I'm taking a sociology class, and we just started talking about Marx. My professor asked us for examples of socialism, and quite a few people mentioned welfare.

I pushed back on this, saying that a redistribution of wealth isn't the same as "redistribution" (shared ownership) of productive means. My professor replied that socialism is a commitment to equality, which welfare provides.

Now, I wasn't sure exactly what to say next without denouncing capitalism. I'm also aware that my response could have been better. How would you respond to this?

EDIT: I'm not trying to convince my professor. I'm trying to present arguments that get my classmates thinking in hopes of radicalizing a few of them. One of the TA's actually pm'd me later saying that they agreed with me.

  • PermaculturalMarxist [they/them]
    1·
    4 years ago

    Socialism is the lowest stage of communism in my view, so it's when a state goes about trying to resolve the contradictions keeping it from achieving communism. That would be meaningless to people not committed to a Marxist view though. I say this because socialism isn't even really control of means of production by the workers, that's a common misconception.

    • yang [they/them, any]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Socialism is shared decision-making power then. It's still a far stretch from "socialism is equality"

      • PermaculturalMarxist [they/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        yeah for sure, that is pure liberalism and academic dishonesty/ ignorance on the part of your professor. It astounds me that even "Marxists" professors think Marx was an "economic determinists" and dismiss his historical materialist methods on those grounds, but if you read Marx at all that is an absurd take. Academia just doesn't produce good discourse around Marx at all, it's pretty sad.