can someone explain the difference between communism and socialism?
- Thread starter Mark
- Start date
AyashiKaibutsu
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2004
- 9,306
- 4
- 81
Communism is giving by ability receiving by need. Socialism is having the government run everything. I pulled these out of my head without research might not be entirely accurate.
According to dictionary definitions coined in terms of Marxism:
Socialism: 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.
Communism: a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably.
Socialism: 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.
Communism: a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Total Capitalism on one end and total Communism on the other with everything inbetween being Socialism. We are more toward the Capitalism side and Sweden is toward the Communism side. I don't thing either extreme is possible in any nation of size. Maybe Monaco or like that but, If there are class structures you've got to have some Socialism and if you have few you have to have some Socialism. Maybe there is no such thing as Capitalism or Communism and every thing is some degree of Socialism.
Communists believe in overthrowing the current government and redistributing wealth, eliminating all classes immediately and likely by force.
Socialists stay within the current system to make changes that benefits society rather than the individual, such as creating a national health care system. Socialism can lead to what would be the same as a communist state, in theory.
At least this is what I thought. Learned about the first communists who broke from the socialists and started planning a revolution in Germany.
Socialists stay within the current system to make changes that benefits society rather than the individual, such as creating a national health care system. Socialism can lead to what would be the same as a communist state, in theory.
At least this is what I thought. Learned about the first communists who broke from the socialists and started planning a revolution in Germany.
in the perfect form of communism there is no government. all recourses are controlled by the people and distributed equally.
in socialism, there is a government and it controlls the means to manufacture everything and distributes the goods according the ammount of work you do.
in socialism, there is a government and it controlls the means to manufacture everything and distributes the goods according the ammount of work you do.
and to be realistic neither a fully socialist nor communist country can work.
communism has no chance at all imho because man is inherintly selfish, if you get as much stuff when you work, than when you dont work, why should u work ?
Socialism has a bigger chance of actually working, because it still rewards work (which is needed to get people actually working) but because there is also an economy outside of that single country it will fail in the long run, all poor people will come to that country because they will get support and money for doing nothing (unemployment fees or something similar) which places a huge burden on the working people (who in the end pay for all the non working people) which again makes working less attractive, and more people get unemployed, and voila, the system collapses.
the best system tries to find a balance between socialism and liberalism, countries where the balance is tipped in favor of socialism (most scandinavic countries, and belgium spring to mind) have to take precautions tho, because the risk still exist of that collapsing scenario to happen.
communism has no chance at all imho because man is inherintly selfish, if you get as much stuff when you work, than when you dont work, why should u work ?
Socialism has a bigger chance of actually working, because it still rewards work (which is needed to get people actually working) but because there is also an economy outside of that single country it will fail in the long run, all poor people will come to that country because they will get support and money for doing nothing (unemployment fees or something similar) which places a huge burden on the working people (who in the end pay for all the non working people) which again makes working less attractive, and more people get unemployed, and voila, the system collapses.
the best system tries to find a balance between socialism and liberalism, countries where the balance is tipped in favor of socialism (most scandinavic countries, and belgium spring to mind) have to take precautions tho, because the risk still exist of that collapsing scenario to happen.
I still don't understand why the concept of "to each according to his contribution" is such a hard system to adhere to.
me neither, but I guess that's why I'm a communist at heart
I think that some people *coughprotestants* are raised to believe that more is always better.
fortunately, my parents are both agnostic, communist hippies
Originally posted by: loki8481
me neither, but I guess that's why I'm a communist at heart
I think that some people *coughprotestants* are raised to believe that more is always better.
fortunately, my parents are both agnostic, communist hippies
lol and I actually butchered that, it's "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
That, of course, provides obvious incentives for shirking, so that you minimize your effort, and you inflate your need. This system is untenable even in the short term.
My parents are Christian-lite capitalists, though socially open-minded, and I tend to hold to that as well.
Excellent link. Clearly the author has either read the Communist Manifesto and/or understands how the principles of Socialism and Communism relate to allegedly socialist or communist countries.
Cogman
Lifer
- Sep 19, 2000
- 10,284
- 138
- 106
As I understood it, The main diffrence was communisim came by force, likely from a cival war. While socialisim was the gradual changing through goverment laws and such to a communist state (same as communist, but without violent war)
The Spectrum of Capitalisim (United States) --- Socalisim (Spain) --- Communist (North Korea) is a good definition.
Interestingly enough, while some predicted Communisim to be Capitalisims equal, History does show that Capitalisim currently is the most stable form of government. The biggest problem with Communism is corruption in the system, something nearly unpreventable. The next is the lack of motivation for workers to work, After all, Joe Shmo gets exactly the same benifits (If the system is not corrupted) as John Doe. And Joe could be a ditch digger and John a Nuclear Physisist.
One day, I think communisim might be the end result, but that can only happen after A LOT of reform civilization as we know it, People will have to care for one another MUCH more then right now, to the point where they put the needs of others infront of their own. This is the major change that has to happen in a society that is required before I think the communisim will work well.
