None of what you claimed is true.

Socialist countries aren’t built on imperialism. They have their own problems, but at the same time are directed by the working classes rather than capitalists.

Thanks.

It’s not about simple accounting, but instead Denmark’s participation in broader systems of imperialism and unequal exchange. Unequal exchange, for example, results in monopoly prices charged for goods produced in the west, and maintains dominance over IP while relying on foreign labor for the earlier parts of the supply chain.

The nordics are all reliant on imperialism to fund their safety netd and are in decay, same with the European countries and NZ. A fundamental lack of caring for international impact is required to see them as “fair and just.”

We need to tax the rich until there are no rich people left, only wealthy ones.

This is what I have to go off of.

The global south. The US Empire, and its vassals in Europe, all work together in order to plunder the global south through a combination of millitary intervention, financial domination, and unequal exchange.

Incorrect, I don’t mean “publicly traded” as in publicly owned, but actual public ownership, like state-run healthcare. Private ownership is the principle aspect of the US economy. As for working class control, you’re incorrect again:

China has 8 sub-parties that help guide state policy, they just don’t have equal footing to the CPC.

As for liberalism, by that I mean the kind of competition-focused, individualist, private-property supporting ideology backing capitalism. Liberal democracy focuses on competing parties all representing capitalist interests, which creates disunity instead of cohesion.

Incorrect. Every single economy I listed has public ownership as the principle aspect of the economy, with the working class in control of the state. The fact that China is developed, and maintains markets for small and medium secondary industries does not mean private ownership is dominant.

I’m not talking about those imperialist countries, but Cuba, the PRC, DPRK, Vietnam, Laos, former USSR, Nicaragua, Venezuela, etc. I don’t lionize the countries you assumed I do that fund their safety nets through imperialism. Both the US Empire and all of the countries you listed are indeed capitalist.

Haha, fair!

No? Socialism is far better, looking at how socialist countries prioritize electrification and balancing ecological protection with development it’s clear.

Yep, the jump from capitalism to socialism is a qualitative leap before gradual quantitative buildup to a qualitative leap to communism. History progresses by leaps and bounds.

Yep, just wanted them to spell out their claims exactly. It’s much easier to debunk clear claims than vagueposting.

It isn’t, and I never said that it was. What exactly are you vagueposting about?

Genuinely funny, lmao

Here’s a diamat study list I’ve been throwing together (as a part of my prep for rev 3 of my ML reading list):

1. Dialectical Materialism - ProleWiki

2. Marxism for Newbies: Dialectical Materialism - Dash the Internet Marxist

3. On Practice - Mao Zedong

4. On Contradiction - Mao Zedong

5. Where do Correct Ideas Come From? - Mao Zedong

6. Anti-Dühring - Friedrich Engels

7. Materialism and Empirio-Criticism - Vladimir Lenin

List subject to change, but anyone who wants to dive into diamat can start here!

The major difference between the New Deal and what socialists want is the replacement of bourgeois rule with proletarian, which does require axing the state and replacing it. The Party for Socialism and Liberation has a book called Socialist Reconstruction that goes over what that would look like in the US, including nationalizing the top 100 companies immediately.

Please explain, the economy switched from public property as principle to private, and from the working class in power to capitalists. This is widely recognized as a transition to capitalism.

Vietnam is worth it though as it’s a socialist country and rapidly developing.

Denmark also relies on imperialism to fund its safety nets, so “fair and equal” doesn’t apply either IMO.