A Civics Lesson for America the Ignorant

Socialism is an economic system, not a form of government. In its purest form it is ownership, by the people or state, of the means of production. Socialism is not a system of laws that governs people, obviously. It is an economic system. You can tell me to read all you want. I already have. What does socialism say the punishment for murder is? Nothing? Right because socialism only pertains to the economy and how money is spent and earned.

Are you serious? Socialism is a friggen economic system. Not a political one. And the people are the government in communism.

You're post is flawed because when you are describing communism you are describing the pseudo communism that was shown in countries such as the Peoples Republic Of China and the USSR. This was merely facism under the guise of communism. Yes there may have been some communist ideas, but there was far to big of a social divide (speaking fiscally) to truly consider it communist. Communism is where the people are the government numbnuts, quite similarly to democracy in fact the people ratify and vote on what would be best. In fact one of the chief concepts of communism is common ownership, not government ownership. THE ENTIRE GOAL OF COMMUNISM IS TO CREATE A CLASSLESS SOCIETY IN WHICH OWNERSHIP BECOMES IRRELEVANT AS EVERYONE SHARES. What you said above is simply a summary of cold war "communism". Not communism itself, in fact it contradicts everything communism stands for.

Before you start ripping on "America the ignorant" do some god damn research.

I'm grew up in Brazil and I have friends from different parts of the world (including Japan, Denmark, France, Canada, Chile, etc...) I can say that the US public education is one of the best in the world. The main problem is what our youth is interested in learning about.

We have public libraries and most of them count of great selection of books, magazines, newspapers, computers, movies, etc... and how much does it cost for us to use it? nothing. I mean, we do pay our taxes. And in return we get SOCIALISM!!!!!

We also pay taxes for the Government to take care of our trash. Yeah, have you ever wondered where your trash goes. SOCIALISM!!! Thank God for that. I don't think I'd enjoy carrying my own trash somewhere and having to bury it.

Great article. Great simple explanations. But I'm sure there will be folks that won't understand. Oh well.

The President of the United States is a Christian! It shouldn't make any difference in a secular society. Why do people continue to refer to President Obama as muslim? I realize most people here do not believe that he is a muslim but there is a large percentage of people out there that actually believe he is. The ignorance that surrounds this propaganda is mind boggling.

If our present education system is considered a huge success I fear for us all! I'm referring to the public education system grades K-12. If we spent as much on education as we do on unnecessary wars we would all be a lot better off!

Glenn Beck is a racists asshole!

Excellent point of view. Too bad some just can't understand there's no "God" in politics, or at least shouldn't be.

One could argue that Judaism is just a branch of Islam, not the other way around. :/

well put now can you explain the word ..."IMPEACHMENT" for me..DNC used it a lot a few years back..

That's what I call boiling it down to the basics. You should be a social studies teacher if you aren't already. More.

WELL PUT!
I wish I could force some people to read this.

Excellent post.

Just as a quick note, anyone notice how long our most vehement conservatives are nowhere to be found here? Shocking, huh?

FINALLY, SOMEONE TO SHUT PEOPLE UP!!!

Very good post, although socialism is usually an economic system and can sometimes be political whereas communism is more political than economic. Most of the government programs listed are accompanied by a capitalist society so the United states cannot be labeled as a socialist state, or at least a "true" one. I completely agree with you on the soviet massacre of socialism, especially under the rule of Stalin. Leninism though can be considered a better form of socialism/communism. Pure communism, as you said, cannot be achieved, or at least in the near future. From a political standpoint, socialism is less aggressive and revolutionary that commnuism. Again, great post and I hope to see more from you.

The last two are wrong. Socialism and communism are both economical not governmental. Govts my be backed by socialist or communist parties but thats as far as it goes. Anarchists (who desire no state) are socialist and communists that aim to attain such societies from the bottom up instead of the top down using the state.

Socialism- From each according to their ability to each according to their Deed.

Communism- From each according to their ability to each according to their Need.

Good post. Thanks Burke.

Great Post!

"Muslim = Branch of Judaism just like Christianity"
...... uhhh, stop any muslim is the street and tell them that and see what they say! Probably something along the line of infidel, blasphemy and BOOM! A good post otherwise. Ben Franklin said it best "the masses are asses!"

I haven't enjoyed a simple post so much in awhile. Yes there are many issues that are misunderstood but if may suggest an addendum to ' black.'

