socialist or communist?

this may not be the right place to ask this but.

i never was good with words so yeah. i wanna join communism but i still have a little need to be in socialism. can anyone give me advice( not on grammer or spelling)

oh yeah and hi

Well, socialism is really more "liberal" per say than communism but both are almost the same thing. In socialism, the state cares for you and your family, gives you money, and your happy to spend whatever the way you like it.

True communism is where everybody is equal and everybody shares equally. The problem is, everybody isn't the same.

At least...that's how I view it. Both call for equal rights of people however, and that is why I like the concept of it. ^^

Socialism is the transitional phase into communism. True communism can't be achieved unless world wide socialism is achieved first.

As Ilych pointed out correctly, Socialism is a transitional, developmental phase of communism... For that I don't think any can be better, however, thinking it well is like asking: "What's better a complete or a half-finished building?".

socialism i guess

Jeiro Sijakeuigwan wrote:

Well, socialism is really more "liberal" per say than communism but both are almost the same thing. In socialism, the state cares for you and your family, gives you money, and your happy to spend whatever the way you like it.

Socialism is merely a transitional phase in which the communist infrastructure starts to be built. Socialism starts preparing the society for communism and builds the path towards it.

It's not like a mild capitalism, nor it is a state capitalism.

Jeiro Sijakeuigwan wrote:

True communism is where everybody is equal and everybody shares equally. The problem is, everybody isn't the same.

At least...that's how I view it. Both call for equal rights of people however, and that is why I like the concept of it. ^^

No, in communism we don't share equally per se. We share proportionally to our needs. If we are ten people and we have 2 chairs we produce 8 more chairs so there's one for each. If you spend more proteins you're given more protein-rich food than someone who spends less protein than you.

Ah, I see now. Thanks! ^^

Communism is the end of socialism.

Fascism, Capitalism minus dumb people voting.

i know this is off the subject, but what is a supremasist

ychoosedemocracy wrote:

i know this is off the subject, but what is a supremasist

a supremacist is someone who believes their race, religion, gender, belief system or culture is superior to others and entitles those who identify with it to dominate, control or rule those who do not.

ychoosedemocracy wrote:

i know this is off the subject, but what is a supremasist

Seems like the kindn of thing you could have wikied.

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

It's in the socialist society, where the state gives all the people free eduvation, healthcare, etc. In liberal(or capitalist) society evryone must care only for themselves.

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

It's in the socialist society, where the state gives all the people free eduvation, healthcare, etc. In liberal(or capitalist) society evryone must care only for themselves.

no if you work hader in capitalism your life will inprove but in communism nothing happens you only get more teierd.
capitalism givs oppritunity but in communism your life will always be the same standar no survival of the fittets natures lawa erased.

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

It's in the socialist society, where the state gives all the people free eduvation, healthcare, etc. In liberal(or capitalist) society evryone must care only for themselves.

no if you work hader in capitalism your life will inprove but in communism nothing happens you only get more teierd.
capitalism givs oppritunity but in communism your life will always be the same standar no survival of the fittets natures lawa erased.

It could be like this in a bureaucratic pseudosocialist society. In socialist/communist society evryone gets equal opportunities to have what they need. It's not true that the government will decide evrything for the people.

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

It's in the socialist society, where the state gives all the people free eduvation, healthcare, etc. In liberal(or capitalist) society evryone must care only for themselves.

no if you work hader in capitalism your life will inprove but in communism nothing happens you only get more teierd.
capitalism givs oppritunity but in communism your life will always be the same standar no survival of the fittets natures lawa erased.

It could be like this in a bureaucratic pseudosocialist society. In socialist/communist society evryone gets equal opportunities to have what they need. It's not true that the government will decide evrything for the people.

u know nothing nobody has an oppritunity in commuism all get the same no matter where they work how they work or if they do at al!!

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Riddler wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

liberalism power to the pepole!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think you meant power to the rich people

no liberalism tries to give evrybody the same education, