested on several plots and then discarded.Mao himself regretted the Great Leap Forward and it was largely done without forethought due to the need to lift China from the Medievil ages to the 20th century.The fact that his officials lied to him purposely about the true extent of the low yields and covered up barren fields and also kept everything else’s in the dark to him shows that to a degree Mao can be absolved for the death toll and the famine itself.As stated he did not intentionally set out to cause a famine it was a combination of numerous factors that coalesced into each other that led to it occuring.He could have if shown the actual records of crops made efforts to import crops and relief from other countries including the west and reduce exports.The reason that the death toll was so high was due him being lied to and this led to him exporting more crops,importing less from other countries and not changing the policies with regards to the distribution of crops.Had he been shown the true yields its possible that he would have imported more from other countries and exported less and changed policies with regards to distribution as he did takes steps to prevent another famine or use of chemical fertilisers,employ mechanisation and stopped the slaughter of sparrows and furthermore gave up red meat.The fact that this was the only famine under his administration and the very last famine in China’s entire history a country that for thousands of years suffered famines routinely that killed more than the Great Chinese Famine combined proved that he regretted the Great Leap Forward and again it was not done intentionally and was done without forethought as a need to bring China centuries ahead on par with the western world.If you were a capitalist in his place given the same pseudoscience and lied to would you have done anything different?Famines are not good for economic growth and since it did cause an economic collapse and he was trying to bolster the economy it was not intentional.Mao did not intend on causing a famine as his goal was to spur economic growth and famines like the Great Chinese Famine did cause economic collapse something he did not want and he knew would happen and tried to avoid therefore he did not set out to cause it was a result of bad economic plan in the form of the Great Leap Forward.Mao had after his initial genocide during his early adminstration years before 1959 created a culture of fear amongst his subordinates and regional leaders who didn’t want disappoint someone who did not tolerate opposition and failure and so they lied constantly to him and Mao was only if the last people to fully gain acknowledgement of the horror and extent of the famine caused by the Great Leap.In otherwards people below him knew full well the true extent of the famine and its death toll throughout its entirity but lied to him and he was the one of the last people to be told it was so bad of that it even happened.His underlings did virtually everything they could to prevent news of it happening at all reaching Maos ears including outright lying,suppressing riots and burying bodies in mass graves.When you have tens of millions of people dying in the space of three years your going to have mass graves and bodies piling up in the streets and mass riots which for the most part Mao was unaware of.Mao was completely unaware of what was going only until at the very end of the famine as at that point it was impossible for his subordinates to cover up reports of the death toll or that it was happening due to increased rioting and the fact that bodies of those who died of starvation were starting to pile up in the streets of villages,towns and cities that are too numerous for officials to bury in mass graves to hide them from him.China in 1959-1961 due to being underdeveloped and being several centuries behind the rest of the world meant that news of what was going in could not be televised across the country through newspapers,radio reports etc and whatever deaths occurred were reported to the leaders in each region of China under Mao and it stopped right there they did not report to him how bad things were until after 1961 so technically to a large degree Mao was completely unaware of the true death toll and extent of the famine until at the very end.Its possible that Mao was kept in the dark of what was going in terms about riots and bodies piling up in the streets and mass graves by his officials just as likely as they overexagerrated yields of crops.Televisions,radios etc were not common enough to be able to control as in modern times because as stated China was already several centuries behind the rest of the world.Mao was not in a position himself to suppress the extent of the famine through censorship of and control of the media because he did not know it was so bad.As stated the fact that this was the only famine during his administration and the very last famine in China’s history shows that Mao made efforts to prevent another famine highlighting that the famine was not caused intentionally it was the result a poorly thought out government policy that was born out the intention of lifting the country from the Medievil Ages to the 20th century and actually eliminating poverty.Therefore Mao cannot be credited with the 15,000,000 – 55,000,000 dead from the Great Chinese Famine of 1959 – 1961 since it was not an intentional act of genocide it was effect of a mistake and badly thought policies meaning that 15,000,000 – 55,000,000 dead can be removed from the 100,000,000 death toll of “communism and “socialism and that of Mao himself ” lowering it to at least at least 45,000,000.Mao was therefore intentionally responsible for at most a few million deaths within the range of between 5,000,000 – 10,000,000 deaths.This is the exact opposite of say Congress and Donald Trump activiley carrying out actions with malicious intent that qualify as intentional genocide during a pandemic.This doesn’t negate the fact he was responsible for an extra several million deaths due to the Hundred Flowers Campaign and Cultural Revolution.Same goes for Soviet Russia etc the largest amount of death tolls came from primarily famines which were rooted in drought etc.The Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961 which accounts for about half of the death toll of “communism” was a mistake that just about anyone could have made.As stated Mao did not intentionally set out to cause the greatest famine in human history it was the result of bad policies that anyone including a capitalist could have carried out.The purpose of the Great Leap Forward was to bring China a country that due to being ruled by feudalism up until 1912 was at least several centuries behind the rest of the world into the 20th century and make China an economic superpower.Famines are not good for economic growth and the Great Chinese Famine proved that and since Mao didn’t want to cause an economic crash he therefore did not want to cause a famine.Therefore using logic Mao did not set out to intentionally cause a famine because doing so would cause a massive recession which it did and this was the exact opposite of what Mao wanted.Therefore causing a famine was not what Mao wanted.the vast majority of deaths associated these “communist” countries during the 20th century such as Soviet Russia,Maoist China etc was due to famine and poor decisions with most famines the result of poor weather outside of the control of these governments.At least another 25,000,000 – 35,000,000 that were the result of famines outside of the control of governmental control.Outside of famines the intentional death toll of “communism” that is where the state intentionally carried out genocide comes to at most 10,000,000 – 20,000,000 people still high but only about 10-20% of the 100,000,000 death toll and capitalism kills far more than that every year and decade.Therefore in reality only 10,000,000 – 20,000,000 people died under “communism” and “socialism”.Capitalism kills this amount every year.Even if the death toll is at least 100,000,000 kills this amount every five years.Food shortages did occur due to droughts but they never led to famines due to command economies,private farmers,chemical fertiliser and the Green Revolution etc.Any bread lines and food shortages that occurred in China between 1960 – 1990 had almost always to do with the constant routine droughts that occur there.Therefore there is a myth that famine was a consistent problem in China under “communism” as after that single famine food productivity rose exponentially every year up until modern times with poverty also exponentially declining every year since his death and in fact even before his death after the last famine..Looking back, it seems hard to believe that Mao and his colleagues would be taken in by Russian pseudoscience, which could have been checked easily with a few test plots.It’s also hard to believe that government officials would rather starve their own people than admit to the world a policy mistake had been made.So yes Mao did use the famine as a excuse as to carry out intentional genocide against his enemies but not all of his citizens.His using the famine to carry out intentional genocide through starving them was done against his enemies efforts were made to alleviate the famine when it came to his citizens with issues of people being denied food stored in grain houses largely being carried out by Mao but by by different people in charge of each region and commune..Therefore the famine was not an intentional act but misguided and poorly thought out government actions and although it was used to an extent as an opportunity to commit actual genoicide against his enemies it was not done so at the behest of intentionally killing off his own citizens as killing his own citizens through starvation even those loyal to him would not help state loyalty meaning to an extent he knew there was some shortages to restrict aid to his enemies but not as severe that he purposefully refused grain to his loyal citizens.Mao knew that purposefully starving his own loyal citizens would cause revolt and it’s why he believed sending more grain to the loyal densely populated cities was important to keep the factory worrkers loyal and exported more to increase GDP to invest more in infrastructure.The fact that agricultural productivity was already increasing exponentially every year prior to 1959 shows that the Great Leap Forwards plan of increasing grain yields was unnecessary.The level of government mismanagement shows that it was not a collective or colleberative effort on part of the government as a whole as most government officials of each regions were competing against each other and even against Mao in how to control the disaster.Even the notion of communes does not infer collaboration as each region in theory competed against each other for resources from the state.Part of the main reason for the Great Leap Forward was a desire to outcompete both the United States and United Kingdom in still production which in order to do so required a need to increase steel and grain production and thus was motivated by Mao wanting to repay loans he had with Soviet Russia as it was believed that Mao owed Russia billions of yuan to Russia and wanted to pay them back quickly therefore he was willing to do and believe any pseudoscience in order to make ad much money as quickly as possible..Within the Party, there were major debates about redistribution.A moderate faction within the party and Politburo member Liu Shaoqi argued that change should be gradual and any collectivisation of the peasantry should wait until industrialisation which could provide the agricultural machinery for mechanized farming. A more radical faction led by Mao Zedong argued that the best way to finance industrialization was for the government to take control of agriculture, thereby establishing a monopoly over grain distribution and supply.This would allow the state to buy at a low price and sell much higher, thus raising the capital necessary for the industrialization of the country.By diverting farmers away from farms and into steel production and construction led to further agricultural waste.However, the amount of labor which was diverted to steel production and construction projects meant that much of the harvest was left to rot because it was not collected in some areas.Despite the harmful agricultural innovations, the weather was very favourable in 1958 and the harvest was also good.However, the amount of labor which was diverted to steel production and construction projects meant that much of the harvest was left to rot because it was not collected in some areas.Furthermore there was a major flood in 1958 that led to Mao deciding to use farmers as search and rescue teams thus again allowing crops to rot.This problem was exacerbated by a devastating locust swarm, which was caused when their natural predators were killed as part of the Four Pests Campaign.Although actual harvests were reduced, local officials, under tremendous pressure to report record harvests to central authorities in response to the innovations, competed with each other to announce increasingly exaggerated results.These results were used as the basis for determining the amount of grain which would be taken by the State, supplied to the towns and cities and exported.This barely left enough grain for the peasants, and in some areas, starvation set in. A 1959 drought and flooding from the Yellow River in the same year also contributed to the famine.During 1958–1960 China continued to be a substantial net exporter of grain,despite the widespread famine which was being experienced in the countryside, as Mao sought to maintain face and convince the outside world of the success of his plans.Foreign aid was refused.When the Japanese foreign minister told his Chinese counterpart Chen Yi about an offer of 100,000 tonnes of wheat which was going to be shipped away from public view, he was rebuffed.John F Kennedy was also aware that the Chinese were exporting food to Africa and Cuba during the famine and he said “we’ve had no indication from the Chinese Communists that they would welcome any offer of food.”With dramatically reduced yields, even urban areas received greatly reduced rations; however, mass starvation was largely confined to the countryside, where, as a result of drastically inflated production statistics, very little grain was left for the peasants to eat.Food shortages were bad throughout the country, but the provinces which had adopted Mao’s reforms with the most vigor,such as Anhui,Gansu and Henan,tended to suffer disproportionately.Sichuan,one of China’s most populous provinces, known in China as “Heaven’s Granary” because of its fertility, is thought to have suffered the highest number of deaths from starvation due to the vigor with which provincial leader Ali Jingquan undertook Mao’s reforms. There are widespread oral reports, though little official documentation, of human cannibalism being practiced in various forms as a result of the famine.Author Lan Yianke also claims that, while growing up in Henan during the Great Leap Forward, he was taught to “recognize the most edible kinds of bark and clay by his mother. When all of the trees had been stripped and there was no more clay, he learned that lumps of coal could appease the devil in his stomach, at least for a little while.”He like most people would have been unaware as to what effect killing birds would have on locust populations as understanding of the complex ecology of China was basic at best for its time – its true that they knew locusts are grains but they also believed the sparrows ate more grain and did not eat locusts and so killed the birds rather than the locusts but the main factor was an unusually bad and surprise drought brought on by China’s unpredictable weather meaning its likely had a capitalist had been in charge of China instead of him and had nothing but private farmers and no command economy that economic idiot capitalists wanted then its likely the death toll would have just as bad or even worse.This is because hyperinflation would have been the cause of the famine and the ratio of land catered to private and state farms would have caused chaos and more than likely they would not have been able to deal with the fact that the same amount of crops would fail due to the bad weather and also the fact that they would have likely killed off the sparrows thus encouraging the locust population to skyrocket.In otherwards the same factors that caused crop losses and low yields would have still occurred under a capitalist economy meaning the death toll would have just as bad.Thus there is debate as to how responsible he was for the 45,000,000-55,000,000 dead from the Great Famine of 1959-1961.Under Mao private enterprise was restricted mainly to the rural areas while the state focused on urbanised areas.Private enterprises were also allowed in retail,restaurants,the steel industry and other sectors outside of state control.Therefore these private farms in Maoist China and other businesses were by all legal definitions private enterprises as private individuals reared crops and livestock and provided goods and services of their choice and then sold them for profits that they kept for themselves which increased their disposable income.These were by all legal definition private enterprises which is not allowed in either communism or socialism either the real or bullshit definition.The government propped these private business up and kept them afloat by bailouts and guaranteed markets which again cannot occur in either socialism and communism both the bullshit or proper definition it can only occur within state capitalism.Maoist China cannot be considered socialist or communist since not all of the sectors of society were run for profit by the state that had centralised planning of the economy as their were private industries that were run for profit which is not how socialism or communism works.Even though he had an initial spur of intentional genocide at the start of his adminstration and during the Hundred Flowers Campaign and The Cultural Revolution he very rarely encouraged it again with his role in the Great Famine debates making his role in causing the deaths of roughly 55,000,000 people through causing an intentional famine debatable..China is and always has been state capitalist both during the time of Mao to present day especially since it began to open up to foreign markets by 2007 after the Great Recession the difference is the extent of the governments stronghold on the economy with the economic reforms after the death of Mao only been eliminating price controls and allowing private enterprises to be set up as competitors with today 60% of the Chinese economy privately run.Mao like Soviet Russia even though they allowed private farms and industries to exist realised that they private industries and business they encouraged were becoming too powerful and became too successful and thus feared not a revolution of the proletariat working class but by the bourgeoisie capitalist class – the exact opposite of what Marx wanted or predicted.They controlled them by having them heavily regulated,taxed and sidelined to only rural communities out of sight of the rest of the world to suppress competition to their state monopoly thus since they kept them under control they likely earned the erroneous label of communist or socialist by attacking private industries they helped create in the first place thus making historians,Americans and even themselves believe they were communist or socialist when they were not.It is true that Mao did commit intentional mass murder and genocide against business owners at first but this was at first done to those he found particularly corrupt etc and those who refused to hand over business to the government that he believed should be handed over to the state.This also included those that also treated their workers extremely harshly,landlords who treated their tenants harshly alongside of course counter revolutionaries.It was also done to those who got absurdly wealthy through corruption,bribery,tax evasion,selling state secrets and treating their workers and tenants in the case of landlords etc extremly badly.This included outright slaughter to even encouraging peasants to drive them to suicide