Log in

View Full Version : Communism vs. Socialism



theCruzanCheGuevara
7th May 2006, 22:50
yeah so whats the difference between the two I have the basic ideas of both but not a deep understanding of what makes them different. I also have my own interpretation but I'll save that for another post.

Hegemonicretribution
7th May 2006, 23:03
I will keep this short, and perhaps a little vague (specifics vary depending upon who you ask):

Basically socialism is seen my Marxists as the phase in between capitalism and communism. During the transition the infastructure of capitalism is improved/disolved/replaced as appropriate, and this is done under the direct control of the workers. Some suggest that there should be a "party" or "vanguard" to steer this, personally I don't...

Anyway communism is the finished product. That is a moneyless, stateless classless society. It is once the state has "withered away" that a society starts to become communist.

This is why any "communist" countries were not.

OneBrickOneVoice
7th May 2006, 23:23
I think socialism is more like a worker's capitalism. It's not quite communism since it is a market economy and things aren't always collectivized and shared communally, yet industry is nationalized. Healthcare, education, jobs, and etc.. are unversally distributed.

LoneRed
8th May 2006, 00:57
socialism is Not capitalism, In capitalism there is the taking of the surplus value, capital, and private property. In socialism there is none of that, what market? there is no market as we know it, in socialism

Zero
8th May 2006, 01:27
In my opinion there is almost no way to specificly say that "Okay, now we are in Socialism" and "Okay, now we are in Communism." You will know when you get there.

Things that wither away don't have definate edges.

Entrails Konfetti
8th May 2006, 02:06
One explanation I have heard is that during the second international all the Socialists called themselves "Democratic-Socialists", during this time the Great War (or World War One) came about. Some of the Socialists like Bernstein supported their countries decision to go into the war, and modified their theory to reform capitalism through legislative or reformist means, and were dubbed "Social-Democrats". Whereas the other other Socialists (Lenin, Luxemburg, ect.) were against the war, maintained a revolutionary stance, and became "Revolutionary-Socialists", to be dubbed later as "Communists".

Today there are two types of Social-Democrats, those who still think they can reach Communism (though they say "Socialism") through reformist means, and then there are those who have given up trying to reform the state to socialism, but instead to have greater social programs, and nationalize the big businesses (fair-trade in place of free-trade). Today British Labour Party is a lot like the latter definition of Social-Democracy.

Some of today’s Social-Democrats are not even for nationalization, and are more like Liberal-Democrats.

A lot of people say the differences today between Communism and Socialism is that the Socialists want to use parliamentary means, and the Communists think that revolution is necessary. This description has caused a lot of confusion, if you look at Socialist Party USA, you will notice there are revolutionary wings, and reformist wings-- which has caused an uncertainty with the direction of the party

redstar2000
8th May 2006, 03:16
What is Socialism? An Attempt at a Brief Definition (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082900868&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

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

edit: link fixed (encephalon)

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

theCruzanCheGuevara
11th May 2006, 00:22
Anyway communism is the finished product. That is a moneyless, stateless classless society. It is once the state has "withered away" that a society starts to become communist.

This is why any "communist" countries were not.

see yeah i said that but my dumbass classmates believe otherwise and no matter how I explain it they point out whats stated in the history book and I try to explain who wrote it but they still ignore it.