Politics explanation

[Arkhangelsk]

I kept the title short and to he point, so you won't complain, but the question comes now: I've become more and more interested in politics, and there are three branches of politics and philosophy I've been trying to ask about, but everyone I know are either clueless or biased. The three branches are communism, socialism and capitalism. What I'm asking for is a short summary on the basic principle. Try to be as unbiased as possible and don't flame. I don't want any explanations that degrades or upgrades one o more forms of these philosophies. I'm not here for debate, I'm here to learn from the wise men (or women!) of the Escapist.

Oh, and one thing someone I know who is capitalist described it as was: Socialism is that the individual owes his money to the state, communism is that the money belongs to the state and should be handed out to the people equally, and capitalism is that you get your money and nobody takes it from you.

 

[Kiutu]

All I know is that they are economy systems, not governments and people need to stop freaking over them. I would attempt to explain them but I feel I do not know as much as I think about them to give a good enough answer.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism>Communism, <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism>Capitalism, and <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism>Socialism. That's as unbiased as you'll get.

I think I just got crushed by a wall of text. It was a good example, just too many words I don't understand (and too many words in general).

 

[Simonccx]

communism can be argued to be an extreme form of socialism, basically capitalism is general focussed on the individuals ability to live "freely" and be able to accumulate wealth with minimal influence from the government it thrives on competition and the free market,

socialism is more about the state as a whole, the individual generally comes second to the mass, the class boundaries are narrower, even non existent in communism. The state has greater control over business and wealth redistributing it to the needy, communism takes it further in hat the government has complete ownership over business and social mobility. It operates on a principle that those with the ability provide for those with the need. Its often more efficent because people do as they are told and are placed in a situation where they should excel, however many are sceptical of the lack of freedoms.

Capitalism has often been seen to help the elite and tread on the masses, whereas socialism can help the needy but off the backs of those who are talented or hard working.

Obviously all these systems are open to corruption, extreme capitalism can be seen as facism where the class divides become so severe that there are seperate laws based on your class etc.

Bear in mind capitalism and comunism are more economic political views whereas socialism tends to be more idealogical.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

Communism is where a bunch of people get together and decide to do the "from each as he can, to each as he needs" thing. Socialism is like Communism, but with a small group of people who throw people who don't do the "from each as he can, to each as he needs" thing in jail.

Capitalism thinks that that those both suck, and says that the best idea is to trade for things.

Doesn't that seem a bit biased? You give the first ones a bit of a negative approach.

 

[I_LIKE_CAKE]

Well, from what I understand, the three you listed are economic philosophies rather than political systems.
Starting with communism, it is an idea put forward by Karl Marx as a counterpoint to what he saw as the excesses of capitalist society. Marx envisioned a future in which the downtrodden working class, the proletariat, would rise up to overthrow the system in which they contribute all the labor and reap none of the reward. In its place, the workers would institute a system of "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". In other words, there would be no need for money, all would contribute to the good of the community (hence communism). Unfortunately, pure Marxist communism has never been implemented on a large scale. The public perception of communism is shaped by the Soviet Union. The U.S.S.R had what is known as Stalinist Communism, which takes some of Marx's ideas, and combines them with a totalitarian government.

Capitalism was first introduced by Adam Smith, in what he called "laissez faire" economics. Adam Smith put forth what he called the invisible hand of the market place, and it is this hand that balances and corrects any flaws In this theory, each person benefits according to his or her abilities. If an employer is cruel, or underpays his workers, then he will not be able to retain a workforce and will go out of business. If a company sells a superior product, then it will be more successful, forcing competitors to innovate and improve or go out of business. The end result of the invisible hand is an economy that rewards innovation and fair practices, and benefiting everyone. Unfortunately, unregulated capitalism in the real world has certain flaws, a boom bust cycle, monopolies etc.

Socialism attempts to hit a balance between capitalism and communism, by having a safety net for those who in need, and certain guaranteed services for all, while maintaining a functioning economy that attempts to minimize risk.

