Do conservatives get the distinction between socialism, social democracies and communism?

Question

Socialism is not a political system, it's a way of distributing goods and services. Ideally, socialism and capitalism could be very similar as everyone will produce exactly what's needed for exactly who needs it when they need it.

Socialism is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the economy works. Democracy is liberal. More people (preferably everyone) have some say in how the government works.

Communism is conservative. Fewer and fewer people have any say in how the economy works. Republicans are conservative. Fewer and fewer people have any say in how the government works.


http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html

LOL Andrew - got you going.

I have no problem with you expressing your views, just with the name calling. On the other hand, name calling usually just signifies fear and insecurity.

coragryph - thanks, interesting points

cutiessailor - you should check out Canadas universal healthcare system then maybe you wouldnt be so afraid of it.

dan_dwise1 - I like your comment re equal liberty

ervin_parker - democratic socialism sounds like the best of both worlds

cutiessailor - I am sorry that you have had those experiences with your healthcare systems. My experiences with ours in Canada are at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlUmPwpEeDIuIVLXY29L9vTgPhV.?qid=20070803130057AAJAVcV&show=7&cp=2&tp=2&tnu=39#all-answers
the third last answer. There will always be exceptions.

Answer 1

Close -- but no.

Socialism is NOT liberal. Socialism requires govt control of resources and govt regulation of business -- both of which directly oppose the liberal model of laissez-faire economics which demands free market economy without govt regulation.

But socialism is an economic model, while liberalism is primarily a philosophy. Which is why one party (Democrats) can have both liberals and socialists, even though the two are very different.

Just like the Republicans can have both fiscal conservatives and neo-conservatives, which also handle economics very differently -- almost directly opposed.

Communism is total govt control over property and money -- it is a much more extreme form of socialism -- like the difference between punching someone in the face and shooting them in the face.

But it's also true that communism can only co-exist with conservatism, not liberalism, because both communist and conservatives want to control people -- in different ways, but it's not mutually exclusive.

However, communism cannot co-exist with liberalism -- because liberals demand freedom of choice, and communism directly opposes freedom of choice.

Answer 2

from what I see, most people do not.
econmic structures are similar to politcal systems because if a nation has said econmic structure generally the candidates and politians will support issues that follow their nation's economy. some countries will not let a politian run if they do not support that economic structure.
we have an american communist and socialist party. We also have third parties that want to increase and stand for capitalism.

-socialism is more liberal in the sense that personal econmic freedoms are noy entirely taken away, they are more limited than with capitalism. a socialist capitalist could have more freedom of choice when it comes to social issues than a capitialist nation. communism is against free choices of any kind. thus when choosing where to put these things on a political specturm socialism will be left-center, capitialism will be close to the very middle, and communism will be right-center. -

Answer 3

And you have to think that if the USSR defined socialism, then the same USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) must have also defined "Republic". Hence, the "Republic" of the U.S.A. must be the same thing as the 'Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICS'

Oh, and for those who think that Liberalism doesn't accommodate a " Government regulated" free market economy, I'd suggest taking a look at the philosophy and tradition of the Liberal Party of Canada. They have been the predominant ruling party of Canada for most of Canada's history.

Liberalism is evolving like everything else.

Answer 4

But you are missing the key difference between socialism and capitolism. With socialism the government decides what the people need. In capitolism the consumer is responsible for determining what goods and services they need. When one institutes a massive government based social program such as the proposed universal healthcare programs. The government would decide what medical services that you would be entilted to. I do not need nor want someone else deciding what services myself and my family recieve. You say that socialism is liberal i say it is not. When you start allowing the government to decide what your needs are you give up your liberty. The number of people that are truely needy and in need of social assistance is far lower than the media personalities (Michael Moore) portray. If someone is able bodied they need to work to provide for their own needs. My mother has never been above the poverty line until both her children were out of the house. Did she complain, no. Did she get any kind of handouts we were eligible for, No. Did she go out and get a second job to provide for us, Yes.

Each one of these system take away from the individual to provide for the masses. Fiscal coservatism is the exact opposite of what you describe. The consumer decides the economy buy how they spend their money.

Stepping of my soapbox....please try and read the Definiton of liberty and think about what it means to you.

