Semantics, if you want to redefine the term socialism then you have a long road ahead. You should go debate Crowder and determine the definition before you declare your position:
In short: Because everyone has called it a piano for thousands of years, and you say it is a cabinet and there never has been a "real" piano, creates a real dilemma. (There are several different types of pianos, fyi) I suggest you hone your definition of which type of socialism you are advocating, as there are several sects/varieties of "socialism."
It is already defined. You just don’t want to know and refuse to learn.
Definition of Socialism
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
-Merriam-Webster
So your definition is wrong, just like your wrong in thinking it can work and thinking it has never been tried, and how you think it doesn't always fail.
I have to turn you back to your words:
Where is the violence in your definitions?
If you would want to know, you would start thinking. In theory, socialism is the next step.
It is more humane one than capitalism — exploitative system that needs system of oppression. If it has more violence, than it is not socialism, but a higher stage in capitalism — state capitalism. Richard Wolff explains that very nice in the video at the link in my first comment. You know, if you do not accept the truth, you will be forced to live it.
In socialism you (gov) have to take from someone else to give someone something, which is theft, theft=violence.
No one here is advocating state capitalism, the term was anarcho-capitalist. And it applies to voluntary interactions between consenting parties. No use of oppression or violence required when interactions are voluntary, right?
But that is not in your definitions, but in yur head only.
Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism cannot exist without the state opression and violence. You just have described capitalist and label it “socialism”. You are brainwashed like a millions of Americans John Steinbeck has described:
The violence where “the government have to take from someone else to give someone something” is happening in the US just now. Jeff Bezos is getting $11 million an hour, while paying his workers $12, and is going to be authorized to collect taxes instead of paying them! What would you call that?
You had the same situation in 1929. FDR has saved USA by imposing true socialist measures — high taxes (up to 90% on predator corporations) and breaking up monopolies. Learn history. Everything you are living has already happened. You just have mixed the terms and calling “socialism” the worst kind of capitalism.
Definition of capitalism
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.-Merriam-Webster
There is no state control in the FREE MARKET.
Does Bezos receive tax breaks from government that the $12/h workers do not? USPS subsidy and tax breaks/subsidies of $1.2bil
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.
Government is choosing winners and losers and controlling the means of production, which by definition is socialism.
Franklin D. Roosevelt presidency (1933-1945) 99.5% tax imposed Jan 1, 1941. Dec 7, 1941, almost a year later exactly there is a War and the government uses all that revenue to create the largest military industrial complex in history. Great, socialism.
And not to mention the socialist control policy of the federal reserve (1913), controlling the means of production through centralized control and manipulation of the money supply. Which lead to the 1929 crash you blame on capitalism.
There is no free market. It is propaganda.
And yes, its all capitalism that you call “socialism”. Congratulations.
https://steemit.com/informationwar/@lighteye/instability-of-capitalism