and was done only to business men who got wealthy through nefarious means by corruption and treating their workers and tenants unjustly by doing everything they could to squeeze every last penny from them,overworking them of even beating them up and just in general treating them like shit.A substantial amount of businessesmen were spared from this genocide primarily those who paid taxes and got wealthy even absurdly wealthy through legal and ethical means meaning it wasn’t so much the fact that businesses men got wealthy at all but how they got wealthy that determined whether they were spared or not from genocide.Thus even those who got absurdly wealthy through ethical means,paid taxes and treated their workers fairly etc were spared from his genocide.Mao didn’t care about private entrepreneurs becoming absurdly wealthy in fact he wanted them to become wealthy and if possible become millionaires or even billionaires because then they would have extra disposable income to then buy more state produced goods.The wealthier they got the more it helped the state sectors of the economy and thus improved GDP.What he did care was if they got wealthy through illegal or unethical means and were thus likely to spin the economy out of control by not contributing by promised buying of state produced goods and paying taxes and were likely to commit treason by committing the five evils thus only those who carried out the five evils and treated workers terribly were killed or imprisoned the rest who abided by his legislation were spared and encouraged to become as wealthy as possible.They were also likely to branch into areas the government did not want thus spinning the economy out of control.Those he killed were unlikely to be loyal to the state by evading tax,treating workers badly,selling secrets,bribery and not allowing the state to gain control of the sectors of the economy they decided was best under their control and thus were unlikely to buy state manufactured goods.Treating workers badly would have made workers much weaker than normal and thus less likely to contribute to the economy by becoming poorer at their jobs and less able to contribute to the economy including buying goods from state owned enterprises with treating tenants harshly and extracting too much out of them through high rents would have done the same.Those spared were thus more likely to abide by the regulations he set down.Being corrupt and getting wealthy through nefarious means would have made them untrustworthy and thus unlikely to abide by the new regulations namely the five evils especially bribery,tax evasion and selling state secrets etc.This was done at first to send a clear message to all future business that if they didn’t abide by regulations they would be consequences if they didn’t though in reality he decided to only punish them lightly by sapping them of resources as to go on another mass genocide and purge the country of all private businessesmen would be both political and economic suicide as he needed private enterprises to grow the economy and to ensure state loyalty and doing so would incite counter revolutionaries.Any instances of these infractions after the genocide were no longer met with genocide but rather with fines and measures to make them bankrupt and imprisonments with it rarely happening at all thanks to the fear struck by the initial genocide.Killing them would have been economic suicide as they were needed to pick up the slack.Genoicide against counter revolutionaries did happen but these were those he deemed were themselves terrorists who were a threat to both economic growth and social stability as most citizens were allowed to criticise the state.The effect of imprisonments and massacre for only the most extreme dissidents had the knock on effect of keeping the less radical citizens under control without the state having to go to even more extreme lengths.The state by imprisoning and murdering only extremist who were a real threat and were prone to terrorism etc were able to keep the rest of society in control without outright control.To ensure state loyalty Mao had to tread lightly in applications of new laws and treatment of the public in terms of what he wanted and what was needed to ensure state loyalty and prevent riots and rebellion from the general public.This is no different than Bush,Obama and Trump era America through the Patriot Act and the treatment of Julian Assange,Edward Snowden,Chelsea Manning at the hand of both RNC/DNC.The Republicans and corporate democrats both capitalists by the way torturing people,carrying out war crimes and censoring progressives on YouTube and distorting the facts through mainstream media is no different than what was in Soviet Russia,Maoist China and Cuba by the state.Teapot calling kettle black anyone?.The cultural revolution that is the last attempt to purge China of all remaining capitalist business from 1966-1976 was a failure as private enterprises existed in Maoist China from the very start to the very end and they existed right through state capitalist China from 1976 when he died until today.Private businesses in Maoist China worked like this – they were given state owned land,factories and other base materials and were also given quotas which were to be met in order to meet the basic needs of the economy but were allowed to surpass these quotas to become as wealthy as they wanted to increase their own disposable income and that of their workers as the more disposable they earned the more they had to use to buy state run products and services and were encouraged to buy goods etc from other private businesses as well in order to increase their disposable income to buy state made goods in a positive feedback loop that benefited both sides.Private entrepreneurs could get as wealthy as they wanted provided they did not commit treason,commit bribery and tax evasion,did not treat their workers harshly and did not get too greedy and start cutting into the states jurisdiction which would cause imbalances in the economy that could lead to economic crises similar to the Scissor Crises in order to prevent boom and bust cycles and thus famines.The state therefore set up private businesses.Since a significant amount of the private businesses were spared from the initial genocide and private enterprises were set up before the Great Famine 1959-1961 Maoist China was from the very start state capitalist.The fact that they existed both before,during and even after the Cultural Revolution shows that it was a failure.The.Cultural Revolution of 1966-1976 was meant to eliminate all remaining capitalist enterprises from China during the last 10 years of Maos administration and life and it was a failure because they existed after it.The fact that private enterprises existed until the very last 10 years of Maos adminstration and life means and the Cultural Revolution aim of eliminating capitalism was a failure for the following reason – private enterprises existed throughout the the entire 27 years of Maoist China and the only way this was true was because they were tolerated and were set up by Mao himself something which cannot happen in communism or socialism.He had 27 years to purge the country of capitalist enterprises so if he was an actual “communist” or “socialist” dictator then he would have purged the country of all private enterprises within the first few years when he had the chance and resources to do so.He had unlimited,unrestricted control of the economy,society,media for 27 years and had the ability to eliminate them with a whims notice in few years once he came to power – but he didn’t and after 27 years he was carrying out the final purge in the form of the Cultural Revolution shows that his “socialist” or “communist” revolution was a complete failure.The fact that private enterprises remained and grew under his 27 years requiring the Cultural Revolution in the first place after 27 years in power shows it wasn’t socialism or communism.The fact that the whole purpose of the Cultural Revolution that lasted during the last ten years of Maos life was to eliminate the very last vestiges of capitalism including private businesses thus means that during the entire 27 years of Maos reign wherein he had complete control of all of society such as the media,government and economy and he could shut down all private enterprises at a whims notice and yet private enterprises still existed after 27 years because they were set up by him in the first place and let flourish in order to pick up the slack and also create new money from scratch that was to be added to the economy and then through state control gateway theory was needed to fund the state owned businesses etc.Someone with the amount of unrestricted level of power over the economy,society and media such as Mao would have eliminated all private enterprises within the first few years thus rendering the whole purpose of the Cultral Revolution pointless.Therefore using actual logic because private enterprises lasted during the entirety of Maos entire 27 years in power and required the Cultural Revolution shows that his country was not socialist if communist.Think about this we go on about how the government has control over the media etc and infringing in people rights yet the constitution prevents the state gaining complete control but in Maoist China the constitution did not exist and other safeguards did not exist.Mao has complete unrestricted control of the economy and society for 27 years without constitutional safeguards snd yet after 27 years private enterprises still existed enough so to warrent the Cultural Revolution which was the states final purge of capitalist enterprises therefore Maoist China was neither socialist or communist it was state capitalist.Maos communist and socialist revolution was thus an absolute failure in every sense of the world as the fact that he had to carry out the Cultural Revolution in the first place after 27 years of unrestricted power of the country shows it was a failure.Cultural Revolution was less likely about purging the last remaining capitalist entities even though they were tolerated and even set up by the set prior to this showing that the country