The Spectrum of Capitalisim (United States) --- Socalisim (Spain) --- Communist (North Korea) is a good definition.
Interestingly enough, while some predicted Communisim to be Capitalisims equal, History does show that Capitalisim currently is the most stable form of government. The biggest problem with Communism is corruption in the system, something nearly unpreventable. The next is the lack of motivation for workers to work, After all, Joe Shmo gets exactly the same benifits (If the system is not corrupted) as John Doe. And Joe could be a ditch digger and John a Nuclear Physisist.
One day, I think communisim might be the end result, but that can only happen after A LOT of reform civilization as we know it, People will have to care for one another MUCH more then right now, to the point where they put the needs of others infront of their own. This is the major change that has to happen in a society that is required before I think the communisim will work well.
MAW1082
Senior member
- Jun 17, 2003
- 510
- 7
- 81
Communism is essentially the result of socialism.
Socialism is the transitional period, like the dictionary says, from capitalism to communism. Socialism probably implies that there are still forms ofcurrency and possibly privately owned busineses.
Communism is the time at which a utopian society has been formed. At this point, there is no form of currency and as the saying goes, "from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs" would form the basis of the society.
Socialism is the transitional period, like the dictionary says, from capitalism to communism. Socialism probably implies that there are still forms ofcurrency and possibly privately owned busineses.
Communism is the time at which a utopian society has been formed. At this point, there is no form of currency and as the saying goes, "from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs" would form the basis of the society.
Socialism means redistribution of wealth, communism has more to do with ownership, a truly communistic government will own all assets.
Europe and US are both using variations of mixed economy, the differences are smaller than most americans want to admit, probably because they want the US to be "above" the european countries.
Someone mentioned sweden as an example of socialism, i wouldn't disagree with that, private ownership is encouraged, that goes for all branches except fire department, police and military. There are plenty of private hospitals in Sweden, plenty of private schools too.
So basically, Sweden is as communistic as the US.
Europe and US are both using variations of mixed economy, the differences are smaller than most americans want to admit, probably because they want the US to be "above" the european countries.
Someone mentioned sweden as an example of socialism, i wouldn't disagree with that, private ownership is encouraged, that goes for all branches except fire department, police and military. There are plenty of private hospitals in Sweden, plenty of private schools too.
So basically, Sweden is as communistic as the US.
Communism is a good idea (if you are religious) and in theory it would be great...
But I'm not religious and I don't really think all humans on earth are equal. That said I am not claiming to be in the "better" part but I think the worth of humans differ on many scales from the IQ level to their physical ability and so forth.
I'm not suggesting the lower end of the spectrum are worthless meat or some such but I think there is a distint difference between the worth of Einstein to the worth of say, 50 cent.
But I'm not religious and I don't really think all humans on earth are equal. That said I am not claiming to be in the "better" part but I think the worth of humans differ on many scales from the IQ level to their physical ability and so forth.
I'm not suggesting the lower end of the spectrum are worthless meat or some such but I think there is a distint difference between the worth of Einstein to the worth of say, 50 cent.
that "above" is seen from a socialism = bad point of view, for the same reasons some people (me) see europe as being more socialist, and hence "above" (from a liberalism = bad point of view)
but my liberalism = bad point of view is not as extreme as the socialism = bad view in the U.S. is methinks, I just have a dislike for pure liberalism without a social net to fall back upon. Pure liberalism is the law of the strongest in economy, darwinism at it's worst (or best if you have money or a way to get it)
and I'm just talking about the economic structure eh, not the political one.
I do not exist for others, and I recognize no authority higher than mine own. (While doing the same for others).Socialism (in all its forms) is the most vile idea ever spawned on earth.
There is not and never has been a true communist nation, only nations calling themselves communist. In my opinion, if he was never killed, Allende would have been one of the first to truly implement it.
Also, the "property" in communism isn't abolished entirely, only that of the wealthy, because, according to the Manifesto, they are the only ones who really own any of it. Communism is meant to remove the antagonistic aspects of life, not to remove all facets of your identity.
Extremely low wages, extremely long hours, horrible work conditions, and no safetey precautions at factories. No health, dental, or retirement benefits. Work 80 hours a week and earn $25.
Pay high tolls to use corporate-owned roads. No libraries, most kids can't go to school because it costs too much. The lower classes get nowhere while the rich get richer. Eventually the poor outnumber the elite few and revolt. Death.
Chrisms, I agree. Any political movement taken to it's extreme will fail. The genius of the system of checks and balances translates into practical politics as well.
I in no way see how the above scenario is the outcome of a capitalist system. However, in your dystopian capitalist worldview at least there is no coercion. However in your socialist/mixed system there is coercion on a daily basis. Remeber live free or die "Give me liberty or give me death" Some of us believe it.
As far as refuting your statement I am not an economist and so I will refer you to those more qualified than myself. writings by the following would be a place to start (they are my favs :thumbsup
Murray Rothbard
Ludwig Mises
As far as refuting your statement I am not an economist and so I will refer you to those more qualified than myself. writings by the following would be a place to start (they are my favs :thumbsup
Murray Rothbard
Ludwig Mises
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter