• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Collectivizing all production and distribution to satisfy the needs of everyone, ie socialism, is the answer. Not merging corporate and state power, which is the exact opposite.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It’s the opposite, because in socialism the working classes are in control and production and distribution are collectivized, to satisfy the needs of all. In your fascist example, corporations are entrenched in the state, giving capitalists far more power without collectivizing production and distribution, retaining production for profit.

        • presoak@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          36 minutes ago

          In both cases you have a monolithic organization running the whole show. What you call it makes little difference. And the people in charge will be of the same type.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            32 minutes ago

            No, this is fundamentally wrong, akin to saying NATO and doctors without borders are the same thing. If you erase every distinguishing characteristic and just look at things as “organizations” with no further investigation, you absolutely ruin your viewpoint. I already explained how a wide gulf separates fascism and socialism.