• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      Disparity is rising, as are real wages. The Private Sector is seeing larger stratirication of overall wealth, but the purchasing power and real wages of workers is rising at a much higher rate. Eventually this will need to be combatted, yes, but the trends are very positive for the working class, which is the overall goal of Socialism.

      • JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        which is the overall goal of Socialism.

        What is the overall goal of socialism? To increase our purchasing power and real wages of workers? Because I’m incredulous of that.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          The overall goal of Socialism is the liberation and improvement in the lives of the Proletariat. The central belief of Socialists is that at higher stages in development, Public Property is more efficient at that than Private Property, but that at different phases in development each form of property is more or less efficient.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 days ago

              Marxism posits modes of production as phases related to technological and industrial development. The more complicated the industry, generally, the longer Private ownership and competition remains useful. However, at a certain point, it’s better to fold into the public sector as you have more access to information and better oversight. China often employs both via State Owned Enterprises that compete in Markets under the ownership and direct guidance of the CPC.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 days ago

                  This is actually a genuinely interesting question for Marxists, more than you likely think. Personally, I don’t believe there is such a thing as a clear-cut line where Public ownership instantly becomes better, down to the exact second. You can centrally plan something from the ground up, though it may not be as stable or grow as rapidly in the beginning. However, there are massive benefits to being entirely centrally planned and publicly owned, such as the abolition of money and the replacement by which with labor vouchers or other such non-transferable tokens, as well as being able to compare the entire productive forces against each other for all industries and adjust accordingly.

                  The thing is, there is no such thing as “true” Socialism, and if an aspect of Marxism turns out to be wrong, then it must be adjusted and accounted for to be true to Marx himself. There will be different processes in each country and different characteristics, hence why the PRC practices Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, in anticipation of Socialism with Palestinian Characteristics, or Socialism with Canadian Characteristics.