Well give me a term that other people understand that I can use instead of socialist.
I do tend to agree with most socialist diagnosis of the problems of capitalism, I just don't tend to agree on the cure for the disease (or if there even is a cure, and not just limiting the damage).
The fact that the terms don't really exist are a good indication of how well the propaganda is working I guess.
> Yes it seems that capitalism/free markets works best most of the time (even China knows this) but there are many cases where it does not and something else has to happen (healthcare, housing etc.)
And I don't necessarily agree with this. I think money+markets will need to exist. I don't agree that the current top-down hierarchical nature of corporations is the best. CEOs are all tinpot dictators and we've universally decided that this is just okay and commands flow down from the top and people don't question that. I've found that to be a pretty shitty model, just on the basis of not having enough feedback loops from the bottom to the top which leads to badly performing economic machines. And as corporations consolidate and grow to become the size of governments the CEOs are becoming real political dictators and a ruling class.
I don't know about new terms, but I prefer pragmatism over the other 'isms out there, as long as they respect individuals rights and dignity. A far as CEO's as dictators, I don't think we see eye to eye, because this can be a GOOD thing in a lot of cases. Rule by committee instead of a single minded focus of someone with a vision is a recipe for mediocrity... up until a certain scale anyway. This is where I think things tend to break down. It's like Newton's laws, they work fine up until things get too big, or fast, then you have to correct for them with something else. As long as companies aren't so big and powerful as to disrupt the function of government, or negatively affect the populous without recourse, then I think it is fine, but after that ya, you need regulation at least.
I do tend to agree with most socialist diagnosis of the problems of capitalism, I just don't tend to agree on the cure for the disease (or if there even is a cure, and not just limiting the damage).
The fact that the terms don't really exist are a good indication of how well the propaganda is working I guess.
> Yes it seems that capitalism/free markets works best most of the time (even China knows this) but there are many cases where it does not and something else has to happen (healthcare, housing etc.)
And I don't necessarily agree with this. I think money+markets will need to exist. I don't agree that the current top-down hierarchical nature of corporations is the best. CEOs are all tinpot dictators and we've universally decided that this is just okay and commands flow down from the top and people don't question that. I've found that to be a pretty shitty model, just on the basis of not having enough feedback loops from the bottom to the top which leads to badly performing economic machines. And as corporations consolidate and grow to become the size of governments the CEOs are becoming real political dictators and a ruling class.