Communism and Socialism ?

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Whets the difference between Socialism and Communism ? Can someone explain this to me ? And please provide a lot of answers like I know its XXXXX and the communists think its YYYYYYY and my friend thinks its ZZZZZZ.

Thanks for the answers

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

I've heard that communism is when the state takes everything and redistributes everything equally to everyone. Government controls all industry and there is no free enterprise. Socialism is more mild, where the government controls a lot but still allows some free enterprise like in Venezuela.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:35 am

I've always heard the ultimate ideal of communism was to eliminate the state completely; in other words, no government. Of course this ideal has never been actualized. Socialism, as far as I know, never strives to eliminate government.

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Cygnus wrote:

I've heard that communism is when the state takes everything and redistributes everything equally to everyone. Government controls all industry and there is no free enterprise. Socialism is more mild, where the government controls a lot but still allows some free enterprise like in Venezuela.

Well I have assumed something similar

(I would describe my self for a communist I’m for the abolishment of all privet property , money and every thing you would expect from a communist however I believe my ideas will evolve from the free market because no capitalist firm can compete with my communist system [No government involved] and we already can see south tendencies in modern firms. )

however I’m reading true the communist manifesto of Marx and it peaty mouth states that communist are allowed for some privet ownership.
I don’t know Marx is pretty ridiculously insane he describes something like ludism or primitivism not something you think if communism.
I always assumed communism meant total abolishment of ownership and money or something in this direction more radical then socialism however Marx disagrees and I never listened or got interested in his writings. Personally I think he is insane and a capitalist Razz

( Pising on your grave old man pising on your grave ) , I never listened to Marx after I finish his manifesto I post my review of how ridicules he is.

MockingGods wrote:

I've always heard the ultimate ideal of communism was to eliminate the state completely; in other words, no government. Of course this ideal has never been actualized. Socialism, as far as I know, never strives to eliminate government.

Maybe however Marx jumps from topic to topic in a confusing way he stated something about a goal of communists to be a establishment of government owned production maybe it’s the first step to real communism or something however he just stared a different line of rezoning.
After I finish the manifesto I can decisively answer this.

Remember I haven’t seen Marx use the word “Socialist” he referees only to communist and communist goals maybe he starts using this the definition of socialism later in his book.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:37 pm

carx wrote:

(I would describe my self for a communist I’m for the abolishment of all privet property , money and every thing you would expect from a communist

I have no wish to insult you however I find such ideas morally repugnant. Perhaps as much as you find the ideas of private property and money. You see private property and money as a means of depriving people from what they want and I see a lack of these things as depriving people of what they create--the rewards of their own work. Were there no private property I would produce so very much less and I am not alone in this. I work extremely hard and even though it may benefit many people's health (since I work on software in the medical field) I do not do it out of benevolence. I work extremely hard to succeed, to provide my family with its needs, and also to provide my family and myself with some of our wants.

carx wrote:

however I believe my ideas will evolve from the free market because no capitalist firm can compete with my communist system [No government involved] and we already can see south tendencies in modern firms. )

Communism cannot exist without the force of government since the majority of people, thinking like myself, would opt out of giving our work away to others without proper compensation (even if many think it disproportionate based on their own values) and work in the free economy.

carx wrote:

I always assumed communism meant total abolishment of ownership and money or something in this direction more radical then socialism however Marx disagrees and I never listened or got interested in his writings.

So a person shouldn't own themselves, their work and creations, their homes, etc? I don't understand how anyone can believe in such a thing. Even though your vision of this is the ultimate freedom to me it looks more like slavery. My work is mine. I may sell it by contract to my employer but I can take it elsewhere if I choose.

If that were to change I would work as little as possible. Nearly everyone would, and therefore there would be much less of everything to go around.
Put down the Marx and read about economics and why people actually work and produce things.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

Quote:

If that were to change I would work as little as possible. Nearly everyone would, and therefore there would be much less of everything to go around.

