Socialism?

[Mike Fakelastname]

I visited the newyouth.com site, and read about Socialism. And from what I've gathered on that site is, Socialism is the same thing I thought Communism was, I don't see the difference. Please explain to me the differences!

[Marxist in Nebraska]

"Socialism" has a variety of meanings, depending on who is using the word.

A rightist says it in horror, to imply that anyone would put human interests above business interests.

From the center to the left, socialism can be used to describe reform. Social security, medicare, regulation of business, progressive taxation--these are seen as socialistic. This brand of socialism is usually referred to by radical leftists as "putting a human face on capitalism."

Lastly, there is the radical's definition of socialism. Socialism is an economic system that replaces capitalism, that ends the private ownership of capital. To some radicals, socialism is a transition to communism. Communism is seen as the period when our society finally and permanently becomes stateless and classless, socialism is seen as the bridge between capitalism and communism.

[redstar2000]

What is Socialism? (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=6365)

What is Communism? (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=6&t=6362)

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Mike Fakelastname]

I read both of your well written articles, and I've come to the conclusion that the Communism idea is more along my term of thought, and I've decided that www.newyouth.com is much more Communist than Socialist, even though they call themselves Socialism. But alas, I have several questions about Communism:

1. Under Communism, where there would be no state, no police, no enforcing body except the people themselves, who would write the laws, and who could determine whether or not people follow them? Would there even be any written laws? Or would the people govern themselves based on common sense?

2. If there were no state, wouldn't that make it very easy for an organized group to come in and claim power?

3. I don't get the idea of not being able to hire anybody. What would happen, say, a farmer wants to build a barn, under Communism, he can't hire anybody to help him. Are they supposed to just help him out of good nature, or is he just screwed, and he has to build the barn himself?

4. The people rule themselves correct? Well, wouldn't that make it hard for them to meet up and decide what's good for themselves together? I mean, there are like 7 billion people in the world, they would never be able to meet up together, and if only like a small number of representatives came, that would be at risk of establishing a state. I'm confused, would they just never meet up?

[Agent provocateur]

Mike:

I have three books to recommend to you. Two are about socialism and one a historical masterpiece.

http://www.marx2mao.org//Lenin/SR17.html

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archi...whatis_toc.html (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)

http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inke...62-0393309649-0 (http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=62-0393309649-0)

Peace.

[Mike Fakelastname]

Thank you for the links, I've read a lot of Lenin's "State and Revolution" already though, but thanks for reminding me of it. Reading really long stuff on the computer monitor with no spaces in between lines hurts the fuck out of my eyes, so I prefer actual books, I'll check the library for the titles you recomended for me this weekend.

[RevolucioN NoW]

As I have said before, my knowledge is not great but i will try to answer your questions.


1. Under Communism, where there would be no state, no police, no enforcing body except the people themselves, who would write the laws, and who could determine whether or not people follow them? Would there even be any written laws? Or would the people govern themselves based on common sense?

Under a communist society, laws would decline in neccesity as the class nature of the last society collapses, there will be little theft or stealing, vandalism or any other products of a class society. However, there will of course be crime, murder, mabye rape etc...

I would imagine that after a revolution a commitee would be set up to investigate if any changes need to be made to legal codes. This would allow for those laws no longer needed would be abolished and others kept.

Anyone else have nay ideas on this.


2. If there were no state, wouldn't that make it very easy for an organized group to come in and claim power?

An organised group? like the old ruling class, the ruling class would run away to another capitalist country quickly with as much wealth as it can. Well as the society would be democratic, with different commitees controlling different areas, then there would be no way for a small group to take power, unless they resorted to armed insurrection, whcih would be crushed by workers militias.


3. I don't get the idea of not being able to hire anybody. What would happen, say, a farmer wants to build a barn, under Communism, he can't hire anybody to help him. Are they supposed to just help him out of good nature, or is he just screwed, and he has to build the barn himself?

Well if the farmer wants a barn, then all the people on that farm would need to decide that this is the best option and then they would get it voted on by some sort of oversight commitee (selected by lott) who would then allocate a group of workers to build said barn. In this way there is no need to hire a worker.

This is very hazy and most likely contradicts with a lot of what people think around here so its open to suggestion.


4. The people rule themselves correct? Well, wouldn't that make it hard for them to meet up and decide what's good for themselves together? I mean, there are like 7 billion people in the world, they would never be able to meet up together, and if only like a small number of representatives came, that would be at risk of establishing a state. I'm confused, would they just never meet up?

I personally like the idea posted by redstar "Demarchy". In this way a group of people would be seleted by lott to fill commitees relating to the operation of a certain area of society, and these apointments would loast 1-2 years. The internet is also a good device for communication, it would allow for groups from all over the world to meet up electronically.

:ph34r:

[Mike Fakelastname]

Thanks very much comrade, I understand a lot better now. I didn't consider the possibility of commitees, I thought that would be like a state, but how you put it, it's not a central state. I think I get it now, thanks again.

[Rasta Sapian]

If u want to farm, farm! others will want to join you as well! Ownership of the barn is not yours it is everybody's in turn so would be the agriculture, with people working and living together for the benifit of each other, you have a community living and working under a socialist order.
The government will be large and strong to help organize the nation and administer roles as well as the resources.

[Mike Fakelastname]

What government? See that's the only problem I have with Communism, under true Communism there would be no state and therefore no central government. I'm sorry, but I don't think that would really work too well. It would work if we were all just farmers or something simple, but if we wanted to be an advanced society, I think we would need direction and organisation.

