the difference between socialism and communism

[Qwerty Dvorak]

ok, this is just something that has come up in history class...

so i always thought the difference was that socialism meant a commie-style government, whereas communism was a broader term applied to the movement that would take civiliozation from capitalism to a stateless, classless society. but a few days ago in history we were talking about communism (we're studying the 1913 lockout) and my teacher (who is extremely intelligent) said that the difference was that communists believe in violent means, while socialists believe in democratic means. i was going to object, but this particular teacher knows her shit, so i thought maybe i was wrong.

can anyone help me?

[Jimmie Higgins]

Your teacher seems to be referring to social-democratic parties when she uses the term "socialism". THis is probably the most widespread view of the difference between socailsim and communism: socialists=social democrats, communists=revolutionaries.

In Marxist terms, socialsim is a state formed by workers with the aim of supporting worker's power; communism is a classless and stateless society.

I consider myself to be a socialist since I do not think that communism can be achived directly out of capitalism as anarchists do. But I do not think socialism can be achieved from within the mechinisms of the capitalist state i.e. electing socialist politicians or a coup that takes over the existing state or creating small communes within capitalism.

So your teacher is correct as far as the generally accepted meanings of these terms, but not in the marxist definition of these terms.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

righty-ho :)

thnx

[Livetrueordie]

no she is wrong. the difference between communism and socialism i s not the means which they are achieved. Communism has no money or hierarchy (classles and stateless as stated before) , Socialism does have money and possibly a hierarchy... Now were you asking the difference between a communist and socialist? you topic clearly says communism and socialism.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

when i said socialist i meant a follower of socialism, and when i said communist i meant follower of communism.

so, who is right, exactly??

[NovelGentry]

Socialism does have money

Where do you people get this from? really....

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 10:23 PM
when i said socialist i meant a follower of socialism, and when i said communist i meant follower of communism.

so, who is right, exactly??
Both Gravedigger and your teacher have it right. A communist is one who believes in the eventual overthrow of the state and the bringing about of well… communism. The term communist today almost always means either Marxist or anarchist (although some of the latter don’t agree with that classification).

Socialism on the other hand can refer to two things – one being a very broad category of political parties that are left of centre. These can range from far left communists to moderate social democrats and everything in between. Technically a communist would be a socialist but today the phrase is generally used to refer to those leftists who don’t advocate the overthrow of the state.

The second meaning of socialism is the specifically Marxist one which refers to the state. It’s the period between the fall of capitalism and the rise of communism. Both socialism and communism are epochs of time as defined by Marx. I think that's what Livetrueordie was on about.

In other words: Connolly was a communist who tried to establish a socialist state. Today’s Labour party (which uses his name and image) are socialists who do not work for a communist future.

[Led Zeppelin]

Where do you people get this from? really....

"And as soon as equality is achieved for all members of society in relation to ownership of the means of production, that is, equality of labor and wages, humanity will inevitably be confronted with the question of advancing father, from formal equality to actual equality, i.e., to the operation of the rule "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"." Lenin

In other words; there are wages (money) in Socialism but not in Communism.

[NovelGentry]

"And as soon as equality is achieved for all members of society in relation to ownership of the means of production, that is, equality of labor and wages, humanity will inevitably be confronted with the question of advancing father, from formal equality to actual equality, i.e., to the operation of the rule "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"." Lenin

In other words; there are wages (money) in Socialism but not in Communism.

Yeah, well in the same excerpt he also equates equality for all members of society in relation to ownership of the means of production merely to equality of labor and wages, a huge understatement.

Even still, there is no implication that one must have wages so long as you cannot say society functions on that maxim. Even in his words there is the period from formal equality to "actual equality" where he doesn't maintain either way whether or not wages exist.

I fail to see how it is, or where Lenin says that it's one or the other.

[Jimmie Higgins]

The use of these terms and their often contradicting meanings are such a hedache.

To me communists are anarchists and socialists and anyone who wants to live in a stateless-classless world. But other people Use Communism only to mean Stalinists or Revolutionary communists; Likewise Socialist can be used by people to mean anything from a revolutionary to a social-democrat to a reformist and even Democrats in the US are called socialists by the right-wing.

We should stick to our guns and explain what we mean when we use these terms, but also keep in mind the mangeled popular meanings of these terms to be able to pint out the differences to people.

But until there is a large socialist/communist/anarchist radical movement (where we can go: "see, ok, that's a socialist or that's an anarchist") we will run into these semantic/definition problems.

[Pandii]

Hey thanks for asking this question, and its cleared up a lot for me too.

[drain.you]

Are soviets the only way to organise power in a communist country/government?

[Martyr]

Communism:Work for the state

Socialism: Work for the community

Were Communism encourages violent revolutions Socialism tends to be a party in a election.

[Black Dagger]

Communism:Work for the state

Socialism: Work for the community

Erm... you mixed the definitions up. 'Socialism' (in the 20th century sense) is where you 'work for the state', communism is a stateless classless society, where you for the community.

[sanpal]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 02:49 AM
The use of these terms and their often contradicting meanings are such a hedache.


Bravo, Gravedigger!!!

Yes, of course mess and different interpretation of terms (socialism, communism) by leftists helps to have more bourgeois or anti-communist ideological influence on masses.


We should stick to our guns and explain what we mean when we use these terms, but also keep in mind the mangeled popular meanings of these terms to be able to pint out the differences to people.

Definition of terms must be based on economic (political -economic) basis.
Such economic basis could be economic way of reproduction, i.e. communist way of reproduction - the system where market, money, wages aren't used, and capitalist way of reproduction - the system based on money, market, wages, etc.

Communist way of reproduction (i.e. reproduction of means for living) combined to a political system as stateless society (using self-government) must be determine as communism but not socialism.

Capitalist way of reproduction using market, money, wages, central bank ("typing" money), other market attributes, etc. combined with different political systems gives the spectrum of different socialisms from social-democracy to proletarian socialism of transition period (including "socialism" of stalinist type which used money but tried to abolish market and was proclaimed as 'the first phase of communism' by Soviet 'communists'), etc. but it never could be as communism.

[Craig]

This whole debate is largely about semantics and it's pointless.

Personally, the definition of socialism that I like best is this (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=socialism):

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Essentially, socialists are opposed to private property is some form or another.

In my view, the trouble starts because Marxists have a very strict definition of socialism that non-marxists don't necessarily share. To them, it defines the transitional period between capitalism and communism. (Personally, I see communism as a flavor of socialism, not a separate entity). That's not a critique of Marxism.

I've noticed that some people who post here are more interested in insisting upon their own definitions than actually engaging in meaningful dialogue.

[commie anarchist rebel]

the way i feel is that the differance is that socialism is a transition into communism not its own form of government. im not sure on this but its wat i think were as communism is the already classless, stateless society that socialism works to build up to

[FidelCastro]

I'm more socialist because I belive a country no matter what needs a strong economy to survive in this world, however, if we were united globally as one nation then I'm communist.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by commie anarchist [email protected] 21 2005, 10:59 PM
the way i feel is that the differance is that socialism is a transition into communism not its own form of government. im not sure on this but its wat i think were as communism is the already classless, stateless society that socialism works to build up to
That's correct. Socialism is the period after the revolution where the proletariat is in control. Communism will follow when the classes have ceased to exist.

When somebody refers to themselves as "socialist" it often means that they are left of centre but not communist. When someone talks about "socialism" in a Marxist context or "socialist society" then they mean the transition stage between capitalism and communism.