[DonHopkins]

You have no idea what socialism is, like so many right wing propagandists and dynastic-autocracy labor-exploitation rentier-state apologists.

That's not socialism. It's an absolute autocratic monarchy distributing oil rents to a privileged citizen caste.

Most of the private-sector work is done by foreign workers who don't receive the same benefits or political rights.

[derektank]

Socialism is state ownership of the means of production. The governance of that state, be it democratic, monarchical, or dictatorship of the proletariat, is a separate question.

[DonHopkins]

By that definition, which again proves my point that you have no idea what socialism is, a king personally owning an entire country through the apparatus of the state would be socialist. Most socialists would reject that conclusion because ownership by a state isn't the same thing as ownership by society.

State ownership alone isn't sufficient. If a hereditary ruling family controls the state, then "state ownership" just means ownership by that ruling elite, not by society.

[odo1242]

Socialism is public ownership of the means of production. If there isn’t a way for regular people / “the proletariat” to influence the government, it’s not socialism because an autocratic government isn’t “the public”