Democratic Socialism or Communism

[Jannabear]

I'm a bit new to communism, so I don't really know many of the arguments for and against it, I realize that just like capitalism and socialism, communism as a label entails countless different ideas, just under a general scope.
I personally don't know what to think, I know for a fact that I'm either a democratic socialist or a communist, definitely not a capitalist.
What arguments are there against communism and what refutations, if I'm posting this in the wrong section I apologize, I'm new to the forum.

[Tim Cornelis]

Maybe Reform or Revolution by Luxemburg can come in handy.

[Communist Mutant From Outer Space]

An essay of the same name (i.e. "Reform or Revolution?" (1896)) by Daniel De Leon should also be useful in undermining arguments for reform and in bolstering arguments for revolution.

[The Idler]

The argument for it is that it is a more democratic system.
The argument against it is that it is totalitarian.
Animal Farm by George Orwell deals with these in the best most eloquent way.
Real democracy not sham democracy is vital for socialism.

[RedSonRising]

Obviously it would be good to put this in learning. But in any case, welcome!

Terms and labels can become confusing so I'll try and explain it in the simplest way.

If you're a socialist, in the way Marxists and sociologists and most academics define the term, then you want to see capitalism (a system of private property through which capital exploits labor via surplus extraction) transformed into a system in which the working class-those who produce wealth through labor-own and control the means of production. There are different takes on how this control manifests itself; whether through the state or some alternative structures like councils and federations. This is a broad term, since you can be an anarchist socialist or a traditional "state socialist", or a libertarian socialist, which lies in between. In terms of Marx's theory of stages, socialism is the transition period between capitalism and communism, in which some features of capitalism are retained while the workers organize production for the needs of all.

Communism is a classless, stateless society in which production has reached the highest stage of automization and democratization. Someone who calls themselves a communist is typically a Marxist, and maybe a Leninist, and thinks the state is a vehicle for the empowerment of the working class (unlike say, an anarchist, who thinks the state inevitably reproduces the class system, even though communism is pretty much the theoretical equivalent to anarchism.)

Democratic Socialism is often a reformist strain of socialism, meaning that the goal is to reform capitalism through the existing political framework until socialism can be achieved. Since this is revleft and not refleft, the vast majority of us don't buy this argument since the ruling class is still ultimately in power. Also, Democratic Socialist parties across Europe are simply Social Democratic parties, which advocate a powerful welfare state with plentiful social services and progressive policies, but don't actually want to transfer power to the working class itself.

I'm sure plenty advanced theorists could nitpick at that, but hopefully it's not too confusing and it helps.

[odysseus]

Great lessons on Marxian economics and what communism is/could be.

Marxian Economics - An intensive introduction (http://www.rdwolff.com/content/marxian-economics-intensive-introduction)

Economic Crisis and Globalization (http://www.rdwolff.com/content/economic-crisis-and-globalization)
Great for applying it to the world around you

Marxian Class Analysis Theory and Practice Online Course (http://www.rdwolff.com/content/marxian-class-analysis-theory-and-practice-online-course). This is his most popular.
Class 1: The basic concept of class; history of class analysis; differences (inside and outside Marxism) over how to define “class”; specifics of Marxian class analysis; different results from using Marxian class analysis versus using other analytical frameworks.
Class 2: Analyzing the current US capitalist crisis in class terms and proposing class-based solutions for the crisis.
Class 3: A class analysis of the rise and fall of the USSR (with applications as well to China, etc.)
Class 4: A class analysis of the current crisis of households, families, and intimate life in the US
Class 5: A class-based strategy for US labor and left today based on class analysis of their current situation

Advanced & Applied Marxian Economics Intensive Course (http://www.rdwolff.com/content/advanced-applied-marxian-economics-intensive-course)

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Communism is both democratic and socialist. It's important to differentiate between the system "Communism" and the "really existing socialism" in historical Marxist-Leninist states. These systems were neither socialist nor democratic. Incidentally, many states run by Communist parties did call themselves "Democratic" (like North Korea, whose official name is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea).

"Democratic Socialism" as articulated by Mr Sanders is a slightly more robust version New Deal liberalism.

[Synergy]

The problem with various socialist labels (especially with a site like this) is that everybody has a different view of what they "really" mean. And these views can be formed by lots of different factors like personal experiences within a particular party or reading misinformed/biased articles from various socialist sites.

In my personal opinion I think the majority of groups should put aside endgame ideologies and just focus on building a real coalition to start a revolutionary movement. Once that is actually accomplished then we can have an important discussion about how society should function. There is a lot of common ground to work with and that should be the starting point. The current situation we have now is a million splintered groups that aren't effectual and will continue to be insignificant unless they unite.

[RedSonRising]

In my personal opinion I think the majority of groups should put aside endgame ideologies and just focus on building a real coalition to start a revolutionary movement. Once that is actually accomplished then we can have an important discussion about how society should function. There is a lot of common ground to work with and that should be the starting point. The current situation we have now is a million splintered groups that aren't effectual and will continue to be insignificant unless they unite.

I agree. And those who aren't willing to make certain compromises or explore new experiments, theoretical frameworks, and strategies at the expense of their own ideological rigidity should be left behind.