"Full socialism is a better option than most of these half-baked measures between capitalism and socialism."
Capitalism and socialism cannot be mixed, what people are thinking are is capitalism with public programs. Socialists want a collective sector, not a public sector. Full socialism is not necessarily communism, just because production is collectivized doesn't mean there's no currency or that the means of production are held in common.
Anyone who agrees with this should check out the dream that is socialist Venezuela. There are a ton of articles on it. Here's one: www.nationalreview.com/article/435522/socialism-venezuela-hugo-chavez-nicolas-maduro-bernie-sanders-millennials
The means of production aren't collectivized there, they are nationalized in some cases and still controlled privately in others. Venezuela is in no sense full socialism.
I'd rather have no capitalism or socialism.
Strongly disagree. Socialism is dangerous to society and economies. End of story.
I've been right-wing-ified so I can no longer agree. My new coordinates are (-5, 0).
It's quite cute how people thing -5 is right wing on the political spectrum. Trust me. Ur still a liberal.
Yes, but capitalist.
You became a capitalist? That's actually a major improvement!
Well I realized it would benefit me. And I realized that emotions, ethics, and morality are for the weak. I am completely materialist.
I am happy logic has finally came to you.
Nothing new, I have been drifting right.
As you get older and have a bit of experience paying taxes, you'll know why us capitalists hate socialism.
Nothing to do with taxes. I still want my roads.
So do capitalists. Roads are obviously essential to 21st century society. Capitalists are only against paying high taxes when the government is spending it on something stupid they don't support
Full socialism is better than a lot of things.
Full Socialism is Communism, so no. You need a mix of Capitalism and Socialism.
Communism is a specific form of socialism.
The goal of socialism is communism.
You're incorrect. That's a common misconception spread by Lenin and the Bolsheviks, but it's not historically accurate.
Hammer, what is Pure Socialism then if it's not Communism? Communism is the stateless, classless, moneyless people's utopian dream of pure socialism? Isn't it?
Or better yet, ginger, a free market where people can be free to invest and spend their money where they want. Free market capitalism with slight regulation (to stop monopolies) Is how nations will thrive economically.
If I'm not mistaken, socialism is a general term referring to the common ownership of the means of production. Ancom, Marxism, mutualism, collectivism, M/L, etc. are all forms of socialism (I think).
Brandon, while also creating two world, rich and everyone else. Free Market Capitalism inheritly creates a world of the rich elite and the poor majority. Capitalism requires regulation and government oversight to function benefitly for not only the economy but the nations people.
Hammer, so what? You see Communism as separate from Socialism? How?
Free markets breed monopolies, inequality, hierarchy, class struggle, and inevitably revolution. States breed authority, oppression, dominance, and inevitably revolution. It's a lost caused, really. Anarchy ✌️
Socialism is a general term referring to the public ownership of the means of production. Communism is more specific, I think. Am I getting this right, @DoctorWasdarb ?
But I added slight government control to break up monopolies.
Hammer, I know that. But isn't Communism the most radical form of Socialism? In which capitalism is gone, the people now rule without state, class of money to harm the worker utopia?
Brandon, and I'm saying you need more then just slight government. Just stopping monopolies isn't enough.
Without monopolies, capitalism is great. If poor getting poorer can be fixed by creating jobs and encouraging those who can't get a job to start at a minimum wage and work up the chain.
Wanna tell that to the American Middle Class? Oh wait, there is none. It's thinking like that, that had destroyed the American Middle Class. More money needs to be coming down from the rich, and government needs more of a say in business. The goal of wealth should not be to live this materialistic luxurious life, what's the point? Your gonna lose it all when you die. It should be to better your people, and future generations to come. The massive wealth gaps in America are only making the rich man richer and the poor man poorer.
I've been summoned.
Socialism: an economic system where the means of production are owned and managed by the workers at a specific workplace, or by the community in general.
Communism: an economic and political system where there is no state and no currency, where the means of production are owned by the community, and the products of such productions are distributed democratically.
Classical Marxism is a specific form of communism, where the workers are to take over the state and establish a new state, known as the dictatorship of the proletariat. The purpose of this state is to fight against capitalist insurgencies. Leninists and Marxist-Leninists (stalinists), Maoists all believe the means of production should be owned by the state, so not truly socialist, although the term has been misapplied to these failed states. The other primary form of communism is anarcho-communism, essentially the same as classical Marxism, but skips the dictatorship of the proletariat phase.
Trust me I know that those leaders were not Communist. Marx and Engles were really the only true Communists. But, with that said. So is Communism not Socialism then? I've always thought of it as extreme Socialism. The final end product if Socialism was ever to make it that far.
Communism is a type of socialism. Also note that communism is both a political and economic ideology, while socialism is just an economic ideology.
Marx and Engels weren't the only true communists. Kropotkin, Goldman, Orwell (I think), Parsons, Rocker, etc. were also commies. Is Chomsky a commie?
Chomsky calls himself an anarcho-syndicalist, but the end goal is still the same, so yes.
Doc, so if Communism is not the most radical form of Socialism what is? I will perfectly admit Fascism has an radical side, Fascism's radical is National Socialism. So what is Socialism's radical of its not Communism?
Any true leftist who wants a revolution (including anarchists) is considered a radical. Right wingers (including fascists) who want a revolution are called extremists. The farthest left economic system is a command economy, which is what communism has. But authoritarian leftists who also want a command economy are just as far left, just not communists.
What do you call an economy in which the means of production are owned entirely by the state? It's not socialism (because there isn't common ownership) and it's not capitalism (since it's a command economy). What is it?
Doc, wait but a command economy requires a state. Communism is stateless, classless and moneyless.
Hammer, I'd call that a Command Economy. Like North Korea. A broad economic Socialism in which the state governs industry. What would you call it?
That's a hard question to answer, because historically state owned economies only exist from a perversion of socialism. There isn't really a good name for them. Usually I just sacrifice the word and let them be called socialist or communist too because it's a waste of time to argue that all the time. Other times I call it state socialism, or really state capitalism because the state is the owner of the property, provides services to the people (often with a price), and provides the workers with their salaries. And note that not all state owned economies are command economies.
A command economy just means that resources are distributed according to need rather than through markets. The distributor can be the state, or it can be entirely democratic, like in anarcho-communism.
Can you give an example of a state-owned market economy? How would that even work?
You basically just replace capitalist employers with the state and voila the state determines the price of goods, the salaries of workers, all that. And I just discussed politics in French so I don't really know how to respond right now.
You love being dictated by government, don't you.
Brandon I hope you aren't referring to Doctor or H&S, they're both anarchists.