This is not socialism and capitalism working together, but public property helping the dominant private property in the context of a capitalist system.
Corruption is a problem with any system. Capitalism or communism is irrelevant. Marx would probably argue that greed is a social construct, but I think psychology has conclusively shown that while elements of greed are social, it is fundamentally an evolutionary adaptation (as is altruism).
The reason classes are directly related to ownership of the means of production is because classes have shared class interests.
Ownership of the means of production is just a type of power. It is the power to grant or deprive others of resources. Shared interests by class is another falsehood bred from lack of psychological understanding by Marx. A black woman who works at a grocery store in a city and a white male farmer from a rural area are the same class to Marx. However their interests are vastly different because of intersectionality (which Marx had no way to know about).
The US is a dictatorship of capital, and is far less democratic than the USSR was.
The USSR was on no way democratic. It was an authoritarian state with one party who regularly presented voters with one single party-approved candidate to vote for. The public was not allows fundamental democratic principles like freedom of speech or independent political opposition. Stalin literally won 100% of the vote because of uncontested elections.
The US political system is heavily impacted by capital, but capital isn’t a single entity. It is a wide range of groups with a wide range of conflicting interests. Beyond limiting government regulation of capital and taxation, they rarely agree. Capital spends heavily influencing voters opinions, BUT the voters do still vote and those votes are counted honestly. We absolutely need to get money out of politics and we need to get rid of first past the post style voting. That being said, we are a democracy. And imperfect democracy, but a democracy.
It’s not that greed or altruism are social constructs, but that the way we think and see the world is based on how we produce and distribute. This is more affirming Marxism as correct, and psychological advancements marrying perfectly with Marxism already. Again, more misunderstandings of Marxism on your part.
Same with class. When you identify the differences between different nationalities among the proletariat, you are correctly identifying different interests, but incorrectly erasing class. Both the woman and the man have the same class interests in collectivizing the means of production and distribution. You’re, again, misunderstanding the Marxist position, and arguing against a strawman version of Marxism.
As for the USSR, it was comprehensively democratic and run by the working classes. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
Meanwhile, the US is a dictatorship of capital. You are confusing the ability to vote for the presence of democracy, but the truth is that the only allowable choices are already preselected by the capitalist class. It’s like forcing someone to pick between having their foot or hand cut off, and claiming their decision was democratic and desirable.
It’s not that greed or altruism are social constructs, but that the way we think and see the world is based on how we produce and distribute.
That is literally what Marx believed. He did not believe in biology as a driver of greed in any way.
Both the woman and the man have the same class interests in collectivising the means of production and distribution.
As you point out, people act against their perceived best interests. This is driven by the non-class differences that you so easily dismiss.
As for the USSR, it was completely democratic and run by the working classes.
Objectively false. The government was run solely by the Communist Party and they could not be voted out. No competing parties were allowed. Nobody who did not belong to the Communist party could run. The system was inherently antidemocratic.
You are confusing the ability to vote for the presence of democracy, but the truth is that the only allowable choices are already preselected by the capitalist class.
Two words: Zohran Mamdani. The capitalist class does not want a brown Muslim democratic socialist running the largest city in the country. The people chose him.
Please, show me where Marx said what you think he did. Explain the dialectical materialist theory of knowledge and how it has been disproven.
As for the men and women, they are not acting against their perceived interests, you did not explain this one bit. They both believe themselves to be acting in their own interests.
As for the USSR, you are factually wrong. The soviets had recall elections, and party members were subjected to criticism by the public. People outside of the communist party could and did run. Competing parties were not allowed, but that’s the only thing correct you said. I linked you mountains of evidence.
As for Mamdani, you’ll find that he cannot implement socialism even if he wanted to. It’s theatrics, they will never allow actual change, at best a bone tossed to the public. Even then, you can see that capitalists are kicking it into gear to prevent his reforms from taking place. Mamdani proves me correct.
Corruption is a problem with any system. Capitalism or communism is irrelevant. Marx would probably argue that greed is a social construct, but I think psychology has conclusively shown that while elements of greed are social, it is fundamentally an evolutionary adaptation (as is altruism).
Ownership of the means of production is just a type of power. It is the power to grant or deprive others of resources. Shared interests by class is another falsehood bred from lack of psychological understanding by Marx. A black woman who works at a grocery store in a city and a white male farmer from a rural area are the same class to Marx. However their interests are vastly different because of intersectionality (which Marx had no way to know about).
The USSR was on no way democratic. It was an authoritarian state with one party who regularly presented voters with one single party-approved candidate to vote for. The public was not allows fundamental democratic principles like freedom of speech or independent political opposition. Stalin literally won 100% of the vote because of uncontested elections.
https://www.nytimes.com/1937/12/14/archives/stalin-wins-poll-by-a-vote-of-100-no-opposition-is-shown-in-count.html
The US political system is heavily impacted by capital, but capital isn’t a single entity. It is a wide range of groups with a wide range of conflicting interests. Beyond limiting government regulation of capital and taxation, they rarely agree. Capital spends heavily influencing voters opinions, BUT the voters do still vote and those votes are counted honestly. We absolutely need to get money out of politics and we need to get rid of first past the post style voting. That being said, we are a democracy. And imperfect democracy, but a democracy.
It’s not that greed or altruism are social constructs, but that the way we think and see the world is based on how we produce and distribute. This is more affirming Marxism as correct, and psychological advancements marrying perfectly with Marxism already. Again, more misunderstandings of Marxism on your part.
Same with class. When you identify the differences between different nationalities among the proletariat, you are correctly identifying different interests, but incorrectly erasing class. Both the woman and the man have the same class interests in collectivizing the means of production and distribution. You’re, again, misunderstanding the Marxist position, and arguing against a strawman version of Marxism.
As for the USSR, it was comprehensively democratic and run by the working classes. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
Meanwhile, the US is a dictatorship of capital. You are confusing the ability to vote for the presence of democracy, but the truth is that the only allowable choices are already preselected by the capitalist class. It’s like forcing someone to pick between having their foot or hand cut off, and claiming their decision was democratic and desirable.
That is literally what Marx believed. He did not believe in biology as a driver of greed in any way.
As you point out, people act against their perceived best interests. This is driven by the non-class differences that you so easily dismiss.
Objectively false. The government was run solely by the Communist Party and they could not be voted out. No competing parties were allowed. Nobody who did not belong to the Communist party could run. The system was inherently antidemocratic.
Two words: Zohran Mamdani. The capitalist class does not want a brown Muslim democratic socialist running the largest city in the country. The people chose him.
Please, show me where Marx said what you think he did. Explain the dialectical materialist theory of knowledge and how it has been disproven.
As for the men and women, they are not acting against their perceived interests, you did not explain this one bit. They both believe themselves to be acting in their own interests.
As for the USSR, you are factually wrong. The soviets had recall elections, and party members were subjected to criticism by the public. People outside of the communist party could and did run. Competing parties were not allowed, but that’s the only thing correct you said. I linked you mountains of evidence.
As for Mamdani, you’ll find that he cannot implement socialism even if he wanted to. It’s theatrics, they will never allow actual change, at best a bone tossed to the public. Even then, you can see that capitalists are kicking it into gear to prevent his reforms from taking place. Mamdani proves me correct.