U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-22-2011, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Finally escaped The People's Republic of California
11,121 posts, read 7,551,100 times
Reputation: 6217

Advertisements

could someone please explain in laymen terms to me, what is the difference between Socialism and Communism? They seem the same to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-22-2011, 05:12 PM
 
Location: Staten Island, NY
6,482 posts, read 6,183,525 times
Reputation: 6957
And what would expect of two Men of the Left?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2011, 06:06 PM
 
Location: Here.
13,824 posts, read 12,583,766 times
Reputation: 16219
A whole book can be written on this. The two terms have been used to describe a great variety of possibilities, much like the term "democracy". Basically, Communism is a more extreme form of Socialism. For me, the practical modern difference is that Communism is forced on the people whereas Socialism can be freely chosen by the people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2011, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
40,407 posts, read 18,478,140 times
Reputation: 18569
If you lived in a prosperous capitalistic nation but didn't have any money yourself, your calls for wealth distribution made you a socialist.

If you lived in a nation were you forfeited personal liberty and the rewards of individual intiative in the name of the greater good of the State, the people who were exploiting you were called communists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2011, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Denver
1,788 posts, read 1,971,554 times
Reputation: 1057
I minored in poly sci. Words mean little in my opinion. Shoot....a lot of right wingers call everyone who isn't a right winger...a Communist.

I mostly look at the percentage employed by the government to determine if it is capitalist or socialist or communist. Bigger government always means less freedom. Always.

If someone shows up from the government, you just lost your freedom. And you paid for it via taxation. Such a deal! No?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2011, 10:53 PM
 
Location: New York City
2,789 posts, read 5,291,691 times
Reputation: 1812
Definitions vary for each term so it depends who (also where and when) you ask. According to Karl Marx, communism is the final stage of social development in which the proletariat (the workers) have complete power and ownership over the means of production (capital) in society, and the state itself ceases to exist. All decisions are made collectively. To this day, no country actually reached this stage so technically no communist state has ever existed. In modern lexicon, a "communist country" is one that espouses communist ideas and aims to make them a reality but, strictly, no country has ever been fully communist as defined by Marx.

Socialism is a transitional stage on the way to communism. Under socialism, the state still exists although it is a one party rule lead by the communist party which is responsible for guiding the country in transition towards full communism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-22-2011, 11:22 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 83,700,460 times
Reputation: 18036
Basicall yif youy read communist was centrlzed control over production and the product of production same as socialsim. But the therory was that eventauly no control or gvernamnt would be necesary. Basically the people would take over without any formal governmnet needed in theory.Hitler never supposed in his national socalist that this woudld happen as the leader was the nation. The soviets did everything in the name of the peope like Moa did.In the end they were much the same except for the rethoric.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-23-2011, 06:38 PM
 
Location: Here.
13,824 posts, read 12,583,766 times
Reputation: 16219
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Basicall yif youy read communist was centrlzed control over production and the product of production same as socialsim. But the therory was that eventauly no control or gvernamnt would be necesary. Basically the people would take over without any formal governmnet needed in theory.Hitler never supposed in his national socalist that this woudld happen as the leader was the nation. The soviets did everything in the name of the peope like Moa did.In the end they were much the same except for the rethoric.
Nothing personal texdav, but I've tried to read a few of your posts and would like to encourage you to run them through Spell Check before posting. If you look in the upper right hand corner of the window that you type in, you'll see "ABC" over a check mark. That button will show you all the spelling mistakes. Thank you, respectfully. (By the way, your post had 14 spelling mistakes.) Not sure how you made it 21,831 posts without anyone telling you that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2011, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,044,946 times
Reputation: 36073
Placing the terms in the context of contemporary usage, the difference lies in control of wealth and distribution of discretionary goods and services.

Socialist is the word we use to describe an economy that essentially operates on a fairly free market, but certain aspects are either regulated or controlled by the central government in order to ensure that the benefits of the economic bounty are accessible to everyone, regardless of whether the user is able to pay. This includes education, public safety, defense, retirement and unemployment insurance, post, and some transport infrastructure in the USA, and a few more things like health care, housing, basic food subsistence and energy in some other countries in which it is thought that the private sector cannot be trusted to place the commonweal above their own private interests.

Communism, on the other hand, more closely allies itself nowadays with the principles of what Engels, Marx and Lenin called socialism, in that the collective state controls virtually all the wealth and means of production, with almost nothing left to free enterprise. No knowledgeable person ever called Sweden "communist", because that distinction has been extant at least since WWII.

Both words have been horribly abused, and a century ago Americans were called Communist and fired upon with live ammunition by federal troops for daring to propose the communist idea of collective bargaining. The same collective bargaining that we applauded Lech Wałęsa's Solidarność for advocating, in order to break up Communism a couple of generations later.

Last edited by jtur88; 01-27-2011 at 01:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2011, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Denver
1,788 posts, read 1,971,554 times
Reputation: 1057
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Placing the terms in the context of contemporary usage, the difference lies in control of wealth and distribution of discretionary goods and services.

Socialist is the word we use to describe an economy that essentially operates on a fairly free market, but certain aspects are either regulated or controlled by the central government in order to ensure that the benefits of the economic bounty are accessible to everyone, regardless of whether the user is able to pay. This includes education, public safety, defense, retirement and unemployment insurance, post, and some transport infrastructure in the USA, and a few more things like health care, housing, basic food subsistence and energy in some other countries in which it is thought that the private sector cannot be trusted to place the commonweal above their own private interests.

Communism, on the other hand, more closely allies itself nowadays with the principles of what Engels, Marx and Lenin called socialism, in that the collective state controls virtually all the wealth and means of production, with almost nothing left to free enterprise. No knowledgeable person ever called Sweden "communist", because that distinction has been extant at least since WWII.

Both words have been horribly abused, and a century ago Americans were called Communist and fired upon with live ammunition by federal troops for daring to propose the communist idea of collective bargaining. The same collective bargaining that we applauded Lech Wałęsa's Solidarność for advocating, in order to break up Communism a couple of generations later.
You make socialism sound pretty good.

Would you agree that, in the real world, more government = less freedom?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top