That is what we saw happen in the old Soviet Union. Workmanship went down and corruption went up. No one was willing to work because little came from it.

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Saitou wrote:

I have no wish to insult you

No problem I don’t take offence and like to joke about my crazy views , however thank you for being nice.

Saitou wrote:

however I find such ideas morally repugnant.

Appeal to morality logical fallacy detected. And for a tribesmen the idea of not eating your dead is morally repugnant. And for you the idea of eating your dead is morally repugnant. And the point is ? It’s a logical fallacy to invoke morality because its a nonsensical word.

Saitou wrote:

Perhaps as much as you find the ideas of private property and money.

NO

Saitou wrote:

You see private property and money as a means of depriving people from what they want and I see a lack of these things as depriving people of what they create--the rewards of their own work.

No I never stated this !
I don’t see this in this way I see money for a obsolete medium a hindrance in programs and every one relaying on it in a free market is going to fail.
Remember for me Marx and friends sound insane and I think their arguments are most of the time insane.
My philosophy haze nothing to do with a existing brand of socialism or communism I simply assembled it and I think its communistic.

Saitou wrote:

Were there no private property I would produce so very much less and I am not alone in this. I work extremely hard and even though it may benefit many people's health (since I work on software in the medical field) I do not do it out of benevolence. I work extremely hard to succeed, to provide my family with its needs, and also to provide my family and myself with some of our wants.

And who forces you to abandon your job or money ? You can work in your business and I would expand my little Free Communism (Fcom) system and after this cabal generates a firm that will go for the medical sector and conquers it you have nothing to fare.

Let me give you a example people who don’t wont to work and get paid are most often shown for examples of failures in the free market. OK You understand the capitalist example.
Now imagine that a individual who demands money for his services is like the one above he is going to fail in a competitions with a communist firm.

Saitou wrote:

Communism cannot exist without the force of government since the majority of people, thinking like myself,

Ad populum fallacy . And most people in the middle ages think that the earth is the center of the universe. And most Americans don’t accept modern biology (evolution).
What is your point ?
This is a invalid argument its only stating the statistics and its not going to make the sun rotate around the earth or creationism true.

And again who is going to force thus people work in a Fcom ????
WHO ??? WHO ???
If they don’t wont to live they are going lose the competition in the free market like cars extinguished the hors industry if people are not skilled in building/operating cars tuff shit they have no job and starve to death on the streets or learn to work in the write way , similar you cant work without money your job is going to end in the future maybe not in your life time but its going to end no one is forcing you to work in a Fcom an its not like a Fcom is gong to help the pore homeless if they don’t work in return.

Saitou wrote:

would opt out of giving our work away to others without proper compensation
(even if many think it disproportionate based on their own values) and work in the free economy.

Let me give you example A me I’m willing to work for free and give my engineering knowledge in a communistic organization that I’m imagining. If only I could replicate myself (this maybe perfectly realistic when uploading will be available for humans).
Next people who volunteer in charities example B.
And finally people who have been educated or broth up in a enlivenment that supports my ideas like creationists or people living in religious families this is my example C. And remember my fcom organization is not something that will pare in a revolution its more a evolution that will finalize not in my lifetime I’m simply the initiator and I would be happy if you could give me some mistakes in model. I’m a engineer not a preacher/philosopher like Marx.

Saitou wrote:

So a person shouldn't own themselves, their work and creations, their homes, etc? I don't understand how anyone can believe in such a thing. Even though your vision of this is the ultimate freedom to me it looks more like slavery.
My work is mine.

You can eat uranium if you wont to be free however its not going to help you and give you a quick ride to the commentary. I personally don’t care if you eat uranium to fell free and not eating uranium is slavery however this is irrelevant to the fact that you will die if you eat uranium. You cant change this like you cant change that a Fcom is going to own capitalist business and you will lose your job to the new improved communist men that works for free.
Its like debating the immorality of gravity its not going to make gravity go away.

