Yugoslavia

I see you're trying to attack a strawman version of market socialism where no state interventions into the economy are allowed.

Lol. Why not want as little mandatory work as possible. Basic income ftw.

*are not allowed

Was there private property in Yugoslavia?

There was social property.
mappingthecommons.wordpress.com/2012/12/01/self-managed-socialism/

We've been over this

But if you disagree with it you're literally a Stalin who wants to assassinate 6 million Titos.

ABSOLUTE MADMAN
B
S
O
L
U
T
E

M
A
D
M
A
N

Fuck off hoxha

But could you own a bakery yourself tho?

If only you worked at it. Otherwise you could own part of it.

And the USSR didn't have most of these things?

That's unfair.

Y tho

Because it's not allowing someone to use his property, as if employing someone was a bad thing.

No, besides wages. But in the USSR at least the surplus labor benefited all workers, not just the ones who happened to be in the same workplace as you.

Fuck off, land-hungry revisionist

Do you know where we are?

FTFY

The board of leftism?
Not all left is against property.

We're against private property. Lurk more

Read RDW

Not all left is. Social democracy isn't.

I wasn't talking about the Gorbachev era, silly

wew

This is literally one of the most important distinctions between capitalism and socialism and you are saying that Sweden and Yugoslavia were basically the same despite them being different in one of the ways this shit matters most?

Here you go lazy nigger
m.youtube.com/watch?v=sZhJ-74FcR8

Don't ask me why BO added a SocDem flag.

You put zero effort into your first response. Then you send me a video without telling me the first 90% of it is completely irrelevant. But somehow I'm the lazy nigger?

After wasting 20 fucking minutes of my time it turns out nothing Wolff said contradicts my argument. He straight up says that the profits from state enterprises went right back into building industry, the military, and improving housing, education, healthcare, etc.

In conclusion, go fuck yourself to death with a lead pipe you piece of shit

...

100% of the money went back to the people to improve their quality of life. The workers did the work, and the workers received all the fruits of their labor. It's not profit in the capitalist sense if the earnings weren't concentrated into the hands of a property-owning class.

I'll say it again: In the USSR the surplus labor benefitted all workers, not just the ones who happened to be in the same workplace as you, as would be the case in market socialism.

...

...

Nothing changes so long as there are production units
trying to increase their respective amounts of value.
What happens if the State ("democratic," "workers',"
"proletarian," etc.) takes all enterprises under its control,
while keeping them as enterprises? Either State
enterprises obey the law of profit and value, and nothing changes. Or they do not obey it without destroying it,
and then everything goes wrong. 2
Inside the enterprise, organization is rational: capital
imposes its despotism on the workers. Outside, on the
market, where each enterprise meets the others, order
exists only as the permanent and periodical suppression
of disorder, accompanied by crises and destruction. Only
communism can destroy this organized chaos, by
suppressing the enterprise as a separate entity. - Gilles Dauvé

...