I could write a paper on this, so I will stop and finish my coffee
EDIT:

snip

More succinct and better worded then my answer

 

[Daveman]

*snip

... well that was fairly awesome (although the other guy you snipped did socialism a bit better). I would give you the much coveted cookie, but I think you might prefer cake...

seriously that was a nice concise explanation. Where'd you copy it from?

 

[I_LIKE_CAKE]

*snip

... well that was fairly awesome (although the other guy you snipped did socialism a bit better). I would give you the much coveted cookie, but I think you might prefer cake...

seriously that was a nice concise explanation. Where'd you copy it from?

Well, thank you. But honestly, I just wrote that off the top of my head, although I did google the spelling of laissez faire.

 

[Lord George]

Spoiler: Communism

Spoiler: Capitalism

Spoiler: Socialism

Well all I could find was American anti-socialist images, but its basically everything the government provides for you like the emergency services and national (free) healthcare

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I'd like to mention that contrary to popular belief, communism is actually a form of anarchy. The people become self-governing and self-sufficient from the need for someone to govern them and thus the government becomes unnecessary and vanishes.

 

[grimsprice]

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism>Communism, <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism>Capitalism, and <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism>Socialism. That's as unbiased as you'll get.

I think I just got crushed by a wall of text. It was a good example, just too many words I don't understand (and too many words in general).

Well that's the problem with learning.

Ouch. Yes, wallz of wordz isn't so bad. I had to write a massive 30 page essay on the socialist-capitalist economic spectrum in highschool. granted, the assignment was only a 4 page explanation of cash flow in a capitalist environment but i got interested to say the least...

 

[Quotation Marx]

socialism is more about the state as a whole, the individual generally comes second to the mass, the class boundaries are narrower, even non existent in communism. The state has greater control over business and wealth redistributing it to the needy, communism takes it further in hat the government has complete ownership over business and social mobility. It operates on a principle that those with the ability provide for those with the need. Its often more efficent because people do as they are told and are placed in a situation where they should excel...*snip*

Two things here, both of which aren't exactly from idealistic communism, but are tied to it as much as greed is to capitalism. First off there ends up quite a distinct class barrier between the people and the government. Those who pull the strings and distribute the goods end up better off than those with no control. Second, it may ideally be more efficient IF everyone gets put where they can excel. However, this is very difficult for someone else to decide, and in the ideal or theoretical sense capitalism could manage both better.

 

[walls of cetepedes]

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism>Communism, <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism>Capitalism, and <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism>Socialism. That's as unbiased as you'll get.

I think I just got crushed by a wall of text. It was a good example, just too many words I don't understand (and too many words in general).

Communism is a political way of thinking and idea of how society should work and be organized. Communism is a kind of socialism that says that there should not be social classes or states. Communism says that the people of any and every place in the world should all own the tools, factories, and farms that are used to produce goods and food. This social process is known as common ownership. In a communist society, there is no private property.

Use the 'simple english' language option on the sidebar.

 

[grimsprice]

<url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism>Communism, <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism>Capitalism, and <url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism>Socialism. That's as unbiased as you'll get.

I think I just got crushed by a wall of text. It was a good example, just too many words I don't understand (and too many words in general).

Well that's the problem with learning.

Ouch. Yes, wallz of wordz isn't so bad. I had to write a massive 30 page essay on the socialist-capitalist economic spectrum in highschool. granted, the assignment was only a 4 page explanation of cash flow in a capitalist environment but i got interested to say the least...

Wow. No offense, though I'm assuming you would keep up a very boring conversation.

No, I'm not some boring economic mathematician, but i do get on 'crusades' against ignorance. I've always been compelled to correct people and help them understand. lol, the constant correcting loses me most of my friends tho...

 

[Quotation Marx]

I'd like to mention that contrary to popular belief, communism is actually a form of anarchy. The people become self-governing and self-sufficient from the need for someone to govern them and thus the government becomes unnecessary and vanishes.

Heh... hehe... hehehehe...

"In fact, the abolition of private property is, doubtless, the shortest and most significant way to characterize the revolution in the whole social order which has been made necessary by the development of industry ? and for this reason it is rightly advanced by communists as their main demand." -Marxist.org

Who's going to make them give up their own belongings? Conscience? No. Human nature says No.

"Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution..." -Also from Marxist.org

That ain't anarchy.

If Marx was a leader of communism, then you're a bit wrong. And one for me:

"I'm not a marxist" -Karl Marx

 

[LaBambaMan]

There's no point in trying to understand any political system, because no matter which one you pick you're still going to entrust your country's well being to a bunch of corrupt whack-jobs who's only goal is to deepen their own pockets.

Big problem here, though, is that anarchy isn't a viable solution either. It's just a shame that politics are a lose-lose situation.

 

[bluepilot]

Communism: In theory, `all are equal` in practice, `some are more equal`

Socialism: In theory, `workers rights` in practice `workers rights become worker`s chains`

Capitalism: In theory `every man for himself` in practice `Government bailouts when you screw up.

I am feeling very disillusioned with polictics at the moment.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

I'd like to mention that contrary to popular belief, communism is actually a form of anarchy. The people become self-governing and self-sufficient from the need for someone to govern them and thus the government becomes unnecessary and vanishes.

Heh... hehe... hehehehe...

"In fact, the abolition of private property is, doubtless, the shortest and most significant way to characterize the revolution in the whole social order which has been made necessary by the development of industry ? and for this reason it is rightly advanced by communists as their main demand." -Marxist.org

Who's going to make them give up their own belongings? Conscience? No. Human nature says No.

"Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution..." -Also from Marxist.org

That ain't anarchy.

If Marx was a leader of communism, then you're a bit wrong. And one for me:

"I'm not a marxist" -Karl Marx

It's based on collective ownership, so everything belongs to everybody equally.

Yes, democratic. Direct democracy. The people will be self-governing and the people will decide the laws.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

I generally consider communism and capitalism to be two extremes on a scale where socialism is somewhat of a midground, though honestly that is probably an oversimplification.

In communism (in theory at least) everyone is completely equal, recieves equal pay regardless of their job, and is all a bigger part of the whole.

In an absolutely capitalist system (I don't think we have any example of an absolutely capitalist system) money rules all. If you want healthcare, you must pay for it, if you want your house that accidentially caught fire put out by a fire department, you'd better pay for it, etc...

Though America doesn't consider itself a socialist state, it has some socialist features, but other western nations tend to have more, so America is closer to a capitalist state, while Canada or Britain would be closer than America on the scale to a communist state, but they all are actually socialist. In a social state, you have a market that is at least partially free, but some services that are considered necessary will be provided by the government; fire departments, police departments, healthcare, food for those who can't afford it, etc... The more services that are provided by government mandate, the more socialist a state could be considered to be, until it reaches the point of communism where nearly all services are provided by government mandate.

 

[Quotation Marx]

I'd like to mention that contrary to popular belief, communism is actually a form of anarchy. The people become self-governing and self-sufficient from the need for someone to govern them and thus the government becomes unnecessary and vanishes.

Heh... hehe... hehehehe...

"In fact, the abolition of private property is, doubtless, the shortest and most significant way to characterize the revolution in the whole social order which has been made necessary by the development of industry ? and for this reason it is rightly advanced by communists as their main demand." -Marxist.org

Who's going to make them give up their own belongings? Conscience? No. Human nature says No.

"Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution..." -Also from Marxist.org

That ain't anarchy.

If Marx was a leader of communism, then you're a bit wrong. And one for me:

"I'm not a marxist" -Karl Marx

It's based on collective ownership, so everything belongs to everybody equally.

Yes, democratic. Direct democracy. The people will be self-governing and the people will decide the laws.

Anarchy means no laws. No government. It means chaos. That would be a form of collective organization and association, not free-for-all chaos. By that idea, quite a few things are one form of anarchy or another. And the problem with it is that say two people, of equal health, age, gender, and everything, were in a communist country. We're putting this in the ideal, so they'd receive exactly the same thing, right? Well, one of these two works much harder, produces more for the collective good, going about with his mind set on helping his fellow man. The other does little, barely working, with an aversion to duty. Is that fair? Or lazy?