Everyone understands that Socialism is not Communism, right?

[countryboy]

Socialism, Elections for leadership, free markets exist along with heavily regulated markets (think American utilities), money and private ownership are the norm. Safety nets (think social security) are strong and universal. Land is usually privately owned. Socialism is something dialed up and down as needed. (Think the Federal Reserve).

That's not socialism. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.

socialism​

noun​

so·cial·ism ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

Synonyms of socialism
Simple DefinitionA Simple Definition is available from our Learner's Dictionary to help you understand the meaning faster.
1
: any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

Communism does not allow for elections, the Party runs the government. There is no private industry, the government owns the television station, the grocery store, and the technology companies… ALL of it. In a pure communist system there would be no cash money, Communism is absolute pure government management of everything Economic. All people are financially equal, no classes, the only social mobility is if the entire population moving up or down together.

Very different things. Communism is absolute, Cuba and Maybe North Korea. Capitalism and Socialism always go hand in hand as a balance.

That's socialism. You can no longer pretend you don't know what's going on with the Democrat Party.

This is the guy who helped Mamdani get elected. And Mamdani just helped a bunch of DSA members get elected.

David Jenkins is a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) organizer based in New York City and a member of the Libertarian Socialist Caucus (LSC). He serves on the DSA's National Political Committee (NPC) for the 2025–2027 term and was elected as an LSC candidate for the NPC at the 2025 National Convention.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043495068074414178

View: https://x.com/thestustustudio/status/2043495068074414178

 

[Jarod]

I knew you would dodge the question. You either don't know, or, don't want to say because of how bad it makes you look.

I told you @TOP

Please see above.

 

[countryboy]

The Libs of JPP either think we're stupid, or THEY are stupid. There is no third option.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels viewed socialism and communism as interchangeable terms for the same future society, rejecting the distinction between a transitional "socialist" stage and a final "communist" one. They characterized their approach as scientific socialism, arguing that this society would emerge inevitably from the economic contradictions of capitalism rather than through utopian idealism.

Key features of their vision included:

• Common Ownership: The means of production and natural resources would be held in common by a voluntary association of producers, rather than by the state or private owners.
• Abolition of Class and State: They predicted the eventual abolition of classes and the coercive state, which they viewed as an instrument of class rule. The state would lose its political character and become a purely administrative body for managing social affairs.
• Planned Production: Society would replace the anarchy of the market and production for profit with conscious, democratic planning to allocate resources and meet human needs.
• End of Wage Labor: The system would eliminate the wages system, money, and commodity production, transitioning to a non-market economy.
• Distribution Principles: Initially, distribution might involve labor-time vouchers to manage scarcity, but the ultimate aim was a classless community practicing "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Marx and Engels believed this transition required a revolutionary transformation where the working class conquers political power to dispossess capitalists, leading to a classless, stateless community based on free association.

 

[countryboy]

Please see above.

Please stop lying, or, being stupid. See above.

 

[Jarod]

I

Have you or any democrat on this board bothered to read the Democrat Socialists of America website? Any of you? Even though I have posted thier mission statement and link to thier site. It spells out communism in flowery language. And they are not hiding it.

recently read it, it does not describe communism.

They did not call for an end to private ownership or government takeover of any segment of the economy. They did not suggest that other parties should not exist.

You are simply uneducated.

 

[AProudLefty]

That's not socialism. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.

socialism​

noun​

so·cial·ism ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

Synonyms of socialism
Simple DefinitionA Simple Definition is available from our Learner's Dictionary to help you understand the meaning faster.
1
: any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

That's socialism. You can no longer pretend you don't know what's going on with the Democrat Party.

This is the guy who helped Mamdani get elected. And Mamdani just helped a bunch of DSA members get elected.

David Jenkins is a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) organizer based in New York City and a member of the Libertarian Socialist Caucus (LSC). He serves on the DSA's National Political Committee (NPC) for the 2025–2027 term and was elected as an LSC candidate for the NPC at the 2025 National Convention.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043495068074414178

View: https://x.com/thestustustudio/status/2043495068074414178

You are ignoring my posts.

 

[martin]

My comment is accurate. Both Socialism and Communism use the same mechanisms to control the economy and society. They only vary in the degree they do it too.

As the Russian and Chinese models have demonstrated they vary in kind as well as “degree”. Stalin introduced the brute force “variation” that alienated him from Lenin but then Lenin got sick and died and it became the thing.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Nope. Simply untrue. Capitalism and Socialism always coexist. Communism cannot coexist with any other systems. (China tried with Hong Kong, but that failed.)

Venezuela proves you wrong, as but one example of many.

Communism can only exist when the entire economy is government managed, and owned, otherwise it’s not communism.

Not true either. Even in the Soviet Union micro businesses outside of the system existed. In rural areas, personal 'garden plots' of maybe an acre or two in size at most existed everywhere and were a major source of the nation's food supply.

Soviet private garden plot

www.histclo.com

Private Garden Plots | Seventeen Moments in Soviet History

Primary sources for the history of the Soviet Union, 1917–1991 — texts, images, films, and music drawn from Soviet history.

soviethistory.msu.edu

Socialism and capitalism depend on each other to survive.

Socialism needs Capitalism. Capitalism does not need Socialism.

