That just sounds like a reframing of “the party are the capitalist class” though.
If the party either controls the corporations or has the ability to seize control if their priorities aren’t met, where does one group begin and the other end?
Wouldn’t that have made the USSR capitalist as well? I think a key distinction is how authority within a party is established. If authority is derived from ownership then that is clearly capitalist. If authority is derived from the party itself, then that is something else.
That just sounds like a reframing of “the party are the capitalist class” though.
If the party either controls the corporations or has the ability to seize control if their priorities aren’t met, where does one group begin and the other end?
Wouldn’t that have made the USSR capitalist as well? I think a key distinction is how authority within a party is established. If authority is derived from ownership then that is clearly capitalist. If authority is derived from the party itself, then that is something else.