I would normally agree, but in this case, the “libertarian website” is actually an encyclopedia article by Robert Heilbroner. Also, the above definition seems to be in agreement with alternative sources.
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
A system of social and economic organization that would substitute state monopoly for private ownership of the sources of production and means of distribution, and would concentrate under the control of the secular governing authority the chief activities of human life.
The Oxford Dictionary definition you supply is the one I generally see in use:
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Every nation-state on Earth has a government that regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange. That doesn’t seem like a very useful definition.
I retract the “libertarian website” part *. A reformulated version of my remark is: The respondents who identified themselves as socialists wouldn’t probably agree with Heilbroner’s definition of socialism. I was addressing futility of arguing over definitions rather than a possible libertarian bias.
*) My mistake was caused by the title Library of Economics and Liberty and the fact that the site is maintained by the Liberty Fund, whose description of themselves sounds typically libertarian.
I would normally agree, but in this case, the “libertarian website” is actually an encyclopedia article by Robert Heilbroner. Also, the above definition seems to be in agreement with alternative sources.
Oxford Dictionaries:
Merriam-Webster:
New Advent:
As a Norwegian, I was happy to pick that option. I think of myself as roughly socialist.
It doesn’t mean “centrally planned economy” to me.
You are at liberty to use the word any way you wish, but dictionaries, encyclopedias, and economics textbooks seem to mean something different by it.
Dictionaries, encyclopedias and economics textbooks in which countries?
I suppose we could claim the norwegian word “sosialist” doesn’t quite map to the english word “socialist”, though.
Sounds plausible.
The Oxford Dictionary definition you supply is the one I generally see in use:
Every nation-state on Earth has a government that regulates the means of production, distribution, and exchange. That doesn’t seem like a very useful definition.
I retract the “libertarian website” part *. A reformulated version of my remark is: The respondents who identified themselves as socialists wouldn’t probably agree with Heilbroner’s definition of socialism. I was addressing futility of arguing over definitions rather than a possible libertarian bias.
*) My mistake was caused by the title Library of Economics and Liberty and the fact that the site is maintained by the Liberty Fund, whose description of themselves sounds typically libertarian.