Socialism is NOT Communism

The American people and opponents of Bernie Sanders have got it all wrong – Socialism is neither bad nor is it Communism.  The two do share similar ideals, but there is still a distinct difference that I hope all Americans come to understand.

Neither Socialism or Communism should be viewed as “bad” when they are talked about in the correct sense.

Amongst all the different parties and ideals of the political spectrum, any two can be compared and have similarities.  The Republicans can be similar to the Democrats, and so forth.  But people often confuse radical Communism with Socialism, which are not the same thing at all.

Socialism and Communism both are far left on the political spectrum, but neither means what the general public believe it means.  Here is what they both are:

Communism:

People like to confuse true Communism with a dictatorship.  Yes, many of the countries that are considered “Communist” countries today are ruled by one or a few rulers, but that is because true Communism was never reached in those countries.

True Communism is every person of a society having equal power.  No upper class, middle class, or lower class.  No social classes.  That means that the people are the government, and there is no ruler or anyone seated at a higher power.  THAT is true Communism.

Unfortunately in the Communist countries of today such as China, Laos, and North Korea, that point was never reached.

The first step in creating a truly Communist government is putting a few people in charge of the government, and then over time having the few people in charge disband their power and eventually have a government ran completely by the people.

Instead, what happened is the few people who gained power in these “Communist” countries refused to give it up.  And instead of having an equal people-ruling government, a few people kept their power and have control over an entire country.

This is NOT Socialism.

Socialism:

Socialism is very much a leftist ideal on the political spectrum, but it is not as far left as Communism is.

In Socialism, there is still a government like there is in the United States today.  There are still social classes and there are still wealthy people.  There are also great programs as well.

Welfare and social security both are formed from Socialist ideas and education reform is also important to a Socialist society.

The point of Socialism is to help those in the lower class.  Socialism is designed to strengthen the lower and middle classes in order to benefit the entire country.  It is NOT to eliminate the lower class and reward people who do not work for what they have.  It is to bring those people in the lower class up out of poverty and allow them to contribute to the growth of the country.

Someone who confused Socialism and Communism is conservative news anchor Tomi Lahren.

Tomi stated in her Socialist rant against Bernie Sanders that Socialism is “an even playing field for the lazy to compete with the determined” and that “everyone shares the work and the reward.”

These two ideas are Communist ideas that are often confused with Socialism.  Socialism simply lifts the “lazy” so that they, too, can find a way to compete and make a decent living.  But it does not take away from the fact that they are on the bottom of the social classes.  It also does not put them on the same playing field as the “determined.”

In Socialism, everyone does not share the work and the reward.  Does the whole society receive similar benefits?  Yes, the benefits are government and equal-opportunity based.  But the work is not shared, as there are still social distinctions such as lower class and upper class.  Thus, the reward is also not shared.  Socialism simply lifts the lower class out of poverty, but continues the democratic idea of classes.

Neither Socialism or Communism is what America thinks it is.

 

 

 

 

 

6 Comments

  1. Well, Tika that is a nice try, but I must ask what thinkers you are reading to come up with these nice distinctions. If you mean by communism a politcal idea developed in the 1800;s, it is surely not about holding hands and sharing things, and the communist “upopia” simply will never come, because nature and the nature of man are just not that way. It is very important to read the thinkers these ideas depend upon, in order to try to account for why the soviet union killed one million of its own people per year on average, roughly, over 70 years, China only killed 40 million, and Cambodia only 3 million, Hitler also could only kill about one million per year, but we know this is bad, and everyone agrees

    Karl Marx taught the modern West, out of German “philosophy” or political thinking, that it would be a good idea to have a violent revolution in which it is just fine to spread “Torrents of blood” bringing “death to the bourgeoise,”who are, you know, the parents of little girls dressed for Sunday schooll. You like it yet? He thought it would be a good idea to bring even more bloodshed than “1794,” the bloody French Revolution. He writes these things in his own name, and anyone can read them. .
    Had enough yet? I could go one, but no one cares to listen. Anastasia screamed in vain when Lenin imported these utterly corrupt western ideas into poor Russia, which did not even have an “industrial proletariat” That is why Stalin, once they really got busy, could bring their averages up toward one million per year, and teach Hitler all about concentration camps, used to re-make humans, since there really is no human nature apart from what is made by man. What a brilliant theory- we make ourselves! And who made us the being that makes himself? No one cares if it is self-contradictory, because again, this is not philosophy, but rather, a bad dream, a horror moovie made real. Again, I could go on, but you are already sick of me!

    True “communism,”as you wish to call it, is not a political theory at all, but is found in the Acts of the Apostles, as the way the Christians tried top to live together, before they even had monasteries, because they had a mission and absolutly could not have cared less about economics or the things of the body. By contrast, Marx thinks there is no reality beyond economics, and reduces all theory about man to class conflict, having inverted Hegel and transferred this to political history, looking for some rationality, which in this sense does not exist. My dear Tika, all the torrents of blood and all the death to the bourgeoise will not bring about your lets hold hands and share everything, though these may indeed be nice thoughts.

    For Socialism, we suggest you watch these theories, such as that of Owen, emerge from the French Revolution, spending time with a real teacher, Alexis de Tocqueville and his book on the French Revolution. Even Jefferson and Tom Paine wer horrified, as we all should be. We suggest that securing the free market and preventing tyranny may be the best we can do, especially if we can prevent the rich and powerful from rigging the game in their favor, which is admittedly difficult. We like Bernie Sanders because he is the first to mention many things like prescription drug abuse, where powerful hidden interests indeed do not care if they destroy the common good- which is one way of defining justice in Aristotle, an example of a sane political thinker.

    For history, you might read Paul Johnson’s Modern Times. and cry, cry with us for the killing fields of Cambodia and how they made parents kill their own children to try to eliminate the desire to acquire from the nature of human beings- which cannot be done this way anyway.

    We accept your penance, if you will accept our forgivess, and pardon us for praying for mankind under the “opiate of the masses that teaches things like do oneto others as one would have them do to you, greater love has no man than to lay down their life for their frienda, and Jefferson: a crime is when one violates the rights of another, and the purpose of government is to secure these rights. According to Marx, we believe these things not because they are true, but because we are partisans of one class in perpetual war with another class- never mind my utter poverty, or Socrates utter poverty, or the Apostles utter poverty, we are just deluded by the rich, who own the “factors of production. Tika, go do some reading ant thinking before you respond, but do respond.

    Peace and Love and Blessings to you
    Mark A. McDonald, Jesus Hippie

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Dear Tika: I apologize for the many errors, and have an edited version which I printed as a blog on my own site. You may of course edit this or erase it and invite me to copy paste my blog version. This stuff is very serious, and there was much sorrow in the past century due to communism. I was in a rush, and still have not been able to open a single book to write this. -MM

    Liked by 1 person

    1. No worries bud! You can post an updated version on my page. I’m sorry I didn’t get around to replying to you, it’s been a busy day but feel free to comment! Thanks!

      Like

  3. Thanks. Here it is!
    On Communism and Socialism

    Well, ____, that is a nice try, but I must ask what thinkers you are reading to come up with these nice distinctions. If you mean by communism a political idea developed in the 1800’s, it is surely not about holding hands and sharing things. The communist “utopia” simply will never come, because nature and the nature of man are just not that way. It is very important to read the thinkers these ideas depend upon, in order to try to account for why the Soviet Union killed one million of its own people per year on average, roughly, over 70 years, that is , seventy million people, when no civil war was occurring. This is not even to consider the horrors of the Gulag, imprisoning people who never violated the rights of their fellow citizens at all. China only killed 40 million, and Cambodia only 3 million. These are estimates that vary, but blood like this is hard to count. Hitler also could only kill about one million Jews per year, but we know this is bad, and everyone agrees. That too is aside from those killed in war, and does not count the three million poles, just as we have left out the millions of Ukrainians starved to death by Stalin.

    Out of German “philosophy” or political thinking, Karl Marx taught the modern West that it would be a good idea to have a violent revolution in which it is just fine to spread “Torrents of blood” bringing “death to the bourgeois,” who are, you know, the parents of little girls dressed for Sunday school. You like it yet? He thought it would be a good idea to bring even more bloodshed than “1794,” the bloody French Revolution. He writes these things in his own name, and anyone in a free nation can read them.

    Had enough yet? I could go on, but no one cares to listen. “Anastasia screamed in vain” is the line of that Stones tune no one cares to try to understand. Lenin imported these utterly corrupt western ideas into poor Russia, which did not even have an “industrial proletariat.” That is why Stalin, once they really got busy, could bring their averages up toward one million per year, and teach Hitler all about concentration camps, used to attempt to re-make humans, since there is, according to Marx, really no human nature apart from what is made by man. What a brilliant theory- we make ourselves! And who made us the being that makes himself? No one cares if the theory is fundamentally self-contradictory, because again, this is not philosophy, but rather, a bad dream, a horror movie made real. Again, I could go on, but you are already sick of me!

    True “communism,” as you wish to call it, is not a political theory at all, though it is found in the Acts of the Apostles, as the way the Christians tried to live together, before they even had monasteries. Because they had a mission and could not have cared less about economics or the things of the body, these things were not impractical on a small level. In fact, the functions with one money maker, while all receive dinner according to need. By contrast, Marx thinks there is no reality beyond economics, and reduces all theory about man to class conflict. Marx, famously, inverted Hegel and transferred this theory (Dialectical materialism) about the history of thought to try to understand political and economic history. He was looking for some rationality to the changes of history, a rationality which, in this sense does not exist. My dear ___, all the “torrents of blood” and all the “death to the bourgeoisie” will not bring about your “lets hold hands and share everything” idea of a utopia, though these may indeed be nice thoughts.

    The Marxist Utopia is very scantily described, but consists of no government, no division of labor, and the contemplation of the human essence in the products of our labor, like a sculptor or artist might see something about himself in his artwork. People are supposed to go about randomly from one job to another, without the expertise that develops from a trade. One day a surgeon, the next a garbage man, etc. The idea is delusional, and there is a cause for this, though we cannot address it in a blog.

    For Socialism, we suggest you watch these theories emerge from the French Revolution, spending time with a real teacher, Alexis de Tocqueville and his book On the French Revolution. He refers to four thinkers, including a Mr. Owen, who I would go read if I wanted to know more about socialism. Our idea of socialism seems to come from a misunderstanding of our own system, in which we confuse the “free market” with “capitalism, accepting the derogatory terms given us by Marx, terms foreign to Jefferson and Franklin. Franklin invented the fire department, the whole idea of the fire department, because some things, like education, are better cared for in common and funded by taxes. Social security is another example. But these have little to do with socialism, and nothing to do with communism. Even Jefferson and Tom Paine were horrified, as we all should be, by the bloody mess of the French Revolution. We suggest that securing the free market and preventing tyranny may be the best we can do, especially if we can prevent the rich and powerful from rigging the game in their favor, which is admittedly difficult. We like Bernie Sanders because he is the first to mention many things like prescription drug abuse, where powerful hidden interests indeed do not care if they destroy the common good. The common good is one way of defining justice in Aristotle’s politics. Aristotle is an example of a sane political thinker.

    For history, you might read Paul Johnson’s Modern Times, and cry, cry with us for the killing fields of Cambodia, how they made parents kill their own children to try to eliminate the desire to acquire from the nature of human beings- which cannot be done this way anyway. There is a fellow, too, in Shakespeare’s play the Tempest, Gonzallo, who has a dream of a Utopian condition in the new world of Prospero’s island, and this may be like the socialist utopia. It is joked that the “latter end” of his dream “forgets its beginning, because he began “If I were King…” on the island. In fact communism forgets that it must be brought about by the most cruel tyranny, and if they are wrong about nature and the nature of man, this tyranny will not end until it is ended by real “revolutionaries” who overthrow tyranny and achieve liberty.

    We accept your penance, if you will accept our forgiveness, and pardon us for praying for mankind under what Marx calls the “opiate of the masses,” our “religion,” which teaches things like do onto others as one would have them do to you,” love your neighbor as yourself, and “greater love has no man than to lay down their life for their friend, and Jefferson: a crime is when one violates the rights of another, and the purpose of government is to secure these rights. We have repented other sins, and hope to gain a different forgiveness. According to Marx, we believe these things not because they are true, or a good way to live, or because we think it right to leave nature and man alone as much as possible (Do you like to not be bothered by government?). But according to Marx, we believe these things because we are partisans of one class in perpetual war with another class, so all thoughts, yours and Bernie Sander’s included, are nothing more than the ulterior motives of class struggle in a perpetual war of one class with another class. He seriously teaches that all thought is caused by economic motives. Never mind my utter poverty, or Socrates’ utter poverty, or the Apostles utter poverty, we who disagree with Communist tyranny and the murder of millions per year are just deluded by the rich, who own the “factors of production.” ____, go do some reading and thinking before you respond, but please do respond.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Well yes friend, the horrors of the original “communist” governments was terrible. But that was never what communism was supposed to be. Unfortunately, you’re right and that utopia will never come to be. You are clearly more intelligent and read-up on these ideologies completely, and I applaud you for that and thank you for pointing out my faults, as I am just a freshman poly-sci student-athlete in college. These governments killed many people and that is true, but that is because of the selfishness of human nature and how these tyrant governments refused to give up their power, but instead used fear to keep their power. A misconception is that Hitler was a communist or socialist, but he was a fascist dictator on the other side of the political spectrum. Communism and socialism are far left and fascism is far right. Not trying to justify Hitler, but he is radical right, not radical left. This philosophy of everyone sharing power very much so is contradictory from what has happened with the violence and bloodshed in these poor nations, so you are absolutely right. I do very much believe that this Marxist Utopia is an unthinkable thing that will never happen. Thank you for the reference text of Alexis de Tocqueville, I will be sure to find that and learn a little more about socialism. I am in no way endorsing Bernie Sanders, but just trying to deteriorate the people who believe he is communist and that they ideals are supposed to be bad. Because that is not true, although history tells us communism is bad. It has gotten a bad reputation, and rightfully so since it has destroyed the livelyhood of these countries. I appreciate your response my friend! God bless.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yeah for politicsal science majors! Right, old Adolf was right. These two are extreme opposites in a list of ways, while sharing a list of things in common. Hitler’s “socialism” is like a euphemism for tyranny, complete government control (totalitarian), and complete control of the government by him. These, communism and Nazism, are opposites and fought each other in the streets. Both come from German philosophy, Both reduce all human things or are “reductionist,” one to economic class, the other to biology or race. Both think to purge humanity to bring an envisioned condition, one by killing a race, the other by killing a class- “clossocide”instead of genocide. Both have a replacement for an aristocratic class, the brownshirts and the…what does Marx call the guys who see the march of “history,” I forget. Both replace all ethics, one with racial purity, the other with dedication to the economic class. Both kill millions, again based on race or class. But you see the difference between “genocide” and mere inter-tribal slaughter, as in Rowanda. Both are ideological tyrannies, based on an idea, and this is where the word “ideology” comes from. There are some other points in the lists of same and different, but the question is how to account for these coming out of German thought when they did. Marx needed a Lenin, and perhaps Hitler needed a Nietzsche. One would think, since they both hated one another worse than they hated Liberty and us, they would look in the mirrors!
        We like Bernie, and would vote for him before the trumpet, who seems like a garden variety tyrant. I wish John McCain would run, though, he is one of my heroes, and Barack is maybe the other! Hillary will be ok, though, and if they are getting along, she may have Wild Bill and his eight years experience trolling about the White House, prob’ly burnin’ one on the balcony! But what on earth is this third form, this ISIS, and where does it come from? This is very scary strange, but it is the third of the three frogs, and we’re in for a tussle. Have fun studying, I wish I was there! Do you know Leo Strauss and Plato’s Republic? Soon enough! Pray for the Liberty of Russia and Syria!

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s