In Socialism, without Capitalism the economy stagnates and wealth generation all but ceases. That brings ruin to the economy and privation to society. Capitalism, for all its faults, generates new wealth and grows the economy and society, even if not everyone benefits from that.

 

[Jarod]

That's not socialism. Socialism is government ownership of the means of production.

socialism​

noun​

so·cial·ism ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm

Synonyms of socialism
Simple DefinitionA Simple Definition is available from our Learner's Dictionary to help you understand the meaning faster.
1
: any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

That's socialism. You can no longer pretend you don't know what's going on with the Democrat Party.

This is the guy who helped Mamdani get elected. And Mamdani just helped a bunch of DSA members get elected.

David Jenkins is a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) organizer based in New York City and a member of the Libertarian Socialist Caucus (LSC). He serves on the DSA's National Political Committee (NPC) for the 2025–2027 term and was elected as an LSC candidate for the NPC at the 2025 National Convention.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043495068074414178

View: https://x.com/thestustustudio/status/2043495068074414178

David Jenkins doesn’t understand what socialism is, or if he does, he doesn’t believe in it, as he stated, he believes in communism. Communism is something different.

Can you cite where you got your definition? Is it Donald Trump’s dictionary?

 

[Sailor]

I

recently read it, it does not describe communism.

They did not call for an end to private ownership or government takeover of any segment of the economy. They did not suggest that other parties should not exist.

You are simply uneducated.

You did not read it carefully. What does this sound like to you?? "We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation."

 

[Jarod]

Venezuela proves you wrong, as but one example of many.


Not true either. Even in the Soviet Union micro businesses outside of the system existed. In rural areas, personal 'garden plots' of maybe an acre or two in size at most existed everywhere and were a major source of the nation's food supply.

Soviet private garden plot

www.histclo.com

Private Garden Plots | Seventeen Moments in Soviet History

Primary sources for the history of the Soviet Union, 1917–1991 — texts, images, films, and music drawn from Soviet history.

soviethistory.msu.edu

Socialism needs Capitalism. Capitalism does not need Socialism.

In Socialism, without Capitalism the economy stagnates and wealth generation all but ceases. That brings ruin to the economy and privation to society. Capitalism, for all its faults, generates new wealth and grows the economy and society, even if not everyone benefits from that.

Without capitalism, socialism fails, I agree without socialism capitalism results in a permanent under class of slaves. They both fail without each other, that is why there is no nation that has one without the other.

 

[AProudLefty]

You did not read it carefully. What does this sound like to you?? "We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation."

Don't the federal and state "collectively" own the interstate?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Without capitalism, socialism fails, I agree without socialism capitalism results in a permanent under class of slaves.

Slaves? No. Just poor. Capitalism doesn't force anyone to work. That's your choice. In Socialism, you may be forced to work. In Communism, you will be forced to work.

They both fail without each other, that is why there is no nation that has one without the other.

Socialism and Communism fail because they cannot generate the sort of productivity and wealth to sustain an economy. Instead, they consume wealth until there's none left.

 

[Jarod]

Venezuela proves you wrong, as but one example of many.


Not true either. Even in the Soviet Union micro businesses outside of the system existed. In rural areas, personal 'garden plots' of maybe an acre or two in size at most existed everywhere and were a major source of the nation's food supply.

Soviet private garden plot

www.histclo.com

Private Garden Plots | Seventeen Moments in Soviet History

Primary sources for the history of the Soviet Union, 1917–1991 — texts, images, films, and music drawn from Soviet history.

soviethistory.msu.edu

Socialism needs Capitalism. Capitalism does not need Socialism.

In Socialism, without Capitalism the economy stagnates and wealth generation all but ceases. That brings ruin to the economy and privation to society. Capitalism, for all its faults, generates new wealth and grows the economy and society, even if not everyone benefits from that.

Yes, the Soviet Union was not purely a communist country. They, on a microscopic level, allowed very small capitalist exceptions. Their government was communist, our government is not capitalist or socialist, and hopefully never will be.

 

[Sailor]

Don't the federal and state "collectively" own the interstate?

0/10.

 

[Jarod]

You did not read it carefully. What does this sound like to you?? "We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation."

Sounds like socialism, they are not saying they want to own the entire economy, they are saying they want the government to take over some elements of the economy. Note those elements of the economy are already highly regulated by the government, and in no way or pure capitalist system systems.

 

[Jarod]

0/10.

Yes, socialism. Not communist.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Yes, the Soviet Union was not purely a communist country. They, on a microscopic level, allowed very small capitalist exceptions.

And it was those, in the long run, that ended up being the economic drivers of the economy. That is, the black markets and microbusinesses running on Capitalism were keeping the economy alive.

 

[Jarod]

Slaves? No. Just poor. Capitalism doesn't force anyone to work. That's your choice. In Socialism, you may be forced to work. In Communism, you will be forced to work.

Socialism and Communism fail because they cannot generate the sort of productivity and wealth to sustain an economy. Instead, they consume wealth until there's none left.

When you have to work to eat, you are a slave.

Where do you get the idea that a socialist would make you work? It’s quite the opposite.

 

[AProudLefty]

0/10.

Toll roads is Capitalism.