The endless nonstop raging on about Trump.

[Subduction Zone]

May I know the difference between Communism and Socialism, then?
Or do Americans believe is the exact same thing?

An Italian student can tell the difference.

Can they? Perhaps they are using the wrong definitions. But let's use the same non-American source:

"Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society. Communism is thus a form of socialism—a higher and more advanced form, according to its advocates. Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.

Like most writers of the 19th century, Marx tended to use the terms communism and socialism interchangeably. In his Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875), however, Marx identified two phases of communism that would follow the predicted overthrow of capitalism: the first would be a transitional system in which the working class would control the government and economy yet still find it necessary to pay people according to how long, hard, or well they worked, and the second would be fully realized communism—a society without class divisions or government, in which the production and distribution of goods would be based upon the principle “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Marx’s followers, especially the Russian revolutionary Vladimir Ilich Lenin, took up this distinction.

Communism | Definition, History, Varieties, & Facts | Britannica

Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.

www.britannica.com

In other words, they are pretty much the same. We really have not had a true fully communist state ala Marx yet. They have all been the precursor, the socialist state where people still needed to be paid in money. A pure communistic state would have to be cashless it seems.

 

[John53]

So. We all know the opinions, raging, and statements on the topic about Trump by now.

One main question comes to mind for the chronic ragers that just cannot stop.

What are you actually going to do about it and is it going to work?

A reminder. Trump is not president anymore and I doubt he will be again. So why all the paranoia and alarm-ism over it?

I'm not worried over it. Hell, I'm not even worried about Biden.

You people are going to give yourselves ulcers!

Got some examples of this raging? About all I see are jokes about him

 

[Estro Felino]

In other words, they are pretty much the same. We really have not had a true fully communist state ala Marx yet. They have all been the precursor, the socialist state where people still needed to be paid in money. A pure communistic state would have to be cashless it seems.

They are not the same thing.
Socialism aims at putting social programs into action. Hence the name. Because the goal is the transformation of the society, so the inequalities between citizens are reduced. But private property and free economic enterprise are still respected: they are just limited in some cases, whenever the common welfare, the public interest prevail.
In Socialism the common good prevails over the individualistic, private interests.

Communism practically tends to abolish private property. Meaning that there is no free economic enterprise, but the Communist State decides what kind of industries must be built, what kind of goods are to be produced. It's the management of the economy in common, hence the name.
There are Communist countries: China and North Korea.

 

[Estro Felino]

Can they? Perhaps they are using the wrong definitions. But let's use the same non-American source:

"Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society. Communism is thus a form of socialism—a higher and more advanced form, according to its advocates. Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.

Like most writers of the 19th century, Marx tended to use the terms communism and socialism interchangeably. In his Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875), however, Marx identified two phases of communism that would follow the predicted overthrow of capitalism: the first would be a transitional system in which the working class would control the government and economy yet still find it necessary to pay people according to how long, hard, or well they worked, and the second would be fully realized communism—a society without class divisions or government, in which the production and distribution of goods would be based upon the principle “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Marx’s followers, especially the Russian revolutionary Vladimir Ilich Lenin, took up this distinction.

Communism | Definition, History, Varieties, & Facts | Britannica

Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.

www.britannica.com

In other words, they are pretty much the same. We really have not had a true fully communist state ala Marx yet. They have all been the precursor, the socialist state where people still needed to be paid in money. A pure communistic state would have to be cashless it seems.

From what I have heard from Americans, in American schools there is an incredible antagonism towards all that's European.

So I am driven to believe that Americans don't study European story and philosophy.
No Kant, no Hegel, no Marx, no Nietzsche.

 

[Subduction Zone]

They are not the same thing.
Socialism aims at putting social programs into action. Hence the name. Because the goal is the transformation of the society, so the inequalities between citizens are reduced. But private property and free economic enterprise are still respected: they are just limited in some cases, whenever the common welfare, the public interest prevail.
In Socialism the common good prevails over the individualistic, private interests.

Communism practically tends to abolish private property. Meaning that there is no free economic enterprise, but the Communist State decides what kind of industries must be built, what kind of goods are to be produced. It's the management of the economy in common, hence the name.
There are Communist countries: China and North Korea.

Even Marx disagrees with you. You appear to have totally ignored the source that I quoted and linked.

 

[Subduction Zone]

From what I have heard from Americans, in American schools there is an incredible antagonism towards all that's European.

So I am driven to believe that Americans don't study European story and philosophy.
No Kant, no Hegel, no Marx, no Nietzsche.

Well, you have not been doing very well in any of your arguments. You should really try to support your claims when you make posts like that. If I said that Italian schools only taught kids how to make pizzas and spaghetti don't you think that would have been a bit foolish o f me? Just own up to your error and it will go away.

 

[Estro Felino]

Even Marx disagrees with you. You appear to have totally ignored the source that I quoted and linked.

Marx called his political manifesto Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei. He didn't call it Manifest der Sozialistischen Partei.
And in fact, in Italy the Partito Socialista Italiano was founded to break up from Marxism.
Socialista. Not Comunista.

We Europeans invented these two terms...so we know what they mean.

It's like an European like me imposed the definition of Republican Party and Democratic Party on you.

