Oh, I mean I guess, but isn’t that pointlessly semantic point? The same exact concept has existed before its modern coinage, it was just called by different names like “system of natural liberty” or “commercial society”. It was and still is the go to economic system for classical liberalism which is the ideology that shaped Europe out of the age of the age of feudal monarchies and into constitutional democracies.
Commerce in what sense? Socialism is very much against the idea of a free market where commerce happens. It tries to substitute that concept with collectivization and redistribution.
I meant the term
Oh, I mean I guess, but isn’t that pointlessly semantic point? The same exact concept has existed before its modern coinage, it was just called by different names like “system of natural liberty” or “commercial society”. It was and still is the go to economic system for classical liberalism which is the ideology that shaped Europe out of the age of the age of feudal monarchies and into constitutional democracies.
Most socialists support the existence of commerce. It is the hoarding of wealth that we oppose.
Commerce in what sense? Socialism is very much against the idea of a free market where commerce happens. It tries to substitute that concept with collectivization and redistribution.
Fair enough. In general, you are correct. However, I am a market socialist and therefore believe that markets can coexist with redistribution.