what are the main difference between communism and socialism?

Question

I've been researching them both, and i can not figure what the main differences are, it seems they are one and the same!

Answer 1

Here you go.

SOCIALISM: You have two cows. State takes one and give's it to someone else.

COMMUNISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and gives you milk.

Answer 2

communism = common the ownership of companies and working groups is the people who work there and share the produce and profits if any socialism = social there are companies but the government has rules and regulations for the benefit of the total society. some private and some public capitalism = money is used to make more money the person (s) who provide the money to set up the business hire workers, (labor) as a cost of business, all profit goes to the owners or share holders Free enterprise people can do more or less what they want depending on local rules or regulations for the protection of the general public feudalism. the land owner owns everything and has serfs or laborers bound to the land slavery you can buy and sell humans like you would a mule to do work there has never been any pure form of any of these anyplace The soviet empire started a a feudal system but became a totalitarian dictator ship america is a mixed economy with government support for the rich and powerful and some regulation to protect the average person. China is an authoritarian central planned economy using capitalism method to make a lot of money. Now there are many many multi millionaires and probably a few billionaires there. Saudi Arabia is a kingdom. the king gets all the oil money for the country and passes it around as he pleases Russia has the same sort of thing the purpose of wealth is to gain power and the purpose of power is to gain wealth there were probably some small religious communes on a voluntary basis almost all the polital argument uses words that nobody understands. whaa kind of economy did humans have when they lived as small famies and clans ahd hunted and found wild plants to eat?

Answer 3

Very good, Tabs! Nice and succinct.

To be slightly more specific, there really is no difference -- socialism is a slightly less restrictive form of communism, meaning you can still retain some semblance of your rights and speak out against the government when it tries to remove them. (It isn't much of an advantage, though.) Also, in socialism, the idea is that all of the restrictions and violations of rights are for the good of the majority of the people; in communism, it's all for the good of the state. Although, come to think of it, that's all it really is in socialism too; it just has a different label.

Try studying France's and Canada's governments to understand socialism; Great Britain is pretty socialistic, too. China and North Korea are pretty overworked examples of communism; try finding some FACTS about the Soviet Union for a more developed form of it.

Answer 4

Communism is the extreme left; communists believe that everything should be divided equally and seek to take from the rich to give to the poor. It is a collective society and mentality where you must act in the interests of the whole. It is difficult to achieve this so communists often use extreme means to reach their aims. All property is owned by the people collectively, but in reality it is state-owned e.g. mainland China.

Socialists are also left-wing but to a much lesser degree. They attempt to create a fairer in their view distribution of wealth in society by means such as progressive taxation, government intervention to correct the faliures of the market economy, government provision of healthcare, education, social security etc... It is still a capitalist system but there are many institutions in place to achieve social / political goals for the poorer / minority groups...one example of such a country is Sweden, and the UK to a lesser extent.

Answer 5

Most others don't know either. It's complicated. There are many degrees of Socialism.

The old saying is: From each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds (socialism). From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs (communism).

Although we are very pro-capitalist here in the US, most of us don't believe people should starve as long as they are able to work.(minimum wage) And that would be somewhat anti capitalist, because people would then perhaps choose not to work at all. With Communism, you get the the same money no matter what-so there is no incentive to work there either. With Socialism, you strive for fairness but with Communism complete equality.

The socialist principle of distribution according to deeds- that is, for quality and quantity of work performed. Many countries, including the US has some degree of socialism-but that doesn't mean we are anti-capitalist. For instance, we try to acheive a degree of fairness in the workplace. With strict capitalism, companies have a tendency to be greedy(like the robber barons)

Yes, they look the same and it's complicated but they are very, very different. It's even harder because many call themselves Socialist when they're not. Chavez in Venzuela calls himself Socialist when certainly he's more of a Communist. Compare him to Socialist President Bachelet in Chile(both are democracies). Chile has a terrific free market economy but also has healthcare for it's citizens(the basic one is free, a better one you pay for).

It's nearly impossible to find a pure Socialist or Communist country today. Good luck.

