No? Cuba has a state, it’s socialist, not yet at communism. Communism, the stateless, classless, moneyless society, where production and distribution is fully collectivized and run to fulfill everyone’s needs, is necessarily a post-socialist, global society. Socialism is the transitional state between capitalism and communism, and can happen at a national level.
Where capitalism is characterized by private ownership being principle and capitalists in charge of the state, socialism is characterized by public ownership as principle and the working classes in charge of the state.
Again, if you don’t believe Cuba fits the characterization of socialism as was your original claim, you need to back that up. They are recognized both by liberals and socialists of all stripes as socialist.
Marx can be forgiven for being wrong. He didn’t have an entire century’s worth of hindsight to inform him - unlike the modern-day personality cultists that claim him (like you).
consider late-stage communism and anarchism to be socialist.
Why do you have a problem with the working class controlling the means of production, (alleged) “socialist?”
Between capitalism and communism comes socialism, where the working class controls the means of production but there isn’t classless or stateless society yet. Simple. Communism doesn’t have a working class, because it’s classless.
No, I’m just not of the fringe belief that a state run by the working classes where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy is somehow capitalist. I love the working class, that’s why I support the socialist system the working classes of Cuba fought and died to establish and protect, rather than telling them that they aren’t “pure” enough while defending themselves from the US Empire.
Cuban democracy is comprehensive, and public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. The working classes already control the means of production. You’re the one making outlandish claims with no evidence.
No? Cuba has a state, it’s socialist, not yet at communism. Communism, the stateless, classless, moneyless society, where production and distribution is fully collectivized and run to fulfill everyone’s needs, is necessarily a post-socialist, global society. Socialism is the transitional state between capitalism and communism, and can happen at a national level.
Where capitalism is characterized by private ownership being principle and capitalists in charge of the state, socialism is characterized by public ownership as principle and the working classes in charge of the state.
Again, if you don’t believe Cuba fits the characterization of socialism as was your original claim, you need to back that up. They are recognized both by liberals and socialists of all stripes as socialist.
So you have zero evidence to back up your claim?
I have to back up the fact that you have no evidence to back your ridiculous claim?
Only a rabid anti-socialist claims that a state controlling the means of production qualifies as “socialism.”
No ifs.
No ands.
No buts.
You’re deeply unserious if you think Marx doesn’t count as a socialist, and only consider late-stage communism and anarchism to be socialist.
Marx can be forgiven for being wrong. He didn’t have an entire century’s worth of hindsight to inform him - unlike the modern-day personality cultists that claim him (like you).
Why do you have a problem with the working class controlling the means of production, (alleged) “socialist?”
Between capitalism and communism comes socialism, where the working class controls the means of production but there isn’t classless or stateless society yet. Simple. Communism doesn’t have a working class, because it’s classless.
Ie, you understand perfectly well that your ideology precludes socialism even being possibile.
So, again… why do you have a problem with the working class controlling the means of production?
Perhaps that’s the wrong question?
Maybe it should go… why do you despise the working class so much?
No, I’m just not of the fringe belief that a state run by the working classes where public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy is somehow capitalist. I love the working class, that’s why I support the socialist system the working classes of Cuba fought and died to establish and protect, rather than telling them that they aren’t “pure” enough while defending themselves from the US Empire.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - and you have provided zero.
Really? Then why do you peddle an ideology that preclude the very possibility of the working class controlling the means of production?
Or do you “love” the working class in the same psychotic way that the aristocracy proclaimed to “love” serfs and peasants?
Cuban democracy is comprehensive, and public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy. The working classes already control the means of production. You’re the one making outlandish claims with no evidence.