as state capitalist.Its likely that was the Sino-Soviet split that was responsible for pushing him to the point that he was going all out against his former Russian allies with his advanced age of being 73 years old that spurred it.It was likely due to him falsely believing Khruschevs prediction that communism would be achieved in 1980 that led to Mao deciding to purge the country of the last of the private entrepreneurs he help set it up with it also likely him going against the wishes of Khruschev.Thus even before private farmers were propped up private enterprises existed from the very start of Maoist China,they existed throughout Maoist China even during the Great Leap Forward and Great Chinese Famine of 1959-1961 and existed until the very end.Private entrepreneurs were required by law to meet quotas and were allowed to supersede them as the more profits they made the more disposable income income they had to buy goods from state run enterprises.The purpose of private business was to get as wealthy as they wanted through ethical means so they and their workers could buy state owned goods that would increase GDP.They were not however allowed to corner markets and sector that the state had secured in order to prevent imbalances in the economy.Should any of them begin to flounder they were bailed out and they were guaranteed markets to the state and also to international markets in order to keep them running.The state to keep them running even would carry out legal procedures that would put them at a loss meaning the state would go into debt in order to keep private enterprises afloat with these guaranteed markets to the state and international markets would be ensured these enterprises always had consistent sales and were kept automatically afloat with goods purchased by the state from private enterprises sold on international markets at a profit to ensure the private sector would flourish in order to buy products from the state that would eliminate debts that the state incurred to bail them out thus eliminating any debts the state incurred in order to bail out private enterprises.Whenever the private business were in danger of going bankrupt for any reason etc they were bailed out to keep them afloat.As a result a small number of key private corporations and private enterprises had formed monopolies in Maoist China similar modern day America whose survival was necessary to keep society and the economy filunctioning forever through what can be considered a form of cronyism and corruption with them having extreme power and influence on the state that rendered all small time businesses unable to compete.This system of guarenteed markets and bailouts is exactly the same as that carried out by the American government and similar modern day state capitalist societies.This system of keeping private enterprises afloat through guarenteed markets from the government and bailouts for private industries by the government to keep them afloat is the exact opposite of both communism and socialism both the real definitions or bullshit definitions because the real definitions of socialism and communism cannot allow private industries to exist in the first place and the bullshit definitions of communism and socialism involve the state quashing out,going out of its way to shut down and eliminate private industries therefore there is no possible way for Maoist China to have been either communist or socialist they had to be capitalism namely state capitalism therefore all deaths,censorship and human rights abuses under Mao are now attributed to capitalism namely state capitlism.Private farmers were particularly initiated and kept afloat because they were needed to feed primarily the rural communities who were most at risk of starvation in the case of famines.If Mao did carry out a communist or socialist revolution then it was an absolute failure in every sense of the word.Please explain this fact how can a country be considered socialist or communist when the state exists,when private enterprises exists,when the amount of private enterprises and its control of the economy increases under their adminstrations and when the state encourages and props up the formation and development of private enterprises,guarantees them markets and profits and bails them out in order to ensure they stay afloat.If they are communist or socialist then American under the rule of the corporate Democrats,Republicans and both Bush,Obama and Trump administrations are communist and socialist.Any food shortages that occurred after the Great Famine of 1959-1961 were the direct result of poor weather and other natural occurrences outside of the control of the state which could have occurred under a free market system and also would have been more severe and had higher death tolls had private farmers not existed.These food shortages and famines had almost always had to do with the climate of Maoist China,pests and other geopolitical and environmental factors outside of the states control.Thus the existence of private farmers was thus allowed and encouraged and ensured through guarenteed markets and bailouts to prevent severe death tolls during famines.Thus the state went out of its way to ensure their survival through bailouts and guaranteed markets and to prevent famines imported food.Had private farmers not existed then the famines would have been exponentionally worse and as a result the state went out of its way to ensure their survival.They were given bailouts if they fell into economic trouble and guaranteed markets to ensure they stayed afloat as if they went bankrupt,out of business then the economy would have crashed and people would have died due to starvation.Thus the state had to go out of its way to keep private farms and businesses running and existing in the first place by encouraging them to be set up but regulated them to prevent them getting too big and powerful that they would become a threat to the state run business.Thus private business especially farmers encouraged by the state were set up,funded and kept afloat by the state in order to prevent severe death tolls during famines through guarenteed markets and bailouts..These private businesses were however punished severely if they treated there workers badly,carried out tax evasion,bribery,tax evasion,fraud,theft of state assets,or leakage of state economic secrets known as the five evils.The reason they were regulated and punished was if they got greedy then they usually got there from mistreating workers as well if they got too greedy they would eat into the states profits and thus would cause imbalances in the economy and would in fact hinder and devastate economic growth much like the Scissor Crisis in Russia.The rate of economic growth for private farmers,merchants was rising but at a stable rate but greedy entrepreneurs wanted to get more money more quickly and this would cause imbalances and recessions in the economy that would even eventually cause these greedy private farmers to lose all of their wealth or would put workers in state run farms and factories out of work and thus lead to poverty and thus famines which the state did not want.Thus the state had to regulate them.Had the economy been completely degregulated then boom and bust cycles would have caused havoc with regards to the price of grain meaning the economy had to regulated to the extent that it was.Regulation thus kept the Soviet economy growing and the wealth of private entrepreneurs rising at a stable sustainable rate and prevented boom and bust cycles that the economy could not handle as if it occurred then it lead to mass unemployment,poverty and famine which was done to encourage state loyalty.Growth in the private sector would still have occurred and was occurring and increasing every year exponentially but at a stable and sustainable rate rather than happening too fast to the point that it would cause imbalances like the Scissor Crises and boom and bust cycles.At the same time growth in the state sector was also undergoing stable sustainable exponential growth.The rate of growth in income and wages for both private and state sector workers and entrepreneurs was rising exponentially every year at a stable and sustainable rate.Considering China was prone to famine due to poor weather and an unpredictable climate as well as pests etc as well as other environmental and geopolitical factors outside of the states control it could not handle a boom or bust cycle and thus regulated business to prevent them getting too powerful too quickly that would plunge the economy into a boom and bust cycle something it could not afford to occur at otherwise it would lead to poverty and famine.A boom and bust cycle and similar imbalances similar to the Scissor Crises would increase the chance of famines occurring due to rises in the price of food something they wanted to avoid.Furthermore if America etc on the other hand suffered a recession in a boom and bust cycle due to deregulation of the economy due to the American governments tendencies towards deregulation it would ensure that Maoist China would become an economic superpower which was what Mao wanted.The only way to become an economic superpower and remain an economic superpower indefinitely is to have the economy regulated through a command economy which can only occur in state capitalism not socialism or communism(but a planned economy in socialism and other types can suffice)while all of the other competitor economies worldwide are unregulated markets that allow for the economy to continuously go through boom and bust cycles that even when they reach their height of each boom it is also different and not static and the higher it goes the greater the recession while your economy through regulation constantly goes upwards forever into infinity while everyone elses economy stays in constant state of boom and bust.It is also is the only way to eliminate poverty as it prevents boom and bust cycles and prevents hyperinflation and ensures that GDP,wages and ones incomes rises exponentially every year.This guarentees that the GDP,income of both private and state workers increases exponentially each year forever.Guarenteed