Answer 6

Socialism is the 'feel good' version.

Basically, tabs got it on the head. There is heavy government intervention under both. And the analogy is true with the cows. The main difference is that you may have two great cows. Under socialism, one gets appropriated for others. Under communism, they aren't yours any more. Under Stalinism, they take both cows and send you to the gulag, or just shoot you.

Answer 7

socialism is where everyone is required to contribute to the greater good. Example taxes and the services that are paid by taxes.

communism is where the government owns everything and determines everything. examples of communist ideas in the USA is like the government regulations on pricing of electricity. Communism has enormous potential to benefit society, but fails because it require a huge level of oversight, has few self correcting mechanisms, and is easy to corrupt.

to more correctly state the "two cow" example from above. In socialism you are expected to contribute one cow to the greater good and you get to own the other. In Communism you are merely raising the cows for the government and the government controls what happens to them and your house, and possessions.

Answer 8

Communism is a system of economics where all property is publicly owned.

Socialism is where the means of production are owned by the govt.

Contrary to loony belief; socialism is not a slightly higher rate or taxation of social programs.

Answer 9

Socialism: all property belongs to the state!
Communism: all property belongs to the people - the state will govern it in their place!

Answer 10

Are you talking about either of these two systems in theory or in real world examples? Because they are 2 completely different animals depending on which position you are taking. If you are looking into the theory of socialism then you need to research the original theories.
In the history of political thought, certain elements of what is typically thought of as socialism long predate the rise of the workers movement of the late 19th century, particularly in Plato's Republic and Thomas More's Utopia. During the 18th century Enlightenment, criticism of the idea of private property appeared in the work of political theorists such as Jean Jacques Rousseau in France. Later, following the upheaval of the French Revolution, criticisms of private property and profit began emerging in political doctrine. François Noël Babeuf, for instance, espoused the goals of common ownership of land and total economic and political equality among citizens.

The term "socialism" was first used in the context of early-19th century Western European social critics. In this period, socialism emerged from a diverse array of doctrines and social experiments associated primarily with British and French thinkers—especially Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Louis Blanc, and Saint-Simon. These social critics saw themselves as reacting to the excesses of poverty and inequality in the period, and advocated reforms such as the egalitarian distribution of wealth and the transformation of society into small communities in which private property was to be abolished. Outlining principles for the reorganization of society along collectivist lines, Saint-Simon or Owen sought to build socialism on the foundations of planned, utopian communities.

Marx and Engels regarded themselves as "scientific socialists" and distinguished themselves from the "utopian socialists" of earlier generations. For Marxists, socialism is viewed as a transitional stage characterized by state ownership of the means of production. They see this stage in history as a transition between capitalism and communism, the final stage of history. For Marx, a communist society entails the absence of differing social classes and thus the end of class warfare. According to Marx, once private property had been abolished, the state would then "wither away" and humanity would move on to a higher stage of society, communism. This distinction continues to be used by Marxists, and is the cause of much confusion. The Soviet Union, for example, never claimed that it was a communist society, even though it was ruled by a Communist party for more than seven decades. For communists, the name of the party is not meant to reflect the name of the social system but rather the party's ultimate goal.

The Fabian Society is a British socialist intellectual movement, whose purpose is to advance the socialist cause by gradualist and reformist, rather than revolutionary, means. It is best known for its initial ground-breaking work beginning in the late 19th century and then up to World War I. The society laid many of the foundations of the Labour Party during this period; subsequently, it affected the policies of newly independent British colonies, especially India, and is still in existence today. Fabian socialists were critical of free trade and embraced protectionism in the interests of protecting the realm from foreign competition.

The Fabians also favored the nationalization of land, believing that rents collected by landowners were unearned, an idea which drew heavily from the work of American economist Henry George.

Today's socialist governments of Europe are mostly mixed economies of capitalism and socialist.
I don't see Russia as purely communist, but more of a dictatorship of one party. There is no pure communism state. No economic system can exist in a pure state and survive a social equality of access to that system, not communist, not capitalist.