It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What are the Differences between Socialism, Communism and Anarchy...in your own words.

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Well we had a good discussion in the Define Socialism thread and was asked if we could expand it to other aspects of the political spectrum:


originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: intrepid

Now you should do a thread like this for proponents to describe the differences between Socialism / Communism / Anarchism.



So in the second of a Google free topic
I'm opening this up so others can describe what you believe the differences of these political entities are.




posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Anarchy is no government, people can do whatever they want, and other people can do what they want to them.

Communism is complete government control of everything in society.

Socialism is a society with big government and big business, where government strongly regulates business and highly taxes everyone to provide a lot of social services.


+10 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid


A little humor...a lot of truth. Enjoy Gulch.

SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour

COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk

FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk

NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you

BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then
throws the milk away

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy
grows.
You sell them and retire on the income

ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by
your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption
for five cows.
The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States , leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to
produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why
the cow has dropped dead.

A GREEK CORPORATION
You have two cows. You borrow lots of euros to build barns, milking sheds, hay stores, feed sheds,
dairies, cold stores, abattoir, cheese unit and packing sheds.
You still only have two cows.

A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three
cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce
twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called a Cowkimona and
market it worldwide.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows,
but you don't know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.

A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the ** out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.

A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive...


www.galtsgulchonline.com...





posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Anarchists wear safety pins.

Socialists wear Che Guevara shirts.

Communists wear what they're given.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Socialism= pepsi.

Communism= Coke.

Anarchy = Water.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Socialism = Government giving you someone else's water.

Communism = Government giving you the same water they took from you so they could give it to you.

Capitalism = Dig your own damned well.

Anarchy = Dying of thirst in front of an unfinished well.




edit on 14-7-2018 by DBCowboy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: neo96

Socialism = Government giving you someone else's water.

Communism = Government giving you the same water they took from you so they could give it to you.

Capitalism = Dig your own damned well.





Anarchy destroy it all wearing a guy fawkes mask.




posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96


I added an "anarchy" definition.




posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Well, to be a little serious... In my own words. It's a minefield.

Communism, socialism and anarchy are coverall terms that contain wide interpretation, but to keep it simple.

Communism – One-party dictatorship, with high-levels of social indoctrination and low tolerance for dissent and difference. Marxism is anti-capitalist, so high-levels of state control of industry, society and all that. The theory that government is unnecessary in Marxism (due to control by the classless proletariat) is an unachievable end if people think differently. Communism works if we are all robots. Interestingly, while the Chinese Communist Party is highly capitalist, it is trying to create a society of blind robots, but that’s more about control.

Socialism – Is where wealth is more equally distributed and there is solidarity within the working classes to fight for common ownership. There’s a lot of class struggle in socialism, which is not relevant in most modern societies, so it has all been watered down to common (state) ownership of some functions (typically health, utilities and transport), and an effort to redistribute wealth through taxation. Some think socialism is communism (Marxism), but it’s not. However, the “hard” left may consider socialism as a step towards communism. To note that socialist ideals have birthed hybrids, such a fascism.

Anarchy – This is where there are no controls or a working central government. In an anarchy laws may exist, but their enforcement is voluntary, indeed the very idea of a central authority is rejected. Basically, every man (or woman) for themselves. In an anarchy people are truly free, which may sound good and spiffing, but without societal controls it may be an illusionary freedom if there are no constrains. An anarchy would only work if people behaved themselves and did try to create a leader. We’re not naïve, so know that you’ll end up with rapists, brutality and people pronouncing themselves King. Good luck!

edit on 14/7/2018 by paraphi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

Anarchy is a free for all lawless society which in turn inevitably become's a strong eat the weak trap which spawn's a new aristocracy based on the tribal leaders that would inevitably arise and lead's eventually to what we have today.

Communism in the Soviet and Mao sense of the word is a totalitarian system of big government owning everything and the new aristocracy calling themselves THE PARTY.

Socialism in it's truest sense is the ultimate inevitable outcome of a empath'ic intelligent and wise electorate whom see that the greater good is also there own personal good but it has never been truly achieved, I take the term socialism in this context from a Christian socialist point of View not a Marxist atheist point of view though I do believe he made many good point's, however stealing from Christ was wrong.

IT was Christ who said go and sell all you own and give it to the poor them come and follow (be like) me, he ministered to the poor first and also said if you have TWO coat's and your brother/neighbor (whom is my brother) has none then go and give him the one you are not wearing.

IT was Christ whom pointed out the story of the rich fool whom built a storehouse then piled up treasure in it only to die so who then gain's his wealth.

