2007-03-01 12:25:39 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
they are one in the same. just look at the liberal jackoffs that run the ACLU. The original communist party in America.
2007-03-01 12:29:35 · answer #1 · answered by conservative for life 2 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Heck, they're totally different things. They are related, but I did read Marx and Engels, ya know. A society should never call itself communistic; to do so negates the purpose of socialism, which is supposedly the people's struggle to equalize, reform, and democratize(Yes, you did in fact read that right) their society.
Communism was never considered a form of government in practice until the soviet union; so therefore, the entire thing was a failed experiment in totalitarian dictatorship, ya know? The economics weren't even collective.
I'm not going to defend socialism. Too many in this country, perhaps too rightly, fear it. All I know is that the only socialists I've met weren't bad folks, and what with what my families been through lately... Anyhow, I'd talk more, but there's way too much to think about, and I'm conflicted 'bout the issue. Just my two cents and all...
2007-03-01 20:47:46 · answer #2 · answered by crimsononice 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In fact, 'socialism' is rather a loose term (much like 'conservatism') that refers to a wide range of political philosophies of the left, of which Soviet-style Communism is just one. There are many non-Communist forms of Socialism, like the moderate social democracy practised in many western European countries (not to mention Canada and New Zealand), and the populist Socialism seen in parts of Latin America today.
On the other hand, there are non-Socialist forms of Communism (like that outlined in Plato's 'Republic'). There is no necessary causal link between Socialism and Communism, although doctrinaire Marxism does often tend towards authoritarian Communism (in theory as a stage to be overcome on the road to a Communist utopia). Most moderate Socialists reject this view entirely.
2007-03-01 20:40:53 · answer #3 · answered by surroundedbyimbeciles 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While socialism and communism share aspects - namely state control of many enterprises and state-sponsored welfare - communism differs in two critical aspects.
One is that a communist system makes NO provision for private ownership of businesses or land - it is all communally owned - hence the catch phrase "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". This is the economic difference.
The other is that under communist theory a totalitarian period is required in order to accomplish the necessary redistribution of wealth and state takeover of assets to implement a communist economy. This is supposed to be a transitional state. However, no communist system has ever evolved past the dictatorship phase because dictators don't like to give up that kind of power - particularly when it comes with all the economic purse strings attached.
There is a vast range of socialist governments, ranging from Canada (more capitalist than socialist) to Sweden (pervasive welfare state).
2007-03-01 20:34:12 · answer #4 · answered by Mark P 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
the concepts of socialism and communism are very closely simular, they ARE NOT the same though, with both parties everyone in the society see benifits, however, in a socialist state an individual will be able to have more liberties, in a communist state, an individual will rarley have the choices that a socialist citizen may have.
2007-03-01 20:33:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They're related, but not the same. And then there's "social democracy" which is quite different. But not many people seem to get that.
2007-03-01 20:30:13 · answer #6 · answered by M L 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Oh they're related. The difference is how much they steal and how much force they use. So, would you rather get carjacked at gunpoint, or have your purse/wallet stolen at knifepoint?
2007-03-01 20:41:39 · answer #7 · answered by Michael E 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course they're related, fool. They are both economic and political phlosophies
2007-03-02 06:58:57 · answer #8 · answered by Tsotsi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are different in that socialism is more economic than communism deals with politics.
2007-03-01 20:28:23 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
SOCIALISM: You have two cows. State takes one and gives it to someone else.
COMMUNISM: You have two cows. State takes both of them and gives you milk.
2007-03-01 20:37:10 · answer #10 · answered by tabs 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ideologically of course they are similar... the application seems to have differed greatly in most cases though.. and the words can be used in so many different ways in many different contexts... it's hard to tell
2007-03-01 20:34:19 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