What is a socioeconomic system? What does it do? What's the 'socio' part at the beginning? When you say 'taking land away and giving it someone else' in your mind, think of therelationshipsbetween the person who had the land taken, the person who gets it.
A socioeconomic system is all about thosesocial relations among people. How they interact with each other, in what way they socialize. When you add in the economic part, now we're talking aboutproduction, how things get made, stuff gets done. And so we can think about a ton of these differentsocial relations in production, now and going back in history: a small business owner to an employee, a manager to an intern, a stockholder to a CEO, a patrician to slave, king to a vassal on and into etc. All of these relationships were created under a certain socioeconomic system that promoted them. The thing that never changes is man's labor - man still doessomethingin each relationship. However, something is interesting here. If you'll notice, all of these relationships have a certain character, and in Marx's language, he calls it the oppressor and the oppressed: one person benefits off the labor of someone else in every one of them. And our current socioeconomic system, a form of capitalism, just adds window dressing to this same relationship. As I said in post #1, we add abstractions in the form companies, corporations, and stockholders, relegated through something called capital, to push the reality of this relationship into hiding.
Thatdoesn't meanit's not a better system than those of the past. It's a great step forward past feudalism in that, at least in theory, anyone is capable of 'striking it rich', whereas the serf's socioeconomic status was solidified almost the moment he was born. But what caused this step forward in society? Why did we even switch from the feudalistic model to capitalism? Changes in productive forcesforcesociety's transformation: social relations that are no longer needed are discarded. The role of a king is tossed away for the role of an industrialist. The role of a serf is replaced by the role of a wage worker.Changes in productive forces are the underpinnings of revolution, and those who do not want those roles to be obsolete, will fight tooth and nail to preserve them.
So now we're still left with the same problem: even if someone 'strikes it rich', all they've done is switched up their role, from the oppressed to the oppressor: that exploitative relationshiphasn't been solved yet. That's what communist has set as its goal. To break that ancient, historical relationship that keeps getting window dressed up. That's why I've said a hundred times before: to emancipate man's labor, a free association of men by men, is the basic, fundamental requirement of communism. The road to this communism is a long one, that has before it the steps of every other system used to push forward into the next. Right now, it's capitalism pushing forward to socialism.
With that understanding, let's revisit 'you're taking my land and giving it to someone else.'
In communism,social relations will be completely differentthan those under capitalism. There won't be a owner of a company because companies will not exist. There will not be a stockholder because the idea of a corporation was discarded. There won't be a slip of paper that says you 'own' a piece of land because there's noreasonwhy the concept of 'owning' it would even appeal to you to begin with. I know this is very difficult to conceptualize, but put yourself in the position of a Roman slave and try visual the concept of a modern financial instrument. Hopefully you can imagine you'd look rather retarded running around saying you 'own' things in such a society.
Your father's company wouldn't exist because there's no reason for it to exist. You'll be able to relate yourself and your labor freely asyou want, not under childlike notions like capital or divine right. Your original question should now make much less sense to ask: your mind is working in current social relations under capitalism (my father's land, his company being seized and redistributed) and asking about how those work under communism. Social relations change as the socioeconomic system changes.
That's why hodj never listens or understands my words in his spammage. Mao or Stalin changed no social relations. Mao took land from landlords and gave it to peasants, and all that did was make new landlords and different peasants. The same social relations remained, and that's a part why it's closer to capitalism than any notion of the communism of Marx.
