Market Socialism

[Vendetta]

What exactly is market socialism? I've only ever heard of it described as 'capitalism wrapped up in a cute blanket of socialism' or something to that extent.

[More Fire for the People]

Whoever said that was right in a limited sense. Market ‘socialism’ is an attempt by some, mainly capitulationists, to reconcile the ‘humanism’ of really existing socialism with the ‘productivity’ of market capitalism. Some advocates include Ota Šik and Deng Xiapong — the former sold out to capitalism in word while the latter did so in deed. IMO, market socialism is where petty-bourgeois socialist go to die.

[Janus]

I've only ever heard of it described as 'capitalism wrapped up in a cute blanket of socialism' or something to that extent.
Pretty much. It seeks to allow for greater economic growth through a market economy while maintaining most of the other vestiges of a planned economy including state control of the means of production.

[Ander]

It has little to do with real socialism and is closer to social democracy which is basically putting a nicer face on capitalism. Is it true socialism? No. Is it something that leftists should support? No.

Deng introduced it into China as "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and look what that has done. I believe Tito employed it in Yugoslavia during his rule as well.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

I've only ever heard of it described as 'capitalism wrapped up in a cute blanket of socialism'

That's basically it, or it acts as the paved road from genuine socialism to capitalism.

[Vendetta]

Alright, thanks.

Well, seems those who've described it were correct then. ;)

[Demogorgon]

It depeds what you mean by market socialism. Sometimes it is used to simply describe social democracy.

At othe times it means a system whereby co-operative businesses replace privately owned ones.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2006 06:02 am
It depeds what you mean by market socialism. Sometimes it is used to simply describe social democracy.

At othe times it means a system whereby co-operative businesses replace privately owned ones.
You're a market socialist, right?

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by LeftyHenry+December 02, 2006 12:47 am--> (LeftyHenry @ December 02, 2006 12:47 am)
[email protected] 01, 2006 06:02 am
It depeds what you mean by market socialism. Sometimes it is used to simply describe social democracy.

At othe times it means a system whereby co-operative businesses replace privately owned ones.
You're a market socialist, right? [/b]
To a point. It has it's advantages in that it prevents too much inefficient and dictatorial central planning and ensures that the workers really do control their businesses and no profit is leached away from them.

On the other hand it only works for some industries. It couldn't provide for healthcare, education etc. I would say the economy should be split about 50/50 between more traditional planning and workers co-operatives.

The thing is though you can't allow for any market forces in the so called "Labour Market". There is nothing inherantly wrong with a market in goods and services, so long as there are saeguard against it's excesses. But when it comes to labour the market will tend to drive down wages which is obviously no good.

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by Demogorgon+December 02, 2006 05:47 am--> (Demogorgon @ December 02, 2006 05:47 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 12:47 am

[email protected] 01, 2006 06:02 am
It depeds what you mean by market socialism. Sometimes it is used to simply describe social democracy.

At othe times it means a system whereby co-operative businesses replace privately owned ones.
You're a market socialist, right?
On the other hand it only works for some industries. It couldn't provide for healthcare, education etc. I would say the economy should be split about 50/50 between more traditional planning and workers co-operatives. [/b]
If you're going to divide up the economy into a co-operative and state-owned sectors, why do so quantitatively rather than qualitatively?

[Demogorgon]

Originally posted by Hopscotch Anthill+December 02, 2006 04:34 pm--> (Hopscotch Anthill @ December 02, 2006 04:34 pm)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 05:47 am

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2006 12:47 am

[email protected] 01, 2006 06:02 am
It depeds what you mean by market socialism. Sometimes it is used to simply describe social democracy.

At othe times it means a system whereby co-operative businesses replace privately owned ones.
You're a market socialist, right?
On the other hand it only works for some industries. It couldn't provide for healthcare, education etc. I would say the economy should be split about 50/50 between more traditional planning and workers co-operatives.
If you're going to divide up the economy into a co-operative and state-owned sectors, why do so quantitatively rather than qualitatively? [/b]
I'm not going to do it quantitively. 50/50 was just a guess on my part based on what I understand about different industries. It's certainly not a figure carved in stone