[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')
If you aren't in global liquidity (which is what capital is), you aren't in capital, state or otherwise. You may be an imperfect form of socialism as in being statist. You are either in the global conduit of liquidity flow or you aren't.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', '
')
Michigan had three extraction booms, first they came for the Copper, then the Lumber, and finally the Iron Ore.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Subjectivist', '
')
Michigan had three extraction booms, first they came for the Copper, then the Lumber, and finally the Iron Ore.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')In capitalist society, everyone is vying for a bigger slice of accumulation.

[Lore]

North Korea operates as a single-party state under a totalitarian family dictatorship, with an absolute hereditary monarchy. The economy is also family owned and is more like a feudal system then having any resemblance to a socialist one.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lore', 'N')orth Korea operates as a single-party state under a totalitarian .... dictatorship

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Lore', 'N')orth Korea operates as a single-party state under a totalitarian family dictatorship, with an absolute hereditary monarchy. The economy is also family owned and is more like a feudal system then having any resemblance to a socialist one.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')
Liquidity is capital as it:

1 It is labour value then amplified via stocks and and other non tangible assets which saw their genesis with the rise of the banks and the stock market (accumulation).

2 Drives the relentless move towards globalisation.

Earlier use of money represented static and fixed wealth such as generational land ownership or rudimentary exchange where no labour value or accumulation existed.

Confusing statist socialism with capital only makes the understanding of this particular system all the more confusing (incidentally statist socialism (the USSR, Cuba, N Korea) should not be confused with bourgeoisie socialism (Denmark, UK etc). The former has no roots in capital, the latter is capitalist with a socialised component. Capitalists prefer no expense in good times {nil socialisation) and some in bad times (interventionism) to ensure stability in accumulation.

[americandream]

Communism is transitory to socialism and authoritarian as the new man is invented. It however requires a high state of consciousness. The leaders of the Russian Revolution were par excellence and created a very strong contender to world social economy status. But in no way was the USSR remotely within sniffing distance of captal, no matter how imperfect its communism was. No way. Bourgeoisie intellectuals like to think otherwise, for a whole raft of reasons, mostly ill thought out.

[americandream]

There seems to be a lot of emotional flubbering by Plantaganet when history and systems are discussed. It would be wise for him to contemplate that it will not be a subejective event, but a historical one. Causes have effects and thus, we Marxists introspect on this when considering the fate of the exponential within the finite.

[ralfy]

For me , the USSR was state capitalist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalist

because it had the qualities of industrial capitalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalis ... capitalism

with ownership by a State in which workers had little say.

And it would not have lasted given the eventual move to globalization, as well as reasons such as peak oil and global warming.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', 'F')or me , the USSR was state capitalist

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalist

because it had the qualities of industrial capitalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalis ... capitalism

with ownership by a State in which workers had little say.

And it would not have lasted given the eventual move to globalization, as well as reasons such as peak oil and global warming.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')
You have to really focus on what capital is and not why Marx was incorrectly applied by Lenin (other than to ensure we don't repeat the mistake again). If you confuse the two, you will never get your head around the objective dynamics at play.

These are all about objective forces, not what we would lke to see.

[americandream]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')
You have to really focus on what capital is and not why Marx was incorrectly applied by Lenin (other than to ensure we don't repeat the mistake again). If you confuse the two, you will never get your head around the objective dynamics at play.

These are all about objective forces, not what we would lke to see.

[ralfy]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', '
')
Capital as it contemplates social economy requires accumulation via the capitalist, labour value and factors for consolidation such as intangible assets and the stock market.

Anyways, I am asking you to think objectively whereas it appears that you can't get past the subjective. So I am going to leave this endless tail chasing here.