This is the problem with the term socialism. It’s very often applied to social democracy, so it’s not an exact term any more. For what you are discussing (seizing the means of production, central distribution of resources and jobs), I prefer the term communism.
But none of that matters much. What matters is that the Scandinavian model of social democracy has been far more successful where applied than communism ever was. Communism has only ever been fully implemented on the back of brutal authoritarianism, and that’s because it’s in fundamental conflict with human nature.
And as much as I would love for human nature and social dynamics of large groups to be different, we have to deal with the animal we have rather than the one we want.
This is the problem with the term socialism. It’s very often applied to social democracy, so it’s not an exact term any more. For what you are discussing (seizing the means of production, central distribution of resources and jobs), I prefer the term communism.
But none of that matters much. What matters is that the Scandinavian model of social democracy has been far more successful where applied than communism ever was. Communism has only ever been fully implemented on the back of brutal authoritarianism, and that’s because it’s in fundamental conflict with human nature.
And as much as I would love for human nature and social dynamics of large groups to be different, we have to deal with the animal we have rather than the one we want.