 

[Estro Felino]

Well, you have not been doing very well in any of your arguments. You should really try to support your claims when you make posts like that. If I said that Italian schools only taught kids how to make pizzas and spaghetti don't you think that would have been a bit foolish o f me? Just own up to your error and it will go away.

In Italian schools people have to learn tons of history from Prehistory to the 20th century.
Lots of geography. Lots of biology.
Lots of Darwin. That's why things like Intelligent Design or Creationism cannot be taken seriously by anyone.

Now it's your turn. You have been a student. Tell me what you guys are taught.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Can they? Perhaps they are using the wrong definitions. But let's use the same non-American source:

"Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society. Communism is thus a form of socialism—a higher and more advanced form, according to its advocates. Exactly how communism differs from socialism has long been a matter of debate, but the distinction rests largely on the communists’ adherence to the revolutionary socialism of Karl Marx.

Like most writers of the 19th century, Marx tended to use the terms communism and socialism interchangeably. In his Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875), however, Marx identified two phases of communism that would follow the predicted overthrow of capitalism: the first would be a transitional system in which the working class would control the government and economy yet still find it necessary to pay people according to how long, hard, or well they worked, and the second would be fully realized communism—a society without class divisions or government, in which the production and distribution of goods would be based upon the principle “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Marx’s followers, especially the Russian revolutionary Vladimir Ilich Lenin, took up this distinction.

Communism | Definition, History, Varieties, & Facts | Britannica

Communism, political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.

www.britannica.com

In other words, they are pretty much the same. We really have not had a true fully communist state ala Marx yet. They have all been the precursor, the socialist state where people still needed to be paid in money. A pure communistic state would have to be cashless it seems.

So what do you call it when you own it, it's your property, but the government pretty much controls it to the extent that they essentially own it but didn't pay for it?

Good example is the takeover of the auto industry where government controls and tells industry what it can and cannot produce on its assembly lines, and also mandates auto dealers selling cars to have so many preferred state sanctioned cars on their lot that they must purchase to sell to customers.

Sounds like socialism to me , but with a twist designed to escape the socialist label so they can claim its not really socialism when it actually is.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So what do you call it when you own it, it's your property, but the government pretty much controls it to the extent that they essentially own it but didn't pay for it?

Good example is the takeover of the auto industry where government controls and tells industry what it can and cannot produce on its assembly lines, and also mandates auto dealers selling cars to have so many preferred state sanctioned cars on their lot that they must purchase to sell to customers.

Sounds like socialism to me , but with a twist designed to escape the socialist label so they can claim its not really socialism when it actually is.

Not even close.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Marx called his political manifesto Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei. He didn't call it Manifest der Sozialistischen Partei.
And in fact, in Italy the Partito Socialista Italiano was founded to break up from Marxism.
Socialista. Not Comunista.

We Europeans invented these two terms...so we know what they mean.

It's like an European like me imposed the definition of Republican Party and Democratic Party on you.

You don't understand what they mean. And it was not Europeans as a whole. It was a European, specifically Karl Marx, and he disagrees with you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In Italian schools people have to learn tons of history from Prehistory to the 20th century.
Lots of geography. Lots of biology.
Lots of Darwin. That's why things like Intelligent Design or Creationism cannot be taken seriously by anyone.

Now it's your turn. You have been a student. Tell me what you guys are taught.

In my case it was similar. Probably less history, and far more of it was US history of course.

 

[Stevicus]

May I know the difference between Communism and Socialism, then?
Or do Americans believe is the exact same thing?

An Italian student can tell the difference.

It seems that perceptions of communism and socialism have changed since I first learned about these concepts. America once had a Socialist Party which was considered distinct and separate from the Communist Party. In practice, socialists were more inclined towards moderation and working within the system, favoring incremental and evolutionary change. In contrast, communists were considered to be more radical, and pushed for revolution. Communists tended to be associated with the USSR and were considered to be political allies and connected to Moscow, whereas socialists did not.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm all for it - but you (collective you) are not. At least have the decency to no longer call it English.
(Btw.: would that then be Ameristanish or Ameristaneese or Americanean?)

Decency? Hah!
I don't do that.

"English" is just a label that describes a living breathing changing thing.
Other labels are even further divorced from their original meaning,
eg, to "film" a movie without using any film.

 

[Revoltingest]

In other words, they are pretty much the same.

From your quote, we see the agreed upon criterion
for communism being lack of private property.
Socialism allows for it. This I find to be a highly
significant difference. The ability to own a home,
some land, & a forklift is wonderful.

 

[Estro Felino]

In my case it was similar. Probably less history, and far more of it was US history of course.

That was my point. Americans don't study European stuff.

 

[Revoltingest]

That was my point. Americans don't study European stuff.

Oh, we do.
But we just don't want to (because
you're usually irrelevant when you
aren't warring with each other).

 

[Estro Felino]

Oh, we do.
But we just don't want to (because
you're usually irrelevant when you
aren't warring with each other).

Darwin is European...his name must be banned in America.
That's why creationism spreads like the plague.

 

[Revoltingest]

Darwin is European...his name must be banned in America.
That's why creationism spreads like the plague.

Darwin was a Brit.
Not really a European....or if he was,
he was a higher quality version.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That was my point. Americans don't study European stuff.

Socialism is not "European stuff". And remember, my source was not American, it was British.