markets,private businessesmen using extra disposable income combined with stable economic growth allowed the state to save enough money or at least go into small amounts of debt to carry out bailouts and buy crops etc from countries across the world to prevent or at least lessen famines and also ensure people survived to then produce and buy more to then pay back and cancel debts through extra profits to ensure stability.Maoist China like Soviet Russia through this saw one of the greatest rises in GDP of any other country in the mid to late 20th century.If a boom or bust cycle and recession occurred due to greedy entrepreneurs then the government could not afford to buy food etc from international markets and this would lead to starvation and further recessions.Thus business were regulated and punished for the five evils and getting greedy.The type of economy was a command economy where the state had complete control of the economy which cannot occur in socialism or communism only state capitalism as a planned economy would allow the workers and citizens including private entrepreneurs to have a democratic say in the planning something which would lead to deregulation and thus boom and bust cycles.The government wanted the economy to be strong and have strong growth by creating a balance between the growth of both the state run sectors and private sectors much like Stalinist Russia as too much growth in either state run sectors and private sectors would lead to imbalances and thus stunt economic growth and even lead to recessions,crashes and then boom and bust cycles.The Chinese government tried to avoid boom and bust cycles and recessions by regulating the private sector and stabilising growth in both the state run sector and private sectors because if they did then their economy would outcompete and grow faster and have a higher GDP than the West particularly America where government regulation didn’t exist and thus was prone to boom and bust cycles,recessions etc which would allow the Chinese economy to grow faster and outcompete that of the its western competitors as a recession caused by lack of government regulation in America etc would cause their economy to nosedive while the Chinese economy would continue to rise continuously thus allowing it to become a global superpower.The government can only do this in state capitalism and not communism or socialism.This why the state still tries to regulate the economy in modern times especially in modern state capitalist economies including Brazil,America,Norway,Finland etc its to ensure stable contionous growth,prevent recessions and boom and bust cycles and why countries with more sensible government regulations in Europe,Austrailia were virtually uneffected by the 2008 Global Recession and 2020 recession while Americas etc economies tanked and are still recovering after more than a decade.Its also which you have many middle class and the minority of poor people in modern China still revering Mao and want to return to the days of Maoist China or at least a less tyrannical version as you have alot of entrepreneurs in modern China getting absurdly wealthy through unethical means and many people getting screwed over and unable to gain an economic advantage.They want private businesses to exist but they want them regulated to prevent them getting too powerful through cronyism and eliminate boom and bust cycles.Regulations that existed in countries such as Maoist China that stunted the growth of small emergent businesses was the result of cronyism on part of state capitalism similar to America,Soviet Russia in order to ensure that a small number of private business that were key to the functioning of the economy stay afloat through bailouts and guarenteed markets as they contribute billions of dollars to the economy every year with the government doing everything to ensure they stay afloat including putting in regulations that shut down competitors in the form of any new or existing small companies.This why the myth that Maoist China was shutting down all private business and killing all of them existed when it wasn’t private businesses were allowed to flourish but only those that were key to the economy and not ones that state wanted infringing on its territory and profits and stability of the economy with the state deciding which ones to allow to be set up with them deciding which ones could be set up and what they sell and what limitations they had to prevrnt the economy going out of control.Allowing them to be set up without regulation and control would have caused an endless cycles of boom and bust cycles something China could not afford due to its geopolitical and environmental factors that would cause another famine and also to ensure economic growth would rise exponentially forever in a stable growth curve in order to surpass America and Europe as an economic superpower.Allowing for the economy to be completely degregulated would have caused more and even greater famines than that of 1959-1961 causing the deaths of millions of more lives due to unsustainable fluctuations in the price of grain,meat etc.Famines and food shortages did occur after 1961 but it was always due to to poor,weather,pests and also limited arable land in the country which was out of the control of Mao with the existence of private farms alongside importing food ensuring that any food shortages and famines that occurred resulted in significantly lower death tolls that would have occurred without their existence or in an completely unregulated economy.Command economies were necessary over planned economies and unregulated free market economies as at the time given the geopolitical and environmental factors and to an extent technological capacity as it was necessary to tightly control the economy as any imbalances and boom and bust cycles would lead to hyperinflation,skyrocking prices for grain and meat and thus lead to poverty and consistent famine.Without regulation the price of grain and meat would have skyrocketed and other economic effects would have plunged Maoist China into even worse famines.Adopting a completely degregulated fee market,anarcho capitalist,libertarian economy would have caused hyperinflation,imbalances in the economy and continuous cycles of boom and bust cycles which would have severely exacerbated food shortages leading to outright consistent famine all year long and existing famines would have been much worse leading to exponentially higher death tolls.It would have negatively affected the countries ability to import food thus exacerbating food shortages and leading to consistent famines year after year due to skyrocking food prices.Considering Maoist China was already prone to famines due to poor weather and lack of arable land it had to install command economies to prevent boom and bust cycles and inflation which would exacerbated the problem.This is why private farmers were also given bailouts and guarenteed markets as they were key to the stability of both the economy and society should they go bankrupt then then the entire economy and society would collapse in on itself.Even today in China agriculture and the economy is still heavily regulated and controlled by the state for the same reason.Private enterprises had to meet certain prequisites in order to be allowed to function.The private business were given guaranteed markets to the state and also local citizens and even the state buying goods and exporting them as well as them being bailed out as like Soviet Russia private enterprises were key in keeping the Chinese economy stable to prevent imbalances.Private enterprises were allowed to flourish in Maoist China because they were key to the growth of the economy and preventing famines just like Leninist and Stalinist Russia and were key to developing the economy.The relationship of guarenteed markets,bailouts and also corruption that exists in modern day state capitalist America is exactly the same as Maoist China as you had a small number of private corporate monopolies that were key to the economies functioning and they were given guarenteed markets and bailouts because of they failed and went bankrupt then the Chinese economy would also nosedive and famines would become rampant with these corporations being kept afloat through whatever means even corruption in order to prevent poverty and famine with it thus a good form of corruption that was necessary to prevent outright famines and economic collapse unlike that modern America that is used to ensure perpetual warfare,environmental degradation and needless deaths every year.Yes Mao was corrupt but it was necessary to save lives of the average citizen with their genocide and imprionment of dissenters and corrupt businessesmen done against those they feared would endanger the economic growth that beniffited the prolitariet.Corruption that existed was done to keep private industries afloat and was no different than the corruption by the RNC/DNC involving Congress,big pharma,big oil and the military industrial complex.Shutting down all private enterprises would have both economic and political suicide and would have led to further deaths from famines with them bailed out when they were in trouble and they were given guaranteed markets to ensure economic survival and that they stayed afloat at all times.In order to qualify for such assistance,businessmen must had agreed to institute labor-management consultative councils and to “democratize” their operations in other ways suggested by the government.In 1934 Mao Tse-tung repeatedly expressed his adamance that private enterprises remained indispensable in the economic development of China under New Democracy,a view expressed since in the Common Program and elaborated in the “Tentative Regulations Governing Private Enterprise”.Its continuity can be seen from Maos prime minister and thus first in command Zao Chou EnLai’s statement on February 1953:We must rally all private industrialists and merchants whose activities are beneficial to the national economy and people’s livelihoods,and enable them to develop their constructive potentialities under the leadership of the state-owned sector and unified plan of the state..This is