you use the terms, communism and socialism, interchangeably. That is not right.......there are subtle differences between the two terms."
Interesting exchange, but... First, I didn't spot usage of both terms in Tim's posts, you brought this up from nowhere.
This has been a long exchange of posts......you have to go to the beginning......ten ? posts away where we originally were discussing capitalism and its flaws. Over time, it evolved into a discussion of capitalism, socialism and communism.
Second, the difference between two ideas is more fundamental.
Yes, but we hadn't gotten that deeply into the differences.
Third, your definition of socialism is seriously incorrect:
"Socialism: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done"
The meaning of socialism has evolved over the years. I went back to the original meaning intended by Marx. He believed for a capitalist society to get to communism required an intermediary step........he called that step socialism.
The socialist society was defined (and attempted to be implemented) as a society where each member contributes in accord with his/her own abilities (meaning a sort of equality between all human beings). In return, each member would receive a compensation in accord with the _labor_ he committed, not with the "work done". While the first part of the formula seems to be always true, trying to live to the second part was the root cause of all problems.
Yes. That was a part of the problem. The other difficult hurdle had to do with private ownership. People have difficulty sharing facilities as opposed to owning them outright; to whit, condominiums are popular in the US but co-ops which really aren't all that different from condos and don't look any different are rarely seen outside of NYC. Communism is fairly common on the Israeli kibbutz but the concept has not spread to the cities of Israel.
"There was the pretense of central planning but the reality was an oligarch decided how much to produce."
Who do you mean under "an oligarch"?
An oligarchy is government by the few. In the Soviet Union, even though it claimed to be a people's republic, it was governed by an elite few in the communist party. That's why I refer to it as an oligarchy. Having said that, at times, I think the Soviet Union was a straight out dictatorship with a henchman at the top. I think that was true when Stalin was in control.
"Under communism, the workers were supposed to have control over the factory. In fact, they did not."
Funny thought. Under capitalism, stockholders are supposed to own and control the company. Are you? :-) :-)
Of course not.......and this goes back to our discussion re. the flaws of capitalism. <g>
|
