and after that, explain how it differs from Communism.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 22||11/24/2012|
No..no daddy...you fuck off.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 1||11/23/2012|
After that, please define and explain an anti-colonialist Kenyan socialist as counterpoised to a traditional anti-colonialist or Kenyan socialist.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 2||11/23/2012|
Study it out, you gotta study it out!
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 3||11/23/2012|
I'm not America's teacher, bitch.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 4||11/23/2012|
Socialism is a system kind of like the Swedes have now. The State ok's capitalism but the "commanding heights" of the economy (however defined, usually meaning health, transport, heavy industry and education) are controlled by state planners.
Communism is a more extreme form of that. Socialism usually is democratic - communism never is. There is no private enterprise in communism - there is in socialism.
They are differences of degree, to be sure, but in real life these degrees can be quite important.
Put crudely - would you rather live in Stockholm or Pyongyang?
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 5||11/23/2012|
it is when the government gives the underclasses stuff.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 6||11/23/2012|
OK, but how can China be communist when free enterprise and billionaires are omnipresent?
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 7||11/23/2012|
In it's simplest terms, Socialism is government ownership of the means of production. That's high school econ 101. Communism is the people theorectically share in commoun the means of production and share in the profits equally. No economic system is ever purely one thing. Every single economic system is mixed to varying degrees of some form. Captalism has demonized other forms because it would require ceding control to the state. To varying degrees. That's why the feel like labor unions are "communist" or that any suggestion of government regulation is "socialist."
Stupid Americans understand none of them, and what we have now is a huge imbalance favoring the corporate state ant the expense of labor. The corporate state occures when Corporations control government.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 8||11/23/2012|
Socialism and Communism are the two pinnacle topics that define so many on DL because most fools on this website are blind as bats who think these two political twisted ideologies are euphoric answers to society which produce greatness!That solves the world's problems and its THEE answer to everything! Yet, bring up factors like the huge mess that Cuba is in, the fall of the Iron curtain because the Russians found out the hard way that Communism doesn't work, and the chaotic state that socialistic nations in Europe are in like Spain and Greece and many on DL still defined it till they are buried in their graves.
The reason why many on DL are in major denial because they come from Ivy League wealthy families who feel a combination of guilt because they come from privilege backgrounds and at the same time they are arrogant because they think they know what is best for the lower classes which is a haughty very elitist, attitude!
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 9||11/23/2012|
R9 the mess that Cuba is in is because of the US embargo. Imagine trying to run a store on main street in a city where no one from that city is allowed to come and browse, let alone purchase anything. oh, and the same city has security guards in your store ready to shoot at anytime.
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely- this applies to the communist model that was tried out in Russia.
I think "to each according to his need, from each according to his ability" is a much more sustainable and nurturing starting point than "every man for himself"
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 10||11/23/2012|
Then explain Sweden, R9. Or the rest of Scandinavia and Finland.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 12||11/23/2012|
There is no easy definition of Socialism. To get an idea of what "different things to different people" meanings are you will have to look it up in a reliable encyclopedia, preferably not Wikipedia. Suffice it to say that basically Socialism is government ownership of certain key industries of a given economy which in turn partially help to fund services, this usually being on behalf of "the people". Services such as education and healthcare are usually "free" with Socialism. There isn't necessarily any end result in all of this, it is done for its own sake for the benefit of the people by the people with government usually the agency by which it is done (hence many of FDR's detractors calling his programs "socialist"). Communism is more of a philosophy couched in an ideology which has as its goal the ultimate abolition of government, marriage, family and capitalism as a means of exploitation. The lowest classes, the proletariat, rise up to seize control of the means of production of goods and services and reshape society into one which everyone works for the good of everyone else including him or her self. In theory one is freed to do what one desires to achieve the good of society as a whole. What socialism means to Communists is the means by which society is rebuilt or reconstructed to achieve a truly Communist society where, according to Karl Marx, the state and pary which were the vanguards which implemented the socialist construction (or reconstruction) will "wither away" because their work is done; at that point society would operate under the premise "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need". There is therefore a relationship between Socialists and Communists but the means, methods and goals often differ. Read Marx, Engels, Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, Stalin (yes even him), Kautsky, Bernstein and Mao (or Daniel DeLeon or any of the American Communist Party theorists for the USA) to get even a glimpse of the variety of theories and implementations of Socialism and Communism, that is the modern, scientific applications thereof. Usually Communism, at least Leninists and Trotskyists, advocate violent revolution, Socialists often do not and usually advocate working within a given country's existing political system and are more gradualists than revolutionary.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 13||11/24/2012|
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 14||11/24/2012|
"typical lazy liberal. i'm not going to do your homework for you."
true response when i asked a woman on facebook to please define socialism, and give examples of the president's socialist policies.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 15||11/24/2012|
I might add too r14 that some Socialist parties such as those in Scandinavia have relied more on the tax system of their countries and not necessarily ownership of certain industries to achieve a more equitable distribution of the wealth. As you can see with Sweden, there have been a number of social "improvements" with their brand of socialism. Cohabiting was practiced more freely early on in Scandinavia maybe partly due to a socialist mindset. They still have a monarchy which very likely would not exist had there been a revolution then a socialist constrution under a Communist party. Taxes and taxation are very different with Communists too. I believe one may still ride streetcars (yes, the Russians were smart enough to keep them, unlike the USA) and busses in Russia for very little money (fare). At one point during the Soviet period payment of fare was merely an "honor system" kind of thing and if you missed one, the next one was PROMPT in appearing within the next 10 minutes, again, unlike the USA also with its pitiful Amtrak passenger system--no wonder there is global warming with all the fuckin' cars belching out exhaust CO2.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 16||11/24/2012|
I think you might have talked to my mom, R15.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 17||11/24/2012|
Communism is a Financial System; Socialism is a style of living where every person does something that is for the good of the group. Overly simplified, but factual.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 18||11/24/2012|
r18, I might buy the oversimplified idea about Socialism, but I'm not sure where the idea comes from about Communism being a financial system aside from the fact that Communist systems, pretty much formerly now, did not tie in with the hard currencies of, for example, "the West" or the "dollar-pound alliance"? I don't think they had a banking system in the way that "capitalist" nations do, nor was there a system of buying and selling stocks on a stock market. Aside from that, is one of the things about Communism being a financial system pertinent to the idea of "funny money"? Have I answered my own question?
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 19||11/24/2012|
I do agree that DL is crawling with socialists.
I've always known liberal gays but never seen so many gay socialists as on this site. I don't think DL accurately represents most G&L people.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 20||11/24/2012|
Crawling r20? A while back someone did a poll and found that barely 50% of those who hang out here are gay. Seems that wherever gay people go the straights are sure to follow, almost like Mary's little lamb.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 21||11/24/2012|
R20 is not just a moron, he's in denial of reality... like most conservatives.
|by For the stupid Americans out there||reply 22||11/24/2012|