 |
|
Space05us
|
|
Whats the difference between Communism and Socialism?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:26
|
|
I don't consider myself either, but AFAIK, the difference is the Communism is more of a direct belief in Marxist ideology while Socialism seems to be more like Universal Health Care, Free Education, Social Security nets, etc.
IMO, from a public relations standpoint, people that do believe in Communism should change their name because through all the Red-Scares and American propaganda, Communism has become synonymous with Stalinism and other forms of authoritarian governments. I know that true Communism has never existed, and the Soviet Union and China weren't true Communist/Socialist states; but there are a ton of ignorant Ameicans that don't know the difference. And if you want to get the support of the majority of Americans in order to institute progressive reform, you can't brandish the name of a type of government that was demonized for most of the 20th century.
my 2 cents... 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
SlowwHand
|
 |
of The Cooler
Sep 1999
time: 23:26
|
|
Not the same, no matter what...some will tell you.
According to Marx, socialism is a stage on the way to communism, which is the more advanced stage of humyn organization not yet achieved in China or the Soviet Union, even according to Lenin, Stalin and Mao.
According to Marx, under socialism we have a dictatorship of the proletariat which is a government organized for the defense of survival "rights." Also, distribution goes by the principle "from each according to his/her ability, to each according to his/her work."
Under communism, according to Marx, the government disappears and there is economic cooperation as well. The principle of distribution becomes "from each according to his/her ability, to each according his/her need."
http://www.etext.org/Politics/MIM/faq/commievssoc.html
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:26
|
|
Sava :
not quite, what you describe as "socialism" is social-democracy, i.e a tamed capitalism, like what Europe has done.
Space05us :
I'm no big expert like Che, but here's my attempt to explain though (socialism/communism in the marxist theory). To Marx, there have been several great steps in the economic structure of mankind : primal communities, slavery, feudalism, capitalism. The next 2 steps are socialism and communism, the latter being the last economic structure mankind will know. Socialism can be hence called a transition regime before communism ala Marx.
Socialism is the time when the working class has taken power, and the tools of production belong to it rather than the bourgeoisie. A socialist society still has institutions like State, and the class-warfare continues, even though the working class has the upper hand.
Communism is the last possible form of society because it went to the whole process of abolishing classes, and hence class warfare (socialism was instrumental in this process). A communist society is also stateless.
All "communist" countries have actually dubbed themselves socialist, even though they promoted communism as their official long-term goal. Many elements of socialism were present, the most important being no more private business, except for individual businesses. The lack of democracy in socialist countries has nothing to do with socialism as theoritized by Marx (though Marx acknowledges things must be rough when the revolution is occuring).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
|
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:26
|
|
The problem with Communism I have, and perhaps I'm mistaken about this presumption, is that you need to have some sort of free-market business system when it comes to consumer goods. IMO, things like health-care, education, housing (to some degree), energy production, and transportation infrastructure should be completely non-profit and highly efficient to provide the lowest possible expense. In my understanding of Communism, there is no such thing as private enterprise. And that's just wrong. Even if the system is completely democratic, you can't have the government mandating the production of consumer goods. And in order to enforce the ideals of Communism, you're going to need the government to mandate such things. The free-market has a place in a civilized, socially conscious, democratic society. And as much as business types hate government oversight, you need to have rules and regulation to keep business practices fair, and you need a democratic governmental entity responsible for such regulation. I don't believe in the idea of self-regulation for business. History has proven it to be a terrible failure. And by that logic, it would seem silly to have a self-regulating justice system. We'll just trust people not to steal, commit murder, etc... it doesn't work that way. Wherever people are involved, there will be some criminal element... business is no different, and IMO, especially vulnerable and attractive to criminals because of the amount of money involved.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
|
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
The problem with Communism I have, and perhaps I'm mistaken about this presumption, is that you need to have some sort of free-market business system when it comes to consumer goods. IMO, things like health-care, education, housing (to some degree), energy production, and transportation infrastructure should be completely non-profit and highly efficient to provide the lowest possible expense. In my understanding of Communism, there is no such thing as private enterprise. And that's just wrong. Even if the system is completely democratic, you can't have the government mandating the production of consumer goods. And in order to enforce the ideals of Communism, you're going to need the government to mandate such things. The free-market has a place in a civilized, socially conscious, democratic society. And as much as business types hate government oversight, you need to have rules and regulation to keep business practices fair, and you need a democratic governmental entity responsible for such regulation. I don't believe in the idea of self-regulation for business. History has proven it to be a terrible failure. And by that logic, it would seem silly to have a self-regulating justice system. We'll just trust people not to steal, commit murder, etc... it doesn't work that way. Wherever people are involved, there will be some criminal element... business is no different, and IMO, especially vulnerable and attractive to criminals because of the amount of money involved. |
AFAIK, there is indeed no such thing a a private enterprised in communism. But it doesn't necessarily mean the government is in charge of the enterprises. A good chunk of communists call for "autodetermination", which is about giving the power within the enterprise to the people who work there. It follows the same logic as the zapatista demand "Fields to those who work on them !".
As there is no government in marx's communism, there is no state intervention to dictate prices, demand, etc. Such a state intervention happened during Soviet Union's socialism, when the State and not the Workers owned all businesses except individual ones.
I know socialism doesn't oppose individual private property, and communism doesn't oppose it either. Hence, people earn their money, and use it the way they please to buy goods for them. They earn this money by working for the collective rather than for the shareholder.
The ideal communist society functions a way disturbingly close to Smith's invisible hand.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-03-2003 20:45
|