Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!cbosgd!ihnp4!mit-eddie!lkk From: lkk@mit-eddie.UUCP (Larry Kolodney) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: reply to Henry Spencer {socialism and such} Message-ID: <2769@mit-eddie.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Sep-84 20:49:51 EDT Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.2769 Posted: Mon Sep 24 20:49:51 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 07:36:14 EDT Distribution: net.politics Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA Lines: 62 Henry Spencer is long on wind but short on facts vis: --- "Last I heard, socialism was a economic system and the Social Democrats were a political party. Again, one must distinguish between the map (what things are called) and the territory. I am vaguely aware that there may be a specific economic approach known as "social democracy", but I very much doubt that most Social Democrats even know what it is." --- Socialism is a political grouping, which covers a wide range of particular political programs, including Social Democracy. In general, any political theory which dictates that "the means of production" should be controlled by "the people" should be considered "socialist". Social Democracy, in its current incarnation, is the most mild brand of socialism, currently espoused by the German Social Democratic party, (but not the Swedish one), and the American Democratic party. It espouses for the most part, regulation as the means of control, rather than ownership, and this is often taken as a necessary evil. ----- "Note that true socialism *is* a totally planned economy, as found (to a first approximation) in the USSR and China. The differences beween socialism and communism (note the small "c"; again I am talking economic systems, not names or political parties) are a bit more subtle, but both are centrally-controlled economies." ---- True Socialism *is* a totally planned economy, eh? Says who, you? The vast majority of people calling themselves socialist (at least in the West), do not want a totally planned economy on the Soviet model. Have you every heard of Anarcho-socialists? They reject the idea of any central control, yet still call themselves socialist. Why? Because they beleive in control of the means of production by those the people (in the forms of self-contained co-operatives). Communism, with a small c, is absolutely NOT a centrally planned economy. Did you say the differences were subtle because you didn't know what they were perhaps? Communism, in the general sense, is a philosophy which advoctates a communal living situation (a lot closer to anarcho-socialism than central planning. In Marxist philosophy, communism is a technical term. It refers to the state of affairs that Marx predicted would occur AFTER the fall of the state (i.e. a form of anarchy). Marx didn't think that society could go directly from capitalism to communism, so he said that there would be an intermediate step, socialism, where the state (the supposed instrument of the workers) controlled the economy and transformed it into a communist model; afterwards it would wither away. The Soviets do not claim to be a communist country, they refer to themelves a a socialist country, in "advanced socialism". We call them Communist because they are run by the Communist party, which espouses the doctrines of Marx, which calls for the evetual creation of a communist society. Got it?! -- larry kolodney (The Devil's Advocate) UUCP: ...{ihnp4, decvax!genrad}!mit-eddie!lkk ARPA: lkk@mit-mc