/lit/ - Literature

when the entire book is obscure meaningless word salad

How? It feels like Hayek actually understands how things are to a certain extent, MY fault with it is that he conflates socialism with communism and all other forms solely from the economic perspective.

But the correlation between fascism and communism is a valid connection, and one I don’t see made enough on here

>>11748396
>I don't like what is written in perhaps the best book of early XXth century political philosophy so I just call it fallacious instead.

>>11748437
https://youtu.be/ITBJ0K-9aas

his conflation of the origins of fascism and communism are the weakest parts of the book.

>>11748476
>Nationwide common ownership of the means of production is possible without a strong state

>>11748471
>what is the is-ought fallacy
>what is the reasonable middle fallacy
>what is the all-or-nothing fallacy
>what is the fallacy of extrapolating from a small dataset

>>11748489
I own my farm. You own your farm. We're two farmers on an otherwise uninhabited island. Badda bing badda boom, nationwide common ownership of the means of production without a strong state.

>>11748676
>I own my farm. You own your farm. We're two farmers on an otherwise uninhabited island. Badda bing badda boom, nationwide common ownership of the means of production without a strong state.

>He doesn't understand socialism.

Farms are private property and thus are to be collectivized (nationalized)

>>11748703
>both farms are completely identical in every way
>any slight difference would be disproportionate ownership
if they owned each others farms then that would be socialism

>>11748676
>What is the fallacy fallacy
Checkmate, don't forget the plus 5 for my logic sword

>>11748676

You don't own your farm, you use it as a worker. If someone lands on your side of the island and start doing their own farming there, you have to accept it if you're a socialist.

>>11748396
Great rebuttal.