• coltorl@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m sorry, are you implying that private ownership of a means of production (in this case, farm land) is acceptable in a socialist economy?

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What I never quite understand/know is where internet based services land. If I run a cloud based storage company / web design company or such, the servers are on my personal property and therefore should be considered allowed. Where does that start becoming non “personal.”

          It’s like charging someone to park their ideas/data on my personal property. Which I imagine would be considered private property instead. Where is the nuanced line?

          Anyone care to explain?

          • zbyte64
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            We’re communicating using the fediverse. I can use my own private instance to connect, but in my case I am using a “collective” instance. While capitalism sees the Lemmy Blahaj as a “private enterprise”, it is functionally more akin to a free associative collective where members can take their content with them.

            I would say part of the confusion is because our technology has evolved in a capitalist context, collectivism isn’t the default state of being so the solutions made cater towards (corporate) private ownership.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wrong. Personal property is owned by an individual person. Private property is owned by corporations/ capital. It’s impossible for one to magically change into the other.

        • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you keep more than you need, yes. Socialism is not about hoarding wealth especially in the form of necessary goods.

          • aport@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Who gets to decide how much I need? Some juche thug in the capital wearing a bunch of fake military ribbons? Sign me up!

            • zbyte64
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              IDK, maybe we could decide such things similar to how we’re having this conversation and we’re able to upvote on what’s being said. Totally unprecedented I know.

              • aport@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Do you think there’s voting involved in a command economy?

                My brother in Marx, that’s not how any of this works.

                • zbyte64
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Me: how about democracy in the work place?

                  Reactionaries: but what about Stalin?

                  Me: did I stutter?

        • brainrein@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Socialism is when you don’t have to do alienated work. And when noone else has to. Of course the productivity will be higher if you share the means of production with others. But it’s perfectly fine to work on your own too and harvest the fruit of your work. As you know, nobody gets rich by his own hands work, but you can get along. Capitalist exploitation starts when other people work for you and when you take the added value for your own benefits.

    • zbyte64
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Under a capitalist legal framework yes, but hear me out, it’s possible to redefine laws and is really what this debate is about.