This is an interesting reframing of my understanding of the situation. I appreciate you replying; I’m going to process this for a bit.

You ask “what the point” of Socialism is if you aren’t “picking your boss” and whatnot, but the real answer is efficiency and supremacy over Capital. Markets have a natural tendency to centralize, but at the peak of this they stop actually progressing, because the amount of information required to direct production becomes massive. Central Planning alleviates this, and by folding all property into the Public Sector related industries can be better coordinated, all in service of maximizing human happiness and raising the floor as high as possible.

You lost me here. I’m afraid this is above my comprehension. I’m not arguing against it, I don’t understand what you’re saying (I assume this is my ignorance not any lack of eloquence on your part).

Regarding the public vs private sector that preceded that section, I want to ask clarifying questions if you’ll allow: to you understand does this pathways towards eventual goal then include plans for further assimilation of key assets of the private sector into the public somehow? Is this possible/necessary or is the presumed reality of the ideology at play that some level of capitalistic private sector is inevitable? If it is within the plan, what does this look like?

I appreciate this comment immensely. I wasn’t being facetious about my comparative lack of understanding on the topic. This was well-worded and informative, and I’m going to take some time to process this into my understanding. Thank you.

Look, I’ll admit I’m not as smart as some of the folks who debate this topic, so for me it comes down to a simple question:

Do the Chinese people own the means of production? Not a government body claiming to represent the people, but the people themselves; do the people own the means of production? Can the factory workers choose how the factory operates?

If no, then what’s the point?

“Funko did not request a takedown of the @itchio platform.”

Man, I fucking hate corpo-speak like this.

Yes, you didn’t personally make the request against itchio… But you hired this company to enforce “brand protection” and that’s what they did. So you did actually request the takedown, but you just did so by authorizing another party to make such requests on your behalf.

This is like a military General saying “hey I didn’t commit any warcrimes, I just gave the orders to my men to commit warcrimes!”

Did you forget that shame exists? Not all, hell not even most calls to name an offender are a call for violence, the vast majority are calls for accountability and potentially shame.

Imo we need to start attaching criminal penalties to the people behind businesses that knowingly abuse their power and position like this. Corporate bullying isn’t a financial position, it’s a failing of ethics.

Jesus christ this comment deserves a noble prize. Incredibly succinct explanation of something I didn’t get before.