I know that socialism is an economic ideology whereas communism is an economic & political ideology but I'd appreciate it if some of you could answer some questions regarding the differences between the two:
1) In socialism, are only the means of production owned collectively or by the state wheareas properties such as homes, clubs, & organizations can be owned privately?
2) Are both ideal socialism & ideal communism stateless & classless yet ideal socialism allows for some private ownership?
3) In communism, is everyone paid the same wage and all commodity prices are the same but does socialism allow for some different wages and commodity prices or not?
P.S. Please respond in your own words because different Internet sources provided different and vague explanations. Thanks!
what you'll find is that these definitions will vary greatly from individual to individual and group to group. all you need to know is that both are noxious to civilization and will kill you.
Socialism and Communism from Planned Chaos
I read somewhere that originally it was all called Communism. But then when word got out of what a train wreck Communist Russia was, people started calling themselves Socialists, meaning we are the nice guys that don't mass murder our peasents.
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer
Communism is a type of socialism.
well...when you hear communism, you might be talking to someone who wants an absolute state...or you might be talking to someone who wants a stateless marxist utopia. there's no way to pin these words down.
in the end, both of the words will end your designs for your body and property being subject to quite a bit of danger from the unintelligent poor and the malevolant academics. as I said earlier, that's really all you need to know.
wikipedia:In the late 19th century, the terms "socialism" and "communism" were often used interchangeably. However, Marx and Engels argued that communism would not emerge from capitalism in a fully developed state, but would pass through a "first phase" in which most productive property was owned in common, but with some class differences remaining. The "first phase" would eventually evolve into a "higher phase" in which class differences were eliminated, and a state was no longer needed. Lenin frequently used the term "socialism" to refer to Marx and Engels' supposed "first phase" of communism and used the term "communism" interchangeably with Marx and Engels' "higher phase" of communism.[11] These later aspects, particularly as developed by Vladimir Lenin, provided the underpinning for the mobilizing features of 20th century Communist parties.
These later aspects, particularly as developed by Vladimir Lenin, provided the underpinning for the mobilizing features of 20th century Communist parties.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
All socialist societies lead to the same place: Poverty, violence and the destruction of society. Communism in its core only expedited the process though totalitarian dictatorship versus the only slightly more responsive "Democratic" versions that we see in the USA, Europe and elsewhere. The foundation of society is the right of individuals to own and control property. Without this most basic and important right the progress of society through trade slows and the central governments institute more and more violence in response to the loss of wealth through trade. Government in any form will use violence to modify the behavior of people using their property. Most Western societies are in the process of becoming socialist as more and more property comes under the direct control of central government. Unfortunately the USA continues to lead the world in the individual losing control of property that the individuals acquire through trade. The UK and the rest of Europe and Japan are only just a little farther along toward complete socialism.
@nirgrahamUK
Wasn't "the first phase" of communism in Marx's work referred to as "raw communism" and the "higher phase" as "pure communism." (Private Property and Communism in the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844)? In Marx's day, as well as in Marx's writings, socialism and communism were the same thing. It wasn't until Stalinism (and Fabianism?) that the two terms separated from one another.
My personal Anarcho-Capitalist flag. The symbol in the center stands for "harmony" and "protection"-- I'm hoping to illustrate the bond between order/justice and anarchy.
Yes, Beefheart. It seems wikipedia gives credit to Lenin for the commonplace adoption of the distinction between those terms.