Main differences please ?

[Eddie Van Halen]

Could someone please help me out with the definitions of socialism and communism ? I understand the basic left theory, but i havent really understood what the main differences between these two are ?

I took from several books the idea that socialists will use the system to gain power, whilst a communist will use guns and tanks to get what they want, but appart from method of revolution, are there any major differences ?

[monkeydust]

I took from several books the idea that socialists will use the system to gain power, whilst a communist will use guns and tanks to get what they want, but appart from method of revolution, are there any major differences ?

This is a very difficult question to answer in brief, and I'm of the view that the best way to learn the distinction is to absorb yourself in the literature enough to be able to attain some mental distinction between the two, even if this cannot be expressed in words.

But anyway, I'll have a go.

Your point about the means to change the current system is half-right. On the one hand, a communist would never advocate parliamentary reform; one the other, Socialists would certainly not always do so - many socialists argue that revolution is indeed necessary.

A second difference between the two lies in their critique of contemporary capitalism. Communism, due to its association with Marx and Engels, attacks capitalism in a scientific manner. It argue not just that capitalism should end, but that it will, and that this hypothesis is objectively demonstable. Socialist critiques of Capitalism sometimes adopt Marxist ideas, although they can also be very "wishy-washy" and moralistic. The early utopian socialist, such as Fourier and Owen, certainly had no scientific basis to assume that capitalism would eventually collapse.

A third major difference is in the kind of society which both seek to create. Importantly, Socialism calls for the use of the state as a means to create a "better world", whereas Communism deems the state both unnecessary and undesirable, unless used to guarantee a smooth "transition" from Capitalism.

[sanpal]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2005, 05:44 PM


This is a very difficult question to answer ...
This is a very difficult question to answer ... for those who does not read carefully marxist works. The main difference is in political-economical aspect. Socialism means commodity-money relations and social influence on the market in favour of the proletariat by the socialist parliament (the society which has spots of capitalism). Communism means nonmarket (without money) economy and self-government society.

[monkeydust]

This is a very difficult question to answer ... for those who does not read carefully marxist works

Was that meant to be some kind of "dig"? I think you'll notice I said "difficult to answer in brief". And yes I have read Marxist works carefully, as you say.

[redstar2000]

What is Socialism? An Attempt at a Brief Definition (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082900868&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

What is Communism? A Brief Definition (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082898978&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[minusthebear]

You will actually find that Marx and Engels used both terms (communism and socialism) interchangably.

Socialism/Communism is a society were there no use for the wages system, things are produced because they are needed, not from fancy, the basics fro human survival.

[Essential Insignificance]

Socialism/Communism is a society were there no use for the wages system, things are produced because they are needed, not from fancy, the basics fro human survival.

Wrong... the divergence between the economic structures of socialism and communism are completely different. Therefore, there social structures are different.

The former is still , like capitalism, based on private property, wage-slavery, commodity production... and also a highly authoritarian state apparatus.

Well... theoretically it could be different... and Marx "envisioned" that workers (not conscious elites) would take the newly acquired state apparatus to "smash" the inevitable internal and external reactionary forces ... but practically, 20th century socialism tells us a totally different story.

Perhaps this could be attributed to the material conditions that pervailed in these particular nations -- most of which were steeped heavily in the horrors religion, illiteracy, political and economic backwardness.

Basically these third-world countries or semi-industrialized countries did not have an industrial, urban working class... Marx thought proletarian revolutions would transpire in highly capitalist nations... not in third-world ones.

In reality, they were bourgeois revolution.

Production of useful and enjoyable items will not cease post revolution. It would be madness to divest ourselfs of pleasurable and life-supporting items.

Production of goods -- unlike capitalism -- will be socially regulated and "looked-over"... actively by all members of society. Thus, the manifest idiocy of over-production, therefore, over-work will come to an cease.

Thus, severely reducing the working day!