Saitou wrote:

I may sell it by contract to my employer but I can take it elsewhere if I choose.

And who is wiling to take your property from you ???
A Fcom is not going to do this.
You simply are going to work in a capitalist firm that loses the competition to a Fcom Firm.
You lose your job.
All the sectors will be slowly taken over in free market competition.
Fcom remains only and you are going to work in it according to its rules or sale all of your property for food and live a homeless life.
The one who is going to catapult you from your job to homelessness is the free market not a evil read army.

Saitou wrote:

If that were to change I would work as little as possible. Nearly everyone would, and therefore there would be much less of everything to go around.
Put down the Marx and read about economics and why people actually work and produce things.

I’m a economy student and I’m perfectly aware of standard economics.
Your argument about people not wonting to get into my system is invalid and who needs people ? Genetic_ engineering /Post_humanism , Steroids , Computer Brain Implants if the human species is inefficient with it is , it needs to be replaced or modified. Humans are so pathetic imagine how better it would be if we change the pathetic human skin to something reptilian like something more like the dragon skin armor resists grenades and bullets no problems with heat the unnecessary clothing can be ignored and the new nakedness of homo spurious will ampere over the earth.
However this is not a issue if I can find people like me or simply copy myself then there will be no problem I’m willing for this. If you are not willing to work in this scenario then you wont be able to get a job and feed yourself simply you will get homeless and people like you will get extinct thanks to the brilliant argument from free market advocates that I love to incorporate in my thinking its evolution baby the inefficient will parish.
Thetas why the free market is so similar to natural selection.

Please be not offended Its only my idea and like the machines and mechanized production they eliminated traditional human made production so my concepts will advance over inefficient capitalism will parish or do you think a capitalist company can have a advantage over a firm that can produce products for free ? How can you compete if your opponent can start a price war (Yep my economy education I know what a price war is) that you cant win ?

Cygnus wrote:

Quote:

If that were to change I would work as little as possible. Nearly everyone would, and therefore there would be much less of everything to go around.

That is what we saw happen in the old Soviet Union. Workmanship went down and corruption went up. No one was willing to work because little came from it.

Well that’s the SU allowing money and stuff.
In my system if you don’t work you get thrown out and because you don’t own a thing you simply get nothing back. And how can there be corruption if no one owns a thing ? There cant be even primitive exchange in a Fcom.
Besides you seam to be naive to believe this , a little suggestion and people who are dedicated are going to continue working example D Anorexic girls they have the will power to resist eating because that are their believes.
Not to mention Christians and other fanatic religious groups if you tech them from their childhood they will simply follow it and not working will be “Sinful”. Actually its easy to imagine how all of the devoted members will follow if not then they can get out on the streets with no property I’m not holding them back.
Remember I’m willing to work in such conditions you simply seam not to understand my Example A
my self.

Best wishes.
Carx.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

Quote:

Ad populum fallacy

This is not an ad populum fallacy. An ad populum fallacy, as shown by all of your examples, is wrong because it says because a lot of people believe something, it must be true. What Saitou said is not ad populum. He said that the people would not tolerate communism BECAUSE OF what people think. People in America, thinking as they do, would not tolerate communism. This is exactly like saying people in America, thinking as they do, do not favor evolution. Or people in the dark ages, thinking as they did, did not accept that the earth went around the sun.

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Cygnus wrote:

Quote:

Ad populum fallacy

This is not an ad populum fallacy. An ad populum fallacy, as shown by all of your examples, is wrong because it says because a lot of people believe something, it must be true. What Saitou said is not ad populum. He said that the people would not tolerate communism BECAUSE OF what people think. People in America, thinking as they do, would not tolerate communism. This is exactly like saying people in America, thinking as they do, do not favor evolution. Or people in the dark ages, thinking as they did, did not accept that the earth went around the sun.

Why is even this statement relevant to this discussion ? What the US citizens think who cares its not going to make my argument invalid. Thinking that the opinion of the majority somehow makes something true is a ad populum.