That true wealth is only found in heaven and can only be built up through doing what is good in the sight of God AND not looking for a pat on the back for it so doing good for it's own sake not as a mercenary act so not capitalism.

edit on 14-7-2018 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Socialism is the way to communism.

Socialism is what happens when you can continue to own your own property ... until the collective good determines that you have too much of something. At that point, the government steps and takes what used to be your property in the interests of redistributing some of it to those who don't have enough to make it fair. As time goes on, this will almost always end up failing in some way, either people adjust by not having enough to have their property taken or government ends up not having enough to take for those who need or society decides there is an ever-growing list of things that government needs to make fair by taking from some to give to others.

This is usually made "nice" by calling it sharing and fair, and people who resist are shamed for being "greedy" no matter their own personal situations.

Once socialism gets to the point of failure, government usually steps in a grabs control of everything claiming that freedom (or these days capitalism) was tried and failed, so it must intervene. At that point, you generally end up with a command economy with the government owning and distributing everything, and you get only what they decide is good for you. At that point, there are no private property rights. That is when socialism rolls over into communism.

Anarchy is what happens when the system so completely fails that there is no real control on anything and you have only what assurances you can provide for yourself.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

From what I have seen from the socialist communist dems,no different then anarchy,fighting amongst each other,no leadership,they were socially conditioned to be a govt slave,why they act so stupid



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Socialism is the government controlling economic activity.

The problem is that economic activity is actually an abstraction for the exchange of value between PEOPLE, and money is the language. We're controlling the communications of PEOPLE by using socialism and in such a fashion we lay the groundwork for the control of the actions of individuals and then we get Communism.

Real capitalism is when you police and punish the fraud and get out of the way of real innovation.

Crony capitalism is when you pay the police to investigate the crimes of others while using them as cover for your own.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Differences? Socialism and Communism require a powerful central authority. True Anarchy is the absence of any government authority.

EDIT: Socialism is baby Communism. Socialism targets private companies to redistribute good and resources for 'the greater good' while Communism targets private citizens, which is the next 'logical' step.

EDIT #2: What do they all have in common? They all sound great on paper or when being discussed by 'intellectuals' on campus or in a coffee shop but fail miserably in practice.
edit on 14-7-2018 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I know this will be picked apart, but you did ask for our opinions......

Socialism= The needs of many are met by the few who actually produce something. The lazy scum live in as nice a house as the family working 50 hrs a week each. The ones who work can't get ahead b/c they're supporting the ghetto rats. Helen Humpsalot, who has 6 kids by 6 different men by age 25, games the system to eat/live/recreate better than Joe Blow who works 6 12 hour shifts a week to be able to buy basics.

Communism= The Govt. owns everything, including industry. They decide where you live. work, etc. Non-conformance can, and often does, lead to death.

Anarchy = No rules. Take what you want.....if you can. Guard what you have, because someone else will want it. No oversight by a ruling body.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Brywilson2

You forgot the part in your first paragraph above where the people gaming the system or relying on it to cover for their own bad choices hide behind the ones who legitimately do have a need for society's compassion. There really is a place for us to provide for people who cannot do on their own, but there are far fewer of them than people in the system.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Anarchy. Closest in theory to libertarian dogma. No to very little government. Keeping in mind that any group or person in a leadership role or a council of people is a government.

Socialism. In theory a much better model than communism but True socialism always seems to devolve into Communism.

Communism. A dictatorship. Always with a secret police force and no freedom of press.

Nordic model. We pool our resources for the greater good. Making sure everyone is taken care of. Works with actual democracy.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Nordic model - still socialism.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: amazing

Nordic model - still socialism.


Not really.

I mean if the nordic countries are socialist than so is the US and Britain and France and Canada and Australia and New Zealand and Germany etc etc.

In the US we have pool our money together for the common good. Taxes. We all pay taxes, we all get social security cards, we all get federal ID. There are government programs in place to help us if we get sick, need education, need housing assitance, need help getting a job, whatever. The nordic countries just do it better than we do.

Also keep in mind that a huge part of our tax money goes to help large corporations. Why we're okay with that I don't know.



posted on Jul, 14 2018 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Are we OK with it?

Have you asked every single person if they are OK with it?

Or are you just assuming everyone is?

That's socialism. It is called the common or collective good, but it's really an assumption made that it provides mostly good stuff to most people. The ones who are hurt by it or who don't want it are ignored, but they still have their money taken by force for it just the same.

The evil is swept under the rug and never addressed.



new topics




 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join