I grew up prior to BET; during the period where 'black' referred to ANY people 'not of European decent' not solely African Americans. This was most evident on buses and public restaurants, something that is often forgotten by BET and todays under forty crowd .I know because even with my straight hair and fair skin in a very real way, i grow up a poor 'black' child in America and if it happened to me ; i am not alone; many generations experiences are being marginalized, mis understood and misrepresented when society 'claims' that the 'black American' or even 'the black experience,' only applies to those of African decent or black skin color.

For instance, there is not one generation in my family that doesn't have 'white' ,'black' 'Asian' ',native'... but my family diminishes in political power if 'we' chose to see each other along those lines... a house divided.Yet the government and all in power want us to look at each other thru these 'colored glasses'. Take the term in America , 'Latin', to most refers to those of Spanish decent , yet excludes the origin of all things Latin , Italy? Misinformation is used by those with any form of 'power' but it is up to 'us' to look for the 'truth'. IMO

I only took a semester of US Government in high school; we only touched on the Constitution and we never talked about socialism or communism. I now at least have a basis for understanding. Thanks.

What's funny is that in my US GOVT class, socialism describes the distribution of money equally, and has no social goals (purely economical).

It is also said that Communism encompasses everything (both social, and economic). Essentially, the government has loose or tight rules on how you should live your life from every perspective. Then last, fascism is just a more extreme form of communism to put it simply. Whether communist and fascist states are totalitarian (government controls all), or authoritarian (one individual, or dictator) depends.

It seems that there are both "actual" definitions, and regional/colloquial definitions for these terms.

First the definitions of Socialism/communism/capitilism/liberalism are all skewed depeding from where you hear it from. Where did you get these definitions from?

Now I'm pretty sure your definitions of communism/socilaim are mixed. Communism is a form of goverment, not an economic system. Look at China, China is still has a Communist goverment, but they have a Capitalist economy. The difference between their capitalism and our is that theirs is State Capitalism and we have more Free Market Capitalism. Soviet Russia was also a communist goverment but also had a socialist economy. To say otherwise is wrong, they had natialized companies and most of means of production was done by the goverment, The definition of socailism, as you pointed out with examples of eductation and social security.

Saying that the United States is a socialist country is completely wrong. Yes we have socialist programs, but we still rely mostly on the private sources of production, making us a Capitalist economy. To say otherwise would mean you shouldn't buy food, stop using the internet and in fact just throw away your computer because those are all controlled and produced through private means.

Another thing, When you said:
"It's great in theory but no government seems to be able to handle the burden and trust needed to implement it."
That should to refer to socialism nto communism because all of the socialist countries fell in the last century for this very reason. This is also why China became Capitalist because the communist goverment noticed how that people were starving and becoming poorer under their Socialist system, so to not have a revolution on their hands and to stay in power, they switched to a form capitalism which has proved to work very well for them and now they have a middle class again.

I also wanted to comment on this statement:
"If we did have a Black Muslim Socialist President what exactly is wrong with that?"
I don't think there is anything wrong with a black or muslim president, who cares what teh color of you skin is or what god you believe in. But a socialist president does bother me because to say socialism works would mean to throw out the last hundred years of history, showing how most countries in the world went from socialism to capitalism and the fact that standard of living in the world has dramticaly jumped since then, kinda showed that that was a good thing. So for us to go the opposite way would just seem stupid. But I don't think Obama is a socialist anyways, I think he's more of Corporatist, he seems to help corporations more than anyone.

Just Saying

My addendum would be the following:

1. The Articles of Confederation were more of a loose governing doctrine focusing on state rights within a vague Federal system. If anything, Tea Partiers should be more oriented around the Articles than the Constitution, which helped prevent tarrifs over state borders (something the well-to-do fat cat writers of the Constitution were very opposed to). They were of course very unhappy with the Articles, and wrote the Constitution pretty much without any outside input and ratified it. When people revolted (Shay's Rebellion) it was crushed. On that point, again, Americans need a civics lesson.

2. Nazis were Socialist in their origins, but were very much a xenophobic nationalist version of it. They wanted a pure perfect Utopia populated by Germans. Those members of the Nazi party still espousing those beliefs were murdered in the Night of Long Knives to make way for the fascist dictatorship that the Nazi party became. Socialism, being a government form most focused on the needs of the people, can be represented by a variety of corrupt causes. There are versions of "democracy" that are illegitimate, corrupt and blood-stained so to equate Socialism with tyranny is ludicrous (see: Central America during much of the past half-century before the recent political changes).

3. The Soviets were born out of the Bolsheviks, or majority party. They were a more blood-thirsty group of Leftists seeking to overthrow the Tzar, and sought a nationalist only Socialist revolution. The Mensheviks, the minority party, wanted a global Socialist revolution. It is no surprise that with individuals like Joseph Stalin in the Bolsheviks that they were brutal and domineering. Stalin was, after all, the bank robber that the Bolsheviks relied on to acquire funds during the time prior to the October Revolution, and essentially a street thug.

As a proud American Socialist and IWW member I am glad at least the topic is being discussed.

steal = to take shit that aint yours

theif = our gubment spending money on bullshit

lie = what they do while stealing

Good post on terminology.

However, I have a small qualification of the constitutional assertion in relation only to federal actions. Relative to a state’s action, it should be easy to prove a federal government’s action unconstitutional as the Constitution doesn't enumerate what is forbidden by the federal government , but enumerates what activities the federal government is authorized to engage in. Any federal activity outside of those enumerated in the Constitution is unconstitutional. Hence the reason why many the foundering fathers thought the bill of rights was redundant and unnecessary.

"Nazis and Soviets weren't Socialist. They called themselves this for Propaganda because it's a "caring system" were in fact Totalitarian Fascist and Dictators.”

I would clarify: the two mentioned countries's political evolutions ended in fascist dictatorships. Nazis were originally socialist, pre-WWII Germany started out socialist and transitioned to fascism .

On a sliding scale one is the next step from the other. But a transition is neither inevitable nor dogmatic.

It will help your purpose if you write with less anger in your "voice" in the future. Also, your ideas, thou mostly right, are a too theoretical. You can't say the Nazis weren't socialists, because they did employ some socialist principles, like giving out food stamps, but on top of that, they also perverted the idea and dragged it into totalitarism, fascism, call them what you like, I'll probably agree. And of course the Nazis first beat up and later killed the socialists that were already around before they appeared on the scene. Still, if you are so much into pulling words apart, Nazi is an abbreviation of Nationalsozialist, and that cannot be undone by theoretical redefinition. Same problem with communists - you could say that the really existing communist systems weren't what Marx, Engels and maybe Lenin had in mind when they developed the idea. But if you say that the Soviets weren't communists, you are just confusing people who try to understand the major lines of recent world history.
Existing and past economic and political systems have never turned out exactly like the pure philosophical ideas of them. But we cannot ignore reality when discussing the ideas behind.

i agree, it seems atlest in freance the people stand up for themselvs even in fear and persecution of ther police. my dad sayes america likes to police evone else and ther own people and be a bully. im to scred to stand up and speak because of the being put in jail and being a enemy in usa here. it makes me feel scred , to me all the politians want is ther own world domination with the religious fractions as ther army messing the whole world up. tho i see it a briter way, if they kill us all thell have to kill each oter becasue noby woudl tolorate it anemore all the people dead and thems left lol whos going to make ther food form the ground whos gonna treat ther water systems etc etc. lol. =s

Also, a lot of people believe Liberals are leftists. Based on the European Political System (American political system is wrong), Liberals are in the middle.

I understand your frustration, but it's ultimately pointless.

The terms 'communism' and 'socialism' are ruined beyond repair. They've been associated with anti-Americanism for decades. People with power who use those terms incorrectly know exactly what they mean. You can't win a semantics war like this against professional liars.

It's an interesting social phenomenon though. Consider the word 'discriminate.' It use to have positive connotations. To be able to discriminate used to mean to be able to correctly identify things, like to to have a discriminating palate, etc. Now it just means racism.
The correct definition doesn't matter nearly as much as the socially accepted meaning.

Thanks for the excellent summation.

Cold war propaganda & movies like Red Dawn made the word
Communist = Enemy in the minds of many americans. And that is what is heard when the Communist dog whistle is blown by the TeaPublicans.
They don't want to discuss policy issues they just want to paint someone red, so they are easily recognized as the enemy.

I don't know which is sadder, that so few people who have graduated from American high schools know these facts already or that the people who really need this lesson are not likely come to this article and read it carefully (or make any real attempt to understand it).

But thank you for going to the effort of putting these items together. A synopsis of the definition of a classic conservative would also be useful.

Oh so true!

Good post. Glad to read that someone still understands the meaning of the words, not just the "percieved" meaning, or the "common knowledge" meaning.
Every time I read/hear someone labeled socialist or communist I can only shake my head in wonder....wonder if they realize exactly what they are saying.

right on.

Thanks for the post, hopefully those trolls will read it!

excellent post, now get ready for the trolls to attempt to make your head explode.

Need some more of these!

I apologize for the poor grammar. It's hard to proof read when you're furious.

fantastic, it's nice to see that facts can still make it on this site. cheers-

Very good post, Thank You!