what is it that makes a state a capitalist state?
Could be the way it influences the world in economic ways? If so, what else would cause a state to become capitalist?
Thanks!
8 answers
The economic system supported by the government makes a state capitalist, socialist, communist, or whatever economic system subscribed to by that government.
No. See this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
Some argue that communist china is a capitalist state, and the soviet union failed in its attempt to become a socialist state, but became a capitalist state. The definition of capitalist state is the state owns all means of production "for profit".
Some argue that communist china is a capitalist state, and the soviet union failed in its attempt to become a socialist state, but became a capitalist state. The definition of capitalist state is the state owns all means of production "for profit".
I think if you read these you will understand. "Capitalism" is defined as an economy in which the means of production are privately owned, not owned by the government. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism
Most modern, industrialized economies are a mixture of private enterprise and some government control, which varies from nation-state to nation-state.
http://www.shmoop.com/economic-systems/types.html
Most modern, industrialized economies are a mixture of private enterprise and some government control, which varies from nation-state to nation-state.
http://www.shmoop.com/economic-systems/types.html
There seems to be a big difference between a capitalist state and a country with an economy labeled as capitalism. This book seems to define the capitalist state.
http://bobjessop.org/2013/11/04/the-capitalist-state-marxist-theories-and-methods/
http://bobjessop.org/2013/11/04/the-capitalist-state-marxist-theories-and-methods/
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state%20capitalism
I think the term "capitalist state" is too broad and borders on the jingoistic, perhaps a leftover from the rhetoric of the Cold War.
Exactly. The term
"capitalist state" is a Marxist term, originally described by none other than Karl Marx. It is markedly different than the modern definition of capitalism in our usage, and that is the main economic difference between socialism and capitalism in our time....who controls the means of production.
Why would a state become a capitalist state? Often it is a belief that the social and economic failures of capitalism is not serving the needs of the population, but in my opinion, it may be a valid reason to make changes, in my lifetime, only Thomas More's Utopia was the only working model, and it was fiction. Some argue modern China is a functioning model, but I would withhold that judgement for a few years more, to see if the excesses of corruption in the "management" of the means of production can be controlled, so far there are mixed results. State capitalism is not working in North Korea, but there, the main issue is the means of production are aimed at fostering a powerful military machine, not at social needs (like food).
You may benefit from reading Karl Marx's (and Engel's) Manifesto. A summary of the economic thought of Marx is here: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Marx.html
"capitalist state" is a Marxist term, originally described by none other than Karl Marx. It is markedly different than the modern definition of capitalism in our usage, and that is the main economic difference between socialism and capitalism in our time....who controls the means of production.
Why would a state become a capitalist state? Often it is a belief that the social and economic failures of capitalism is not serving the needs of the population, but in my opinion, it may be a valid reason to make changes, in my lifetime, only Thomas More's Utopia was the only working model, and it was fiction. Some argue modern China is a functioning model, but I would withhold that judgement for a few years more, to see if the excesses of corruption in the "management" of the means of production can be controlled, so far there are mixed results. State capitalism is not working in North Korea, but there, the main issue is the means of production are aimed at fostering a powerful military machine, not at social needs (like food).
You may benefit from reading Karl Marx's (and Engel's) Manifesto. A summary of the economic thought of Marx is here: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/bios/Marx.html
I wish I knew more about the lesson at issue in this student's question. I was assuming that the question is about modern (post World War II) economies and states, not economic theories as espoused by theoreticians of the past (and/or present). The United States loudly proclaims itself a capitalist nation, but it is such only in that most means of production and distribution are privately owned, for profit. Even then, privately owned companies, whether the local tuxedo rental store or Walmart or the multi-nationals, are heavily dependent on "socialistic" government intervention in the process, as in the public ownership of roads, airports, ports, etc., and in law and regulation. So, no current state, from the United States to North Korea is fully/purely one system or another, as you point out, bobpursley. North Korea perhaps comes closest, but even then it could be argued that the state control over production and distribution is aimed at the maintenance of a monarchy (the Kim family) and bears little resemblance to anything Marx and Engels envisioned (although they described it), much less Thomas More's vision of utopia.
1 answer