Talk:State capitalism

message: The whole article is literraly far-left agenda about "not real socialism". I really don't want to get into a pointless discussion with neomarxist fanatics, so I'll just quote the article itself:
"Some scholars argue that the economy of the Soviet Union and of the Eastern Bloc countries modeled after it, including Maoist China, were state capitalist systems"
"Some western commentators believe that the current economies of China and Singapore also constitute a mixture of state-capitalism"
"It has also been used to describe the controlled economies of the Great Powers during World War I"
"This was the case of Western European countries during the post-war consensus and of France during the period of dirigisme after World War II"
"Other examples include Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew and Turkey, as well as military dictatorships during the Cold War and fascist regimes such as Nazi Germany"
"Noam Chomsky, a libertarian socialist, applies the term 'state capitalism' to the economy of the United States"
So, Soviet Union and modern Russia, maoist and modern China, pre- and after- WW1 Germany and France, Singapore and Nazi, even United States - in other words all countries and regimes that neomarxists don't like are "state capitalism"? 
Communist countries without private property and market prices, with non profit oriented enterprises were "capitalists"? Kaiser Germany economy was indistinguishable from the Nazi's? Nazis guaranteed the inviolability of private property? Maoist and modern China has no differences? And all of these countries economics are equal to modern US economy (like freak Chomsky says)? 
The whole article is contradictory absurdity. "State capitalism" was never exist. Laissez-faire market = capitalism, state contolled economy = socialism, this is an elementary truth that any economist will confirm to you. 12345 5.228.202.229 (talk) 19:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Arguing in bad-faith, you yourself are arguing from the status quo, or pro-capitalist agenda, so painting this article as having an 'agenda' is disingenuous at best. This term is a century old and is used by scholars, historians, and is well attested in this article. Because the precise definition of 'Socialism' as defined by Marx has been picked apart and debated (in goof faith, by contemporaries and other scholars) it opens itself up to a wider swath of tendencies and definitions, but all historians are more succinct about what capitalism looks like and is. 2603:7080:EF41:8B00:D2C3:9F29:9216:B29C (talk) 01:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

text: The article has some weak points, deficiencies etc. which means that it needs to be improved so as to bring it closer to perfection according to Wikipedia standards. I'm sure nobody would stop any constructive attempt made in that direction as long as it is in accord with Wikipedia criteria (such as regarding neutrality, citation etc.). For example, it would be great to include some information about "state capitalism vs. state socialism vs. civil socialism". There must be also some scholars who follow what Marx, Engels and Lenin said about state capitalism (state ownership of the means of production under the rule of capitalists) creating a material base for socialism, and discuss if Marxist socialism would then mean essentially "state ownership of the means of production under the rule of socialists", the difference essentially being that the new "state ownership" means "social/public ownership in true sense of the term" as it no longer serves the interests of capitalists, and it can also try and develop forms of involvement and control of employees in the management of such public enterprises. On the other hand, additional citations can be included from a different view of socialist economy (which avoids becoming "state capitalism without capitalists", i.e. "state socialism") in the form of cooperatives, enterprises owned and run by non-governmental organizations, etc. without letting capitalists dominate the economic or political structures of the society, and without becoming a "state socialism" where employees remain alienated from both the means and ends of production, and a socialist bureaucracy virtually becomes the new ruling class. Veritas.vos.Liberabit.58 (talk) 09:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leftist agenda