hardly the words of a socialist or communist dictators second in command or the actions of a communist or socialist country.In fact it’s the same as what goes on in the land of the free America under a Republican or corporate Democrat.If Maoist China was socialist or communist country then America is and always has been either communist or socialist. How can a country be considered communist or socialist when the government encourages the formation of private businesses and does everything it can and go out of its way to keeps them afloat through bailouts and guaranteed markets?If they are communist or socialist then American under the rule of the corporate Democrats,Republicans and both Bush,Obama and Trump administrations are communist and socialist.Private enterprises,coops and state run industries thus existed during Maoist China which cannot occur in both socialism and communism only in capitalism namely state capitalism.In reality Mao like Stalin and Lenin was not a socialist or communist he was a capitalist who believed in it being both highly regulated by the state and also it being fair and not corrupt much like both Lenin and Stalin.According to Ronald Hsia in ”Private Enterprise in Communist<\em> – In pursuing its course toward socialism,the Chinese Communist regime had paradoxically not only tolerated but actively fostered private capitalism.Its motive,according to Mao-Tsung,was to serve the immediate needs of China’s underdeveloped economy:because the Chinese economy is underdeveloped,anything contributing to its development is desireable;because the economic activities of the bourgeoisie can promote economic development,they must be encouraged.To remedy the backwardsness of the Chinese economy,the Central People’s government is determined to industrialise China rapidly.To this end it emphasis the development of heavy industry,which is entrusted to the state-owned sector of the economy.Once the sector is not yet sufficiently strong to develop industry as a whole,it must concentrate its effort,for a time at least heavy industry.During this period the development of light industry must be left principally to private industry.Simarily,in the field of commerce,the state trading companies can deal only in those commodities that are essential to price stability and the people’s livelihoods.The main responibility for developing commerce,particularly retail and urban-rural commerce,must be entrusted to private merchants.Maoist China allowed private business to exist from the start of his administration to the very end due to the economy being underdeveloped and was encouraged but was sidelined to primarily to rural areas while the state controlled the economy in urban areas such as major cities..Cooperatives did exist but they did not consist of a large or substantial percentage of the economy.Most if not all scholars state that in all of these “socialist” hellholes such as Maoist China the majority of the workers had no real meaningful control over the workplace but rather the state did with them all having visible private enterprises.Furthermore the actions of the state were not democratically decided upon as all taxes,regulations and laws were decided by the state without democratic input.A command economy was used which is undemocratic in nature and thus not socialism.This is not how socialism works this is how state capitalism workers.Democratic control was only relegated to the small number of cooperatives that existed in otherwards democratic control by workers was only confined to cooperatives and how they ran which were a small percentage of businesses and not within the confines of state run corporations and of course not within the confines of private corporations with all actions of the state being authoritarian undemocratic control meaning the workers or population could not vote on any taxes,regulations etc.Since the workers had no democratic control of their workplace and no democratic role in the decisions made by the government and cooperatives were a small percentage of the economy and the economy was controlled predominantly by both state run corporations and private corporations run by private entrepreneurs it could not be classed as socialism.It was not communism due to the presence of private enterprises,state control and money.The use of the term collectivised and working together with in terms of propaganda and also state run industries such as farms and factories in Maoist China etc was likely used to brainwash people especially the ignorant or used in the context of working together against other state run enterprises,cooperatives and private enterprises with if possible the term collectivised used in the context of collectivised working rather than collectively run and operated wherein they were still operated by state run buerocrats in place of a CEO but the work was collectivised but the profits were not shared equally between all workers as in cooperatives rather they were paid according to their time spent each week etc similar to how large private farmers in modern times pay immigrants and other labourers etc fixed prices to harvest crops etc rather than sharing profits.Using the term communism and socialism was used to pull the wool over the eyes of its citizens and believe that they would one day get fully classless communism or socialism buy in reality they got state capitalism.The use of the terms working together etc was propaganda to instill morale and increase state loyalty and productivity like how modern day private corporations organise corporate get togethers,meeting,seminars,retreates and events to promote teamwork and improve worker morale you know those cheesy events,seminary’s etc that use slogans like “theres no I in Team” to improve productivity and about working together for the common good within ones corporation with it the same collectivised mentality propaganda in oother state propaganda in corporate America etc is exactly the same groupthink collectivised mentality propaganda as in Soviet Russia and Maoist China.China is and always has been even to this day state capitalist ever since Mao Zedong came into office because private enterprises and private business were allowed to exist to pick up the slack and allow profits of private entrepreneurs to spent on state owned goods and services – something which is not allowed in ether socialism or communism either the bullshit definition or proper definition.The evidence that Maoist China was communist or socialist does not exist its pure fantasy.The evidence that it was state capitalist does exist therefore it was state capitalist.There seems to this indication that Mao is the poster child of the evils of communism in China but the reality is that he was to varying degrees like Stalin and Lenin national shakes.All administrations after him had to and began increase civil liberties to varying degrees like Russia due to the rise of tellocomunications and aslo more benevolent administrations.There are still restrictions on civil liberties but it’s nowhere near as bad as Mao.Like Stalin and Lenin,Mao has been demonised as the tyrant he was starting from the successive adminstrations the level of civil liberties people had waxed and waned and alternating to different degrees but were never as bad as under Mao with veneration of Mao allowed by remaining supporters allowed to ensure state loyalty and prevent coups.The Tiananmen Square Massacre was quite possibly the last major event wherein the Chinese state decided to openly slaughter its own citizens back in 1989.Ever since then there has been major changes within the Chinese Communist Party to liberalise it more due to the rise of the television and the internet.The rise of television,the internet and YouTube has made it impossible for the Chinese government to return to the authoritarian days of Mao etc.Yes they have made attempts to censor the internet but this had been largely futile and is failing with the censorship of the Chinese state of YouTube,Facebook etc no longer different than corporate censorship of progressives and non corporate donors carried out by Twitter,YouTube etc.Teapot calling kettle black?After Maos death there were three waves of Democratic reforms that gradually introduced more democratic reforms to the country.Its not as democratic as most other countries but its way better than in Maos time,much like Russia under Putin is much more democratic than under Lenin and Stalin but not as democratic as it can be.Like Soviet Russia,China after the death of Mao had to democratise especially in the face of tellocomunications and influences from the West with this waxing and waning under each administration.Planned economies that involve democratic input is one of the reasons for China eliminating poverty.Thus it is in fact democracy inherent in planned economies not the free market system that has been responsible for the economic success of China that has seen its poverty rate drop to nearly zero coupled with a democratic planned economy with Russia being less democratic in comparison.This use of democratic planned economies has been responsible for poverty rates dropping to zero in most other planned economies..Mao like Lenin and Stalin of Soviet Russia was considered by most of the Communist Party especially all succeeding administrations to be an national stain and embarrassment but they only allowed worship of him to please the fanatics who idealised what he represented much like Lenin etc.Some allowed his worship to ensure loyalty like that of Lenin.Again like post Stalinist politicians were allowed to venerate Mao but only the those who extremists who were likely to carry out a coup to reinstall his policies are improsoned.Executions etc still occurred alongside incidents like the Tiannamen square incident which was initiated by students mourning the death of Hu Yaobong who alongside Deng Xiangping were the most democrat members of the Chinese Party.This shows that there was conflict amongst members of the Chinese Communist Party and not a hive mind.In fact the Tiannamen Square incident that is you know where students began protesting the actions of government etc was caused primarily by the death