But maybe he think I need to convince the US citizens to abolish their evil capitalist ways for me to establish a Fcom it’s a misconception I don’t need this actually it will be best if the majority of US citizens remain capitalist then my Fcom will grove unstoppably remember one persons mistake is a someone else gain I would love for Americans to turn libertarian or AC then my Fcom will be fueled faster and it grove will be unstoppable.

And where did I state that the US citizens would know that there is a Fcom running this business ???? Its not like I’m going to parade around “Hey we are communists” its bad for business. If its not a ad populum this statement makes no sense.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

Quote:

Thinking that the opinion of the majority somehow makes something true is a ad populum.

Did you even read anything I said?

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Cygnus wrote:

Quote:

Thinking that the opinion of the majority somehow makes something true is a ad populum.

Did you even read anything I said?

Yes.
And I don’t know how his sentence can make sense or be relevant can you enlighten me how the opinion of Americans or their tolerance is relevant ???
It is beyond my comprehension.

Maybe I rephrase OK :

“How is the fact that most Americans dislike communism make my ideas not work or impossible to function ?”

Edit

OK I finished the manifesto Very Happy

.
There are mentioning of socialists in the end of it.
Socialists are similar to communist but created buy the monarchy to fight the burguazy in the past or some shit like this , I don’t know Marx is insane.
Therese something about class struggle being soften down in a socialist system I don’t understand this so.

There are descriptions of different types of socialism like one that try to establish itself from the burguagy and one that try to create itself in separate areas , somehow similar to my ideas however I don’t understand it.

Marxs is definitively a primitivist and luddite .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Luddism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitivism

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

Quote:

“How is the fact that most Americans dislike communism make my ideas not work or impossible to function ?”

If you mean "my ideas not work or impossible to function" in America, then it is very relevant. It looks to me like you expect the Fcom to be gradually excepted in America. For this to happen, people would actually want the Fcom system. My acceptance of this system would hinge on "does Fcom allow me to own a guitar?" If the majority of Americans would like to own things and control what they receive for their services, then they would not work at an Fcom company. I must have your ideas confused. Please tell me how Fcom would turn everybody communist.

Confident Learner Joined: Jun 09, 2008 Posts: 68

Cygnus wrote:

Quote:

“How is the fact that most Americans dislike communism make my ideas not work or impossible to function ?”

If you mean "my ideas not work or impossible to function" in America, then it is very relevant. It looks to me like you expect the Fcom to be gradually excepted in America. For this to happen, people would actually want the Fcom system. My acceptance of this system would hinge on "does Fcom allow me to own a guitar?" If the majority of Americans would like to own things and control what they receive for their services, then they would not work at an Fcom company. I must have your ideas confused. Please tell me how Fcom would turn everybody communist.

Yes you are confused imagine this like this you go to a store to get a product little you know this product is produced from in a Fcom. The company that displays the shiny billboards is completely a subsidiary of a Fcom it seams to be a normal company not parading like communist people get theirs stuff from a lot of Fcom companies and little they now they are so cheap or can spend so more money in advertising because the are a Fcom.

Its like every efficient company it will win and dominate a free market remember people in America don’t know this. Its not a job of a Fcom to turn every one into communist it operates like business employing mostly it members and occasionally if there is not enough Fcom-personal it simply gets someone from the private sector for the existing gap.

The Fcom will get you from the streats to work in the Fcom is directed on the later stages of development and under a pseudonym of a radical communist organization.
And this maybe be helpful for the later stages of development after Fcom acquired a solid grip on the economy and amerce is addicted to it services.
Quick example imagine America trying to immediately separate itself from chine’s production it would be a catastrophe.

After market domination there will be no capitalist buisnes left and if it is nececary a Fcom can start to get rid of capitalize employs and replace them with new Fcom-ers.
The Americans don’t need to turn communistic they only need to fail in the free market and die in the streets.

