• NightDice@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s correct, but I’m not sure what you understand those terms to mean, because neither really supports taking all ownership away from people. I’m just gonna leave this blorb here, because I feel like this is where it fits best.

      Communism in the style of Marx and Engels means that the workers own the means of production. They would have been completely in favor of a person owning their own farm (or jointly owning it if multiple people worked it). They didn’t really envision much of a state to interfere, much less own property.

      That the Soviet Union (and later the PRC, fuck them btw) claimed to be building the worker’s paradise under communism was mostly propaganda after Lenin died. There hasn’t been any state that has implemented actual communism as established by theory.

      Socialism (as I understand it, but I’m not well-read on it) means the state has social support networks, but largely works under capitalist rules, with bans of exploitative practices. There are some countries trying to implement a light version of this across Europe, to varying success (mostly failing where capitalism is left unchecked).

      The issue is that the US started propagandizing like mad during the cold war, and “communism” was just catchier to say than “supportive of a country that is really just a state-owned monopoly”. Soon everything that was critical of capitalism also became “communism”, which eventually turned into a label for everything McCarthy labelled “un-american”. This is also the time they started equating the terms communism and socialism. A significant portion of the US population hasn’t moved past that yet, because it fits well into the propaganda of the US being the best country in the world, the American Dream, all that bs. The boogeyman of “the state will take away the stuff you own” turned out pretty effective in a very materialistic society. Although I’m very glad to see more and more USAians get properly educated on the matter and standing up for their rights rather than letting themselves be exploited.

      • Nezgul@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Your definition of socialism is more akin to a definition of social democracy, which is… maybe a form of socialism, depending on who you ask – it is historically contentious and generally accepted that social democrats aren’t socialists.

        Socialism can have all of the things that you described, but it is decidedly anti-capitalist. It reorients how workers relate to the means of production. Under capitalism, the means of production are owned by the bourgeois class, while under socialism, they are collectively owned by the workers.

      • mycorrhiza they/them@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Socialism means the state has social support networks, but largely works under capitalist rules

        What you’re describing is “social democracy” — capitalism with safety nets, where production is still controlled by owners rather than workers. “Socialism” explicitly implies worker control of production. “Nordic socialism” could more accurately be called “Nordic social democracy.”

        “Communism” refers to a classless, stateless society where everyone has what they need, no one is exploited or coerced, and there are no wars. It’s an aspirational vision for the future, not something you can do right after a revolution when capitalism still rules the world.

      • icepuncher69@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Holy shit, this is exactly how the whole big picture of comunism is.

        Not even self proclaimed communist understeand this and seems that they think communism is the same thing America propagandises against, so they end up being apologists for tyranical regimes that are the contrary of what comunism and even socialism should be, and end up making an ass of themselves and fitting more with the tankie description. And yes fuck the CPSU/КПСС and the CCP.

        You are ultra mega based.

      • zephyreks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fuck the PRC because… They have state-owned enterprise instead of actual communism? Interesting take.

          • zephyreks@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ah yes, because American democracy is going so well.

            Who’s interests are the Republicans representing? Who’s interests have the Democrats protected after being in power for 3 years?

            Democracy is meaningless if it doesn’t actually act to benefit the people. After all, the goal of government is to improve the lives of the people over which it governs. All of these experiments into different methods of governance should be evaluated based on how much the quality of lives of the population have improved and how happy the population is with their government.

            • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes yes we know America is bad too, now do you have an actual point to make?

              • zephyreks@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You can find a bad example for any form of government. By any reasonable metric of success, the US government is performing poorly compared to non-democratic countries… Even in terms of freedom of speech, given the prevalence of government and intelligence-funded “independent think tanks” that influence policy in Washington.

                At least most people in Russia and China can distinguish between the truth and the party line.

                • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  This not an argument. You can’t respond to “X is doing something wrong” with “OH AS IF Y IS ANY BETTER” when literally no one was talking about Y. You’re just trying to derail the conversation. If you’re going to defend China stick to your guts and defend China, don’t attack completely unrelated countries implying I must think they’re any better, they’re not.

                  At least most people in Russia and China can distinguish between the truth and the party line.

                  I am sure that most people in the country with the largest censorship firewall in existence know the truth any better. And before you say B-B-B-BUT AMERICA— Yeah they censor shit too. I hate both of them.

                  • zephyreks@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    The post I was replying to said:

                    That’s meaningless if they aren’t democratic

                    I get what you mean, but the other guy brought up democracy as if it was the be-all end-all solution. Countries that disprove OP’s point about democracy being the solution are fair game.

                    Chinese people know they’re being censored, though. That’s the key difference. They know that the perspectives being presented are, by and large, coherent with national policy and most urban people either know how to flip the firewall or know someone who can - it’s really not that hard. Sure, there is this nationalist block that doesn’t want to do so, but when have right-wing people actually looked at content that doesn’t agree with them, anyway?

                    Ask any random American what they think, and they’ll go on and on about freedom of speech and blah blah blah… As if the large media organizations in the US don’t all cite reports from “independent think tanks” that are conspicuously all funded by the same billionaires and manned by “ex”-US intelligence. See: the Atlantic Council. The US has been the world leader in manufacturing consent in a way that China and Russia can’t really match. It’s been impressive to see tbh.

              • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                AmeriKKKa also happens to be the same country that spreads propaganda about how capitalism is the only system that works (it does not), how communism never worked and is le ebil, also is publishing nonsense since 1997 on how China is going to collapse every next year (it has overtaken USA).

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They literally have above 90 percent approval according to international studies from people as conservative as fucking Harvard University.

            You’re wrong about their institutions but regardless of what you think of their institutions they have a popular mandate, which is how democracies define themselves as legitimate.