of Hua Yaobang both of whom the students were mourning the death of Hu Yuaobang and Deng Xiaoping and rebelling against the Communist parties remaining autocrats.December 1978, Deng Xiaoping became the new paramount leader of China replacing Chairman Hua Gofeng and started the “Boluan Fanzheng” program which gradually dismantled the Maoist policies associated with the Cultural Revolution, and brought the country back to order.Deng together with his allies then began a new phase of China by initiating the historic Reforms and Opening-up program.In 1981, the CCP declared and acknowledged that the Cultural Revolution was wrong and was “responsible for the most severe setback and the heaviest losses suffered by the people, the country, and the party since the founding of the People’s Republic.”In contemporary China, differing views exist about the Cultural Revolution.Some view it negatively; among some of them, it is referred to as the “ten years of chaos”.According to Gao Mobo others, particularly members of the working class, view it positively.Gao Mobo also by the way through his various YouTube videos,books and even his Wikipedia page offers a more shall we say balanced and less biased view of Mao Zedong.The Cultural Revolution was likely like Stalins purge of private business during his final years was a result of a paranoid and delusional old man trying to retain his power in face of the resistence from Khruschev etc who had gone away with authoritarianism.Its likely that the need to lift China out of the Medival Ages was the reason for his authoritarianism and genocidal tendencies and also lack of foresight with regards to the a Great Leap Forward was a genuine attempt to actually help the country and its people but that doesn’t still justify genocide.Many scholars such as Philip Short in Mao:A Life reject comparisons to Mao to other dictators such as Hiltler and Lenin by saying that whereas the deaths caused by Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia were largely systematic and deliberate, the overwhelming majority of the deaths under Mao were unintended consequences of famine.Short stated that landlord class were not exterminated as a people due to Mao’s belief in redemption through thought reform,and compared Mao with 19th-century Chinese reformers who challenged China’s traditional beliefs in the era of China’s clashes with Western colonial powers.Short writes that “Mao’s tragedy and his grandeur were that he remained to the end in thrall to his own revolutionary dreams.He freed China from the straitjacket of its Confucian past, but the bright Red future he promised turned out to be a sterile purgatory.In their 2013 biography, Mao:The Resl Story,Alexander V. Pantsov and Steven I. Levine assert that Mao was both “a successful creator and ultimately an evil destroyer” but also argue that he was a complicated figure who should not be lionised as a saint or reduced to a demon, as he “indeed tried his best to bring about prosperity and gain international respect for his country.Mao is demonised by many in China for the effects of the Great Leap Forward abd The Hundred Flowers Campaign and Cultural Revolution despite their still modern day supporters of the Cultural Revolution but there are also those who to this worship and venerate him as he did improve the conditions of women by outlawing practises such as foot binding,female circumsicion,widow chastity and also giving them the same opportunities in education and working rights for women in factories,medicine and allowing to learn to read and write.There is also the fact that he laid the groundwork for bringing China several centuries from the Middle Ages and into the 20th and 21st centuries and managed to unify a country which was in a civil war for decades of not centuries into one cohesive state..For these reasons there are still many Chinese people especially older generations that stil in the 21st century still venerate Mao.Most people in modern day China is polarised between those who venerate him for lifting the country into the 20th century as well as improving the lives of women and those who demonise him for his brutish force.Maoism has fallen out of favor within the Chinese Communist Party, beginning with Deng Xiaoping reforms in 1978. Deng believed that Maoism showed the dangers of “ultra-leftism”, manifested in the harm perpetrated by the various mass movements that characterized the Maoist era. In Chinese communism, the term “left” can be considered a euphemism for Maoist policies. However, Deng stated that the revolutionary side of Maoism should be considered separate from the governance side, leading to his famous epithet that Mao was “70% right, 30% wrong”.Chinese scholars generally agree that Deng’s interpretation of Maoism preserves the legitimacy of Communist rule in China but simultaneously criticizes Mao’s brand of economic and political governance.Mao is only venerated in the form of posters in a few public arenas but not encouraging national or individual worship.The official stance is that he is praised as a liberator but demonised as a savage brutal dictator making him both a national stain and a national hero at the same time much like Lenin and Stalin.Decades after his death Mao still remains a controversial figure to Chinese people.So controversial that he is almost never discussed by political pundits,journalists and even Chinese vloggers,journalists etc fairly and painted as a one dimensional cartoon villain and considered almost a taboo and national shame as he despite his savagery was flawed and had been given a country with a better economic and technological standing would have been less brutish or autocratic.The best way to describe Maos flawed nature is that:The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions as despite his savagery it was done purely for the good of the Chinese people and to lift China out of the Medievil ages.This is in contrast to Pol Pot,Ho Chi Min,Stalin and also to a degree Lenin who were bloodthirsty savages who were openly savages.The level of freedoms of citizens in China has waned and waned under each administration after Mao.The only way to achieve true freedoms and civil liberties in China under and other countries under the control of Communist Parties including modern times is through the installing of democratic of democratic safeguards and processes to prevent the state infringing in the rights of the individual.China has out of necessity is a planned economy that is where the state has control of the economy through regulations and government programmes and as a result is one the few countries in the world to have its poverty rate drop to almost zero.Extreme poverty has been been all but eliminated but there is still some way to go in eliminating remaining poverty.So yeah poverty does still exist but it’s nowhere near as bad as the rest of the world or what it was in Maos time and its dropping exponentially every year.Even during Maos adminstration from the very start of 1949 GDP growth and growth in wages were rising exponentially the reforms of 1978 only focused it more on international markets.After 1978 state owned enterprises still were the predominant form of capital investment with private enterprises being a minority.Private corporations like those in Maoist China did exist and still do exist but they are are highly regulated and controlled by the state which is American terms “socialism”.The private enterprises from 1978-2022 are those that are heavily regulated by the state and consist of a minority of the economy.Deregulated free market capitalism which is what conservatives likes does not exist in China and it never had existed in China.The type of capitalism that has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in China is state capitalism that is one that the state has a majority control of the economy and controls the economy through a planned or command – the very same state capitalism that was present in Maoist China.It had shifted from a command economy to a planned economy since the death of a Mao and had thus seen much better results in economic growth and civil liberties.This also includes large social welfare programmes.Government control of the economy existed after Mao but it was relaxed and involved more democratic input from citizens with state owned corporations still a majority holder in the economy.Similar countries that have reduced poverty to almost zero with the adoption of planned economies include Communist Vietnam,Cambodia,Laos,Myanmar etc and this had been done by planned economies controlled by the government and large scale government programmes including large scale social welfare programmes also known as “socialism” with capitalism and private enterprises playing only a minor role in this.China is home to 109 native Fortune Global 500 companies but only 15% of them roughly 17 of them are private corporations the remaining 92 corporations are state owned corporations thus making it neither communist or socialism it is state capitalist just like Maoist China.The majority of the Chinese economy is controlled by state owned corporations you know what idiot Americans call “socialism”.Roughly 60% of the Chinese economy is dominated by state owned corporations that generated 40% of the countries GDP with primarily foreign private multinationals that account for 40% of the economy accounting for the remaining 60% of the GDP.Both of these things the government gaining majority control of the economy and planning the economy and social welfare is responsible for lifting hundreds of millions of people out poverty.These two facts have been true since 1949-2022 both during and after Maoist China.These two things the government gaining control of the economy and social welfare are what conservatives in America consider socialism – therefore by conservative logic socialism has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty not capitalism.It cannot be capitalism because the country is run by the Communist Party and the majority of the countries economy is managed by state owned corporations.If this not socialism then Americans are suffering from cognitive dissonance by picking and