Talk:State monopoly capitalism

message: There really needs to be a discussion on monopoly capitalism by itself. Darth Sidious 03:25, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled Thread 

message: The current title already embodies the erroneous conflation proposed by the merge and perhaps discussed in the text above. "State Capitalism" and "Monopoly Capital" are two entirely different and indeed unrelated things which it is an embarrasment for Wikipedia to be confounding. "State Capitalism" refers to the monopoly of power in states like the former Soviet Union, China, or Cuba whereas "Monopoly Capital" refers to an inexorable tendency within capitalism, a result of the progressive development of productive forces, that drives out small time producers and concentrates production in the hands of the winners of capitalist competition. Lycurgus (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Proposal 

message: This may be something I can do myself, once I'm sure how to make proper attributions.  
The second paragraph of the introduction starts off with what I (maybe mistakenly) believe is jargon--"Statmocap".  Although I had just read the first paragraph, and saw the words "STATe MOnopoly CAPitalism" in the title, the transition into the economic theory jargon was quite jarring.  Once I typed the word into a search engine, it suggested an alternate spelling of "Statmokap".  Should this alternate spelling, along with an explanation of the portmanteau be included in the article?   Dahile00 (talk) 14:15, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not in love with the jargon either, but to be precise, the article says "stamocap," not "statmocap."  Try googling again. Franklin Dmitryev (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification Request 

message: The "Criticisms" section is about notable criticisms of the theory.  It is not the place for editorializing, for stating your own criticism of the theory, or for statements about whether state intervention is beneficial.  If you can accurately cite a notable criticism of the "State monopoly capitalism" theory--not some general promotion of the benefits of "free market" vs. state intervention--then that would be appropriate for the section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franklin Dmitryev (talk • contribs) 00:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Criticisms" does not mean you criticizing 

message: Some ignorant person or persons have whacked this one. It's gone from Monopoly Capital the scholarly study by Bellamy Foster and others, to "Stamocap" some immature and embarrasing OR and distortion. Lycurgus (talk) 14:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messed Up 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:CheGuevaraSmile.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: "Ironically, one of the most prominent examples of Stamocap is the de facto economic system in modern day Russia under the current autocrat, Vladimir Putin."
I'm not sure what's "ironic" about the above statement. Someone care to explain?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.36.195.33 (talk) 00:16, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putin?  

message: Should be article be redirected to State capitalism#State monopoly capitalism?Jonpatterns (talk) 14:58, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect to State capitalism section? 

message: This article was published by Betascript Publishers in January 2010, in a collection of wiki articles titled "State Monopoly Capitalism" allegedly "edited by" Lambert M. Surhone, Mariam T. Tenno and Susan F. Henssonow (ISBN 10: 6130361505 / ISBN 13: 9786130361501). If these are real names of real people, they were not the writers or main editors of the articles, and the publication is bogus. They are stealing and exploiting the work of wikipedians, and falsely claiming ISBNs and copyright (to get ISBNs and copyrights, you have to claim authorship but they were not the authors - by bundling articles they claim to be doing something new).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.148.154.58 (talk) 14:47, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Publication of the article

message: The section about "Neo-Trotskyists" needs clarification. It looks like independent research and bad research at that (sorry). Citations are needed, or it should be removed.
First of all, the Stamocap theory was part of Leninism and Trotskyism already. No "Neo-" needed. "Neo-Trotskyists" seem to be getting confused with actual Trotskyists here. Secondly, what even are Neo-Trotskyists? There is one tiny group in the UK that calls itself that and they emerged very recently. State Monopoly Capitalism is not a distinguishing theory of theirs, it's something that all Leninists have in common. 
Hilferding, who actually came up with the theory (see the German article) isn't even mentioned here! Famisht (talk) 16:20, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I very much agree. I can't think of any notable Trotskyists (notable in that the average trot would know about them) or parties thats said anything like what's in the article, and theres no sources either to give any clues. I also agree that there is no actual ideology of "neo Trotskyism". This is a bad section. 92.236.211.53 (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Neo-Trotskyists"?