Maybe I need to mention that my Fcom will have a advanced and radical policy of child production for itself ? And the main idea is to get many offspring’s educated in the Fcom to create future Fcom-personal it’s a old idea. The main advantage of a Fcom is the fact that its completely opposed to the concept of a family every instead children will be managed like in a school buy multiple personal and like you can imagine from schools 20 people with some organization can manage more children then on woman.
Think of Islamic families in Europe they can “produce” more children because have more wife’s to manage them not to mention give birth to them.

And a Fcom is not bound buy the limitations of the female reproduction cycle adoption of massive child gropes is a extremely efficient form of production.

And there is not even the limit of states some members of a Fcom can simply start to become citizens on the USA and simply manage the Fcom like a bounders state a multinational corporation. Its easy to get citizenship in most countrys I don’t know if it applies to the USA but if you merry a American isent this giving you or your children American citizenship ?
The point is to go on vacation to a target country find a homeless person and simply give him/her a offer to mery and give them money and no requirements. The marriage (I don’t know if this applies to USA in Poland its possible) is with a intercision with means there is no common property every person in a mirage remains their property and after the divorce there is no splitting. So a Fcom can spread from to other country’s like the USA its not a requirement for Americans to accept a Fcom or communism they may never know of its existence it will simply start to grove.
I’m not interested in converting people to communism I’m dramatically opposed to most foolish ideas of Marx and socialists.

Fcom is a strange hybrid of communism ad capitalism.
PS: I don’t know if you read the polish classic “ before summer”(if I remember correctly) it’s a interesting lecture and touches something on the topic of evolution vs revolution of a system.
Maybe its difficult for a American that to understand how a system can evolve like the democracy of the first republic of Poland (From monarchy to elected kings under the control of the senate ) or clean transition of Poland from socialism to capitalism.

PS2: About the guitar thing why own a guitar if you can get one for free ? Fcom can provide it. Remember if you don’t get played in a Fcom you can get stuff for free in a Fcom from others. Simply its like in a renting shop you have a lot of guitars hanging on shelves and you are expected to return it after you finish using it. Sheering is the key to success (This is one of the poisons effects of a Fcom on a capitalist system the people from a Fcom stop buying stuff imagine 1 can buy 1 DVD for 50 people to see instead of every one getting their own DVD or going to the theater , consumption is reduced capitalist firms start to get miserable while a Fcom starts to grove to significant proportions).
Actually counting the number of things that you can use in a Fcom would technically give you access to south amounts of wealth that most of Americans would never be able to buy in 5 life times.

Graduate Thinker Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 519

Quote:

Maybe I need to mention that my Fcom will have a advanced and radical policy of child production for itself ?

I find that appalling.

Quote:

And the main idea is to get many offspring’s educated in the Fcom to create future Fcom-personal it’s a old idea.

And it's something Aldous Huxley warned against in Brave New World.

Quote:

but if you merry a American isent this giving you or your children American citizenship ?

Nope, only your children.

Quote:

they may never know of its existence

Then you underestimate our right wing spin specialists.

Quote:

Simply its like in a renting shop you have a lot of guitars hanging on shelves and you are expected to return it after you finish using it.

What if I don't plan on returning it? Another thing: a guitar is a work of art. If an Fcom intends on growing test tube babies to build guitars, I would doubt that I would get a very good one.

Quote:

The marriage (I don’t know if this applies to USA in Poland its possible) is with a intercision with means there is no common property every person in a mirage remains their property and after the divorce there is no splitting.

No, that is definitely not possible over here. Ask any divorced man.

Question: if an Fcom's employees are being payed basically with food and housing, then how is that more cost efficient than a capitalist corporation that gives its employees a paycheck to buy its own products?

Grand Poster Joined: Apr 22, 2005 Posts: 1034

What is the difference between communism and capitalism?

Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man; communism is the exact opposite.


Create an account	Home · Articles · Downloads · Video Library · Forums · Chat Room · aStore