choosing when something is socialist and when something is capitalism especially considering China whose economy is majority controlled by state owned corporations and involves government planning and regulations and social welfare etc is capitalist while Venezuela can be considered socialist when the majority of the economy(roughly 66-71%) is under control of private corporations and the minority – 33% is under control of state owned corporations.In reality “communism/socialism” through the guidance and control of large scale government programmes including social welfare etc and planned economies controlled by the government and not capitalism has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty across Asia and India while capitalism had done nothing but exacerbated it across America and Africa.Capitalism has had almost minimal influence on lifting out the hundreds of millions in China out poverty.Communism and socialism will again lift a further four billion people out of poverty across the world through me.It is technically state driven capitalism that has done this which is not free market capitalism meaning conservatives lose as it is the same state driven capitalism they hate and the same driven capitalism that existed in Maoist China.China was already lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty before 1978-2000 under Mao before it became “capitalist” and the majority of the economy is owned and managed by the state owned sector.In otherwards it is government intervention and social programmes not capitalism that is responsible for eliminating poverty in China.India still has a significant amount of its population poor with roughly 269,000,000 living in poverty is because of numerous factors such as illiteracy,higher populations,gender inequality,corruption,faulty economic reforms as well as them keeping outdated social systems such as the caste system wherein one is born into a social caste and has no chance due to society of ever being able to rise up from one class to another simply because of what class and family they were born into.Then of course unlike China there seems to a larger percentage of private corporations in control of the economy with the state having only control of key sectors such as oil and gas etc but the vast majority of sectors being privatised.Furthermore India claims it is a net exporter of food it is able to feed itself but the reality is it is a net importer of food it like China is unable to feed itself.Its geology consists of deserts,mountains including the Himalayas and protected forests and its weather consists of the monsoons that can cause major flooding with on the opposite side the monsoons also important to agriculture as it feeds the crops with droughts also a problem which have over the course of its history killed tens of millions of people with it also having severe cyclones.This and the fact that it has varied soil types and ecosystems ranging from deserts etc makes it unsuitable to feed such a large population.India needs a command or planned economy and unfortunately in 1991 it adopted a deregulated free market economy,This may have played a role in eliminating poverty but it hasn’t eliminated it yet and is nowhere close to doing so.Furthermore due to its environmental factors this short boom that has lasted since 1991 roughly 31 years ago will eventually go bust and you will have hyperinflation,skyrockeying food prices and mass starvation and more people dying of hunger especially the hundreds of millions already poor with and all the people lifted out of poverty being dragged back into poverty again.Most of the advances have been to poor regulations which has like China left India with large ghost towns of mansions and apartments that are sitting empty.However China has since 2018 through government intervention has ensured that most of these cities are occupied wheras India has still many empty cities to fill.Poor housing in China was built with no regulations but has since been demolished but those in India were filled with poor people,then later collapsed and then killed dozens of people.The difference between Chinese ghost towns and Indian ghost towns is that those occupied were built with regulations.China has eliminated poverty through government intervention,government programmes and planning and probably will have no poverty for the coming decades of not centuries wheras India will on the other hand will always have a significant number of its population forever unemployed and in poverty and will also suffer a major bust cycle that will not only cause all of those lifted out of poverty to once again become poor,but also exacerbate its current poverty problem.At first China through corruption built large amounts of buildings on the cheap with zero regulation with them almost falling apart and unsafe to occupy.These have been either abandoned from the market or even demolished and bulldozed with them also playing a key role in the current economic crises in China.India on the other hand has pushed people into these including poor people and these buildings built with zero regulations and shoddy material have collapsed killing dozens and hundreds of people.Others have been demolished because they are just to unsafe to inhabit.Although his intentional genoicide against landlords etc was intentional the Great Leap Forward accounts for the majority of his death toll meaning he could have carried out the Great Leap forward without it being a failure and of possible its failure as his great plan to revolutionise the country is what probably led him to crackdown on more of his opponents.There are so many ways the Great Leap Forward could have been successful such as training people to become steel workers rather than having farmers become steel workers,investing in mechanisation and automation,importing people from Soviet Russia etc hiring actual agronomists such as those involved in the Green Revolution which had just started at the time of the Great Famine in the 1950s and even utilising Aquaponics etc which was 2,000 years old by then and was being researched by NASA at the time and having private farmers stay,have cooperative farmers utilised instead of collectives and private farms since the profit motive would have ensured they would have increased productivity just like private farms,not killed sparrows,used chemical fertilisers and so on.Its believed the Great Leap Forward stemmed from the fact that he wanted to increase the country GDP quickly and thus profits to pay back billion dollar loans to Soviet Russia etc.Mao,Lenin etc could have utilised aquaponics that was already 2,000 years old at that point which can produce 6-10 times more yields while allowing all land to be reforested and negated the need for private farms allowing the state to produce more than enough to feed everyone and been immune to droughts etc with cooperative farms used.Cooperatives since they have all profits shared equally amongst all workers would have encouraged to increase productivity through the profit motive.The country has opened up to foreign markets but it is still the same state capitalist system of Maoist China that regulates the economy.Private landlords and businessmen need not have been slaughtered they could have been converted into cooperatives etc to ensure workers had democratic control and rise in wages.There are so many ways he could have “socialised” the country without resorting to mass genocide which is why despite his advancements he is considered a national stain on the country and an embarrassment to the Chinese Communist Party with most presidents of China and high ranking members of the Communist Party deride him as the tyrant he was and like Soviet Russia a process of de-Maoism was started after his death with him only allowed to be venerated by ardent followers to ensure state loyalty.There were incidents of public killings and executions etc after his death but it was nowhere as near as bad as Mao and the Chinese government has not killed anywhere as much as under Mao with them only doing so when pushed to the very extremes.The Communist Party of China’s is not a hive mind collective it never has been.Much like that of Soviet Russia the Communist Party of China contained people of different thought processes and levels of extremes of communist ideals that were constantly at odds with each other over how much power should be placed in the power of its citizens and the state even during Maos administration..North Vietnam was like Maoist China state capitalist as the government in the form of Ho Chi Minh and Lao Dong Party decided to model its economy on that of both Maoist China and Soviet Russia with private farmers and state owned corporations that can only exist in state capitalism.North Korea as we will establish later on has private enterprises that are dynastic in nature by being handed down from one generation to the next similar in a way to those in Maoist China thus making it state capitalist.It had private enterprises that were handed down from one generation with it even throughout the entirety of its socialist or communist regime despite its best efforts at eliminating capitalism it was unable to do so out of economic necessity..

State Capitalism in Khmer Rouge Cambodia:
In Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge administration despite private businesses abolished in favour of state owned enterprises,cooperative and food rations replacing money all land was state owned state run farms with some being private plots of land including those private land by private homes and collectively owned land owned by cooperative members but operated by private farmers who were allowed to grow their own choice of crops and livestock for profit in the form of extra food rations.Cooperstives were divided into “low level” cooperatives that in which land and agricultural implements were lent by peasants to the community but remained legally their private property with them also being “high level cooperatives” in which private property was abolished and the harvest became the collective property of the peasants with most farms and enterprises being state owned ones.Even though c