I often see these words used interchangeably, though as I understand it there is a difference between the two ideologies, no?

  • CrocodilloBombardino@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    socialism: workers control the means of production (the factories, the farms, the freight trains, etc). there is no separate owner. this is usually considered a key step on the way to communism.

    communism: a society without any classes (no capitalists, no working class, no one in poverty, everyone is on the same level of society); without money (everything ppl need is provided for free and fairly, there are no capitalist markets); and without a state (government is not a separate group of people who command others, the people make decisions on things that affect them).

    Even those communists who believe the right strategy to reach a communist society requires them to take control of the state first believe that the ultimate goal is for the state to “wither away” as it becomes less necessary over time. other communists disagree that it is a possible to reach a communist society by taking control of the state, rather the people have to build their own non-state power that eventually defeats it.

    • a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 hours ago

      How would it even be possible to have a stateless society on the scale that communists envision? For example how could China become stateless (I know that might be their ultimate aim but still, it’s a useful example)? It doesn’t at all seem feasible to me

      • CrocodilloBombardino@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        20 hours ago

        Well, why does it have to be one single government covering all of China? “China” refers to a state, a centralized government made of a small number of people who command and control a huge territory and its peoples. It doesn’t make sense to define a future communist society by the criteria of a state. Instead, take all the land and people that are currently within the state of China. If we tried to set up a communist society there, how can we do that? People can have different answers (especially when it comes to details), and I’m certainly open to ideas.

        Disclaimer: the following is not “the answer”, it’s a set of ideas that I believe are compatible with a communist society and can be one example of how such a society could look.

        I’d imagine that power that the state usually has would need to be dispersed among directly democratic assemblies and unions. This would create a federation of communist societies that work together on bigger issues.

        • Geographical Organization : Since government is something everyone participates in and since everyone affected by a decision gets a say in it, we can have federated layers of assemblies of the people. So, at the most local level, a single neighborhood in a city or a single village or a single other municipal unit (e.g., “the people who live along this 2km stretch of river”) can have an assembly. Neighboring assemblies can talk to/cooperate with each other to solve issues that affect all of them. Local assemblies can regularly send delegates (who can be instantly recalled, don’t serve timed terms, have no power of their own, they just communicate their assembly’s position) to meetings and create citywide, regional, etc medium-level assemblies to handle bigger projects. That could include rail lines, ecological issues like forest management, anything that needs to be produced at a larger scale, etc. Then, for those few questions that really and truly affect a territory and people the size of China (e.g., coordinating defense vs a large national army; dealing with climate change; coordinating specialized, high-tech production of medicines, and so on), there can be “national” assemblies. Again, the power would need to be held at the lowest level, or else you risk forming a state when a few greedy people use their position to accumulate power.

        • Membership Organization: Parallel to the geographic assemblies I mentioned above, you can also have unions and associations of workers who are in the same workplace and industry. Everyone who works in a local cafe has a say in how that cafe is run. Then the Cafe Workers Union can make presentations/have an additional say (beyond what the members already have in the geographic assembly) in any local or regional decisions involving, say, food service and safety, disposal of food scraps and cooking oils, and whatever else is relevant. This would go for any union: an agricultural workers union, a research physicists’ union, a students’ union, and so on. Also, since people can split their time how they like, maybe some minimum amount of commitment to a job would be needed for union membership? Not sure.

        Where do these ideas come from? The Next Revolution by Blair Taylor and Debbie Bookchin (discussing the ideas of Murray Bookchin and others). Also check out council communism and, more broadly, Libertarian Socialism as a tendency. Communism is really interesting! There are many different ideas about how we can get there. Whatever you believe, even if you think we need to capture the state, we are at a point in history in which we need to work together to build the power of workers and ordinary people vs. capitalists and the state.

    • AskewLord@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      this is the only good comment in this entire thread so far.

      it’s illuminating how poorly most of the so called socialist/anarchist/communists on lemmy understand the thing they claim to believe in and espouse. just a lot of virtue signalling and grasping at straws by desperate folks I guess. like that dude who keeps posting how to learn about socialism but he refuses to read or watch videos or anything… lol