One of the nation’s socialist Left’s favorite deceptions is to play games with the true definitional meanings of common words. Their recent preference is to make the absurd claim than socialism hasn’t really been tried before because it has to involve ‘The people collectively and directly own the means of production’:
To begin we will examine the meaning of the word collectively in the phrase ‘The people collectively’ to logically unpack this cute little ideological deception.
The Oxford English dictionary defines the term collectively
As a group; as a whole.
One can substitute the relevant part directly into the phrase thusly:
The people collectively becomes The people [as a group]
And it follows that this is referring to the action’s of a ‘group of people’
Compare this to the relevant portion of the Oxford English dictionary definition of the word government
The group of people with the authority to govern a country or state
And it follows that a reference to the action’s of a ‘group of people directly own(ing) the means of production’ has the same meaning as: ‘the [government] directly own(ing) the means of production’
Lo and behold, the phrase ‘the people collectively’ equates to a ‘group of people’ as in the definition of ‘government’.
Thus, the logical “progression”: The people collectively = Group of people = Government.
Consequently, we can logically substitute the equivalent terms in that deceptive phraseology:
‘The the people collectively and directly own the means of production’.
‘The [Government] directly own(s) the means of production’.
Which is universally (Leftists love that word) understood to be Tada!: SOCIALISM!
However, according to at least some of the nation and world’s socialists, this is supposedly something entirely different, because science or something….
The people collectively and directly owning or regulating the means of production is supposed to be manifestly different than a group of people collectively (Government) and directly owning or regulating the means of production.
This is known in the word business as a ‘distinction without a difference’.
The Oxford English dictionary defines the term distinction without a difference:
An artificially created distinction where no real difference exists.
The plain unadulterated facts are that dictionary definitions prove that governments are composed of groups of people. And some governments are composed of groups of people who ‘collectively’ own or regulate the means of production’. These are correctly labelled as Socialist governments, according to the pesky reality of the true definitions of the certain words. Except for the socialist who attempt to defy reality and common knowledge and degree that some groups of people acting as a governmental body aren’t really a government.
One is supposed to look past the fact that there is no real difference in those terms. That little turn of phrase is also supposed to magically absolve the socialists and communists of the absolute failure, repression and mass murder of their base ideology. Moreover, it doesn’t help the socialist cause that they don’t really have and set details on how their system of group or collective ownership will be somehow different than a government having the same function. It also doesn’t help their cause that in the 500 years of failure that is their historic record.
Perhaps in their sheer desperation in absolving themselves of the crimes against humanity the socialist have forgotten common sense and logic. History is supposed to give the socialists the benefit of the doubt for their 500 years of failure. After all, distinguishing one collective group of people owning or regulating the means of production is supposed to somehow be different than another instance of another group of people owning or regulating the means of production.
They also can’t quite cite an example of a group of people empowered as government have devolved that ‘power to the people’ as it were. The historic record shows the opposite – that once a group of people hold power over everyone else in a socialist system they tend to hold onto that power no matter what the cost in lives and oppression.