Edit-Shine- . We have Canadian's coming to the US to get treatments. People wait monthes to see specialists or to recieve chemotherapy.I will probably say this 1,000,000 times before I die, socialism stifles creativity and innovation. Having capitolism in our medical system encourages doctors to learn more skills so they can make more money. Very few doctors would devote the years of work to specialize in things such as cardiology or brain surgery for no reward but to serve their fellow man. To believe otherwise is folly. I am in the Navy (military medicine is socialised medicine) and the father of two autistic children. I had to send them back to the states as the therapy is not available here. They are recieving first rate care and advancing in leaps and bounds. Unfortunatly their treatments are not covered by tricare insurance. I personally want people to desire to become specialists so we can develope better treatments. I should be all for UHC but I am not, it will become a senseless beurocratic sinkhole that will bleed our middle class dry. Medicare is a bancrupt program that is subcontracted out to over a dozen private insurance companies and less than 80% of the funds put in the program can be accounted for at any given time. The VA medical system is almost as bad about dragging out treatment as canadas system. To top it off you cant go to the VA with something like say a knee problem 6 monthes after you are seperated and even get it looked at if you did not have it looked at and documented in your Military medical treatment record. They will say there is know way that it was service related and send you packing. Our system is not perfect but it is a damn sight better than it would be with our government running every aspect of it. Reform in the pharmceuticals, and insurance companies will help greatly. Their are to few reputable insurance providers in the health insurance market. If you broke it down my guess is that three or four big insurance companies hold 60% or more of the health insurance. Smell's like monopoly. We could possibly look intobreaking them up like has been done to corperations like AT&T and microsoft under antitrust laws. but than again i am sleepy and haven't read up on those in about 4 years. goodnight.....leaving the soapbox till this evening.

Answer 5

no life can be free and secure, harmonious and satisfactory unless it is built on principles of justice and fair play. The first requirement of justice is equal liberty and opportunity. Capitalism cannot guarantee you these, while communism does.

Answer 6

I don't get it the way you describe it. Conservatives in the present day are against communism.

"After World War II, communism became a global phenomenon, and anti-communism became an integral part of the domestic and foreign policies of the United States and its NATO allies. Conservatism in the post-war era abandoned its monarchist and aristocratic roots, focusing instead on the preservation of the free market (sometimes capitalism itself), private property, the interests of large corporations, organic inter-cooperation by different classes, and the defense of traditional customs, values, social norms and ways of life. These conservatives saw communism as dangerous due to its intention to abolish private property and its desire to do away with cultural norms, such as traditional gender roles and - sometimes - sexual norms."

http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=Communism+is+conservative&y=Search&fr=yfp-t-501&u=en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Communism&w=communism+conservative+conservatives&d=HOlKVuljPKrd&icp=1&.intl=us

Answer 7

@coragryph: We have a winner!

But alas, it doesn't matter. Conservatives will prefer to stay ignorant and call them all commies.

Answer 8

Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community [1] for the purposes of maximizing social and economic equality and cooperation. This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or community ownership of the means of production.

The modern socialist movement had its origin largely in the working class movement of the late-19th century. In this period, the term "socialism" was first used in connection with European social critics who criticized capitalism and private property. For Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, socialism implied the abolition of money, markets, capital, and labor as a commodity.

A diverse array of doctrines and movements have been referred to as "socialist." Since the 19th century, socialists have not agreed on a common doctrine or program. The various adherents of socialist movements are split into differing and sometimes opposing branches, particularly between reformist socialists and communists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism


Communism is an ideology that seeks to establish a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production. It is usually considered a branch of the broader socialist movement that draws on the various political and intellectual movements that trace their origins back to the work of Karl Marx. However, communism had a rich history of theory and practice for hundreds of years before Marx's attempt to think communism in the context of industrialization. Communism as a political goal is generally a conjectured form of future social organization, although Marxists have described early forms of human social organization as "primitive communism". Self-identified communists hold a variety of views, including Marxism Leninism, Trotskyism, council communism, Luxemburgism, anarchist communism, Christian communism, and various currents of left communism, which are generally the more widespread varieties. However, various offshoots of the Soviet (what critics call the "Stalinist", and supporters call Marxist-Leninist) and Maoist interpretations of Marxism comprise a particular branch of communism that has the distinction of having been the primary driving force for communism in world politics during most of the 20th century. The competing branch of Trotskyism has not had such a distinction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism


Social democracy is a political ideology that emerged in the late 19th century out of the socialist movement. Unlike socialism in the Marxist sense, which aims to replace the capitalist system entirely, social democracy aims to reform capitalism in order to remove its perceived injustices. Social democracy once meant socialism, in the strict sense, achieved by democratic means. This definition, rather than the modern one, still appears in many dictionaries. Social democrats share many views with democratic socialists; social democracy is currently the strongest current of socialism in international politics, followed quite closely by democratic socialism[citation needed] (with whom they often share political parties, such as the British Labour Party in the 1980s, and the Brazilian Workers' Party today). The term itself is also used to refer to the particular kind of society that social democrats advocate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

Answer 9

Wow, I have never heard a more twisted and perverse definition of Communism in my life.

Heck even my communist relatives and ancestors would laugh at such a definition.

Karl Marx created both terms and stated that socialism was part of the process in creating a true Communist state.

Do you know what USSR stood for?

Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics.

I am honestly amazed that you trust more in the rants of some website then in established political science.

Answer 10

No, to conservatives anything left-wing is totalitarian