[Morpheus]

Abolition of the state does not mean abolition of organization. The state is an organization with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence based on centralization of power. An anarchist society would be organized by voluntary non-hierarchical associations, instead of by hierarchical organizations like states and corporations. In anarcho-communism if a farmer wanted to build a barn s/he would ask other farmers or builders to help him/her. There would probably be a farmers' syndicate which farmers would belong to in which farmers could self-organize to achieve things that can't be done by just one person. The syndicate would be organized along decentralized directly democratic lines and would be a voluntary organization, created by the farmers and run by the farmers. There could also be syndicates for other occupations. These syndicates could also cooperate with each other when needed. See http://www.anarchyfaq.org or my homepage for more on this.

[Agent provocateur]

If you read Lenin´s State and Revolution you will see that he and his revolutionary myrmidons had a big dispute with the anarchists over the state apparatus. The anarchists wanted to destroy the state in 24 hours at least but Lenin and his group said they wanted to use the state or whatever remained of it to destroy the old elite ruling class and to install the proletariat as the new ruling class and to do away with class divisions. And then there would be a "withering away of the state."

http://www.marx2mao.org//Lenin/SR17.html#c4s2

[Hawker]

There is a slight difference between Socialism and Communism.In Communism there is the mean of controlling the middle class with a dictatorship but like Socialism it only does that to protect them,there would be no elections because the government will dictate everyone of the people's needs and wants,so everyday would be an election.In Socialism it allows more freedom then Communism because there would be free elections,free speech,etc.So Socialism and Communism are the same but Communism is a bit more extreme than Socialism.

[Mike Fakelastname]

Hawker, I thought Communism would mean total freedom. Where do you get your information that Communism would result in a dictatorship and no free speach and the like? I like the idea of someone else ruling us more than the idea of us ruling ourselves, but I don't think it would have to be a dictatorship, or would result in no freedom of speach. Someone tell me what my political belief system is:

- I'd like to have some form of a government, if nothing else just to give us direction on what we should grow/build for the year, and to set up specific comittees.

- I really like the Communist economic system, wealth and property distributed evenly among the people.


So, someone tell me if that is either Communism, Socialism, or neither.

[Hate Is Art]

i think thats more socialist that communist, i personaly believe go for an al;l or none, pure communism or a left leaning governmeant with good political freedoms, democracy of the purest kind(any party not just leftist) i think this allows the best freedom. Capitilism would be frowned upon but people can start up businesses just not global corparations to exploit the poeple.

[Morpheus]

Originally posted by Mike [email protected] 27 2003, 05:41 PM
Someone tell me what my political belief system is:
<snip>
- I really like the Communist economic system, wealth and property distributed evenly among the people.
What exactly do you mean by a "communist economic system"? Please elaborate in more detail. How should the economy be organized?

The terms "communism" and "socialism" can mean different things depending on the context and what you mean by them. "Socialism" is a very broad term that covers a whole bunch of different philosophies. Basically, a socialist is someone who advocates the abolition of the class system. There are a zillion different kinds of socialism, each advocating different ways to abolish the class system and different things to put in it&#39;s place. In Marxist-Leninist theory socialism is a transitional stage between capitalism and communism in which the "dictatorship of the proletariat" rules, the economy is run by the government and people are (theoretically) supposed to be paid on the basis of how much they work.

"Communism" is also a very broad term that covers a whole bunch of different philosophies. Communist philosophy(s) is a form of socialism because it advocates the abolition of the class system. A communist advocates the abolition of class, money & markets and the organization of the economy on the principle "from each according to need, to each according to ability." In Marxist-Leninist theory communism is seen as the stage coming after socialism, in which money is abolished, pay by work is abolished in favor of "from each according to need, to each according to ability," and the state "withers away." Leninists think we need a long transition period under a "dictatorship of the proletariat" before we can get there, though. Anarcho-communists say we don&#39;t need a transitional dictatorship, we can immediately abolish the state and go straight to communism. The majority of communists believe the state should eventually be done away with, but disagree as to whether a transitional dictatorship is necessary (Leninism) or whether the revolution should establish communism immediately (anarcho-communism). Historically there has been a minority of communists who believe a state should continue to exist in communism forever, but most communists who think through how communism would work come to the conclusion that a state will eventually become unnecessary.

Some people use the term "communism" to mean Marxism, others use it to mean Leninism. Some use the term to refer to the systems set up in the USSR, China, etc. but this isn&#39;t really correct since none of those countries ever claimed to have achieved communism, they claimed to be in the "dictatorship of the proletariat." A better term for them is Leninism. Some people use the term socialism to refer to the welfare states in West & Nothern Europe, but a more accurate term for those is Social Democracy.

[Mike Fakelastname]

D. Nirvana - How is that more Socialism than Communism?

Morpheus - By your definition I think I&#39;m more Communist then. I think we could do without a state, but I still think we would need comittees and the like.

[Hawker]

Originally posted by Mike [email protected] 27 2003, 05:41 PM
Hawker, I thought Communism would mean total freedom. Where do you get your information that Communism would result in a dictatorship and no free speach and the like? I like the idea of someone else ruling us more than the idea of us ruling ourselves, but I don&#39;t think it would have to be a dictatorship, or would result in no freedom of speach. Someone tell me what my political belief system is:

- I&#39;d like to have some form of a government, if nothing else just to give us direction on what we should grow/build for the year, and to set up specific comittees.

- I really like the Communist economic system, wealth and property distributed evenly among the people.


So, someone tell me if that is either Communism, Socialism, or neither.
I got it when I read a biography on Lenin.