What an absolute joke.

Socialism is not "when the government does stuff." Governments are tools that can be used to advance any sort of ideology or agenda. Socialism is a specific ideology (or set of ideologies), which Ben Franklin did not and could not have subscribed to on account of the ideology had not yet even been developed.

When a member of the capitalist class lobbies the government to introduce regulations designed to prevent small business from competing with his monopoly, that is not making the system "more socialist" because the government is doing "more stuff." It is making the system more capitalist. A system that is controlled by and works for the benefit of the capitalist class is a capitalist system, regardless of the degree to which the government does things.

If anything, the more correct term would be "statist" but that's also an absurd term, because again, governments are tools. Whoever holds power in a system will use that tool to advance their own interests, and if the tool does not exist, then it will be created. This ridiculous idea that socialism is simply an ideology based around supporting the government doing things, any government doing any things, is complete nonsense. There is not any ideology that says that, it isn't something anyone believes. The difference between socialism and capitalism is not the degree to which the state is being used but who is using the state and to what purposes.

Capitalist states do not have fire departments because they are "partially socialist" but because capitalists don't like having their buildings burn down any more than anyone else does.

No it doesn’t.

No it doesn't, name one anarchist society where this was an issue in the real world.

https://anarwiki.org/wiki/List_of_Anarchist_Societies

point to them here

Lol read a book, my god

Then, with that logic, none of the social systems work whether it's capitalism, communism, anarchism, socialism, etc.

Just like communism and socialism doesn't work?

Because capitalism is a violent, agressive system that keep sabotaging them for profit.

Capitalism is the reason why everything is shit and why the masses can't have any form of real democratic power.

Yes. Sort of.

To be honest, I think even I need more education on the topic. But I think it's more like societies form organically. People pick roles and contribute to society as needed instead of doing a job just because you need to pay the rent.

And it doesn't mean there's an absence of rules or laws. And commerce would still function but there would be a specific need for it. And it wouldn't be just for profit. So that removed a lot of incentive to do bad things.

A system doesn't have to be 100% socialist to have socialist elements. A city-owned fire department is a socialist element of a system. The fire trucks are collectively owned and controlled by the people via the government. That meets the definition of socialism.

A person who owns knitting needles and uses them to make scarves he sells is a capitalist element of a system. That person privately owns the means of production.

Capitalism and socialism have always existed in a mixed system. In a 100% capitalist system, every "means of production" would have to be in private hands. That would mean that you couldn't have a government-owned fire department, all firefighting equipment, and the labour of firefighters, etc. would have to be privately owned and operated by independent for-profit firefighting companies. In a 100% socialist system, nobody could own knitting needles -- or at least couldn't sell any knitting they did using those knitting needles because that would turn the knitting needles from a personal possession to a piece of capital equipment, which would therefore have to be collectively owned.

The USSR at various times tried to go 100% socialist, but it was a disaster. They had to at least allow small elements of capitalism in their socialist / communist system, just as ramping up capitalism to 100% never works either.

We currently live in a mixed socialist / capitalist system in which some "means of production" are collectively owned and controlled by the people via the government, and others are privately owned and operated. One way in which the USA is different from the UK is that in the UK the means of production associated with healthcare are owned and operated by the people via the government (socialist healthcare) whereas in the USA they're privately owned and operated (capitalist healthcare).

I think failed is a loaded term you're using here. But more important to me than labels is that I believe in free healthcare, housing, food and education. Lots of countries do that already or at least a good portion of those, and the US doesn't.

LMFAO

Oh man, I apologize, I didn't realize your ideal world meant a surveillance state totallitarian dictatorship which abducted and killed people in the night, starved the population, and put millions to work in camps until they were near dying.

You should have started with how you actually support those things instead of saying simply "I think everything was great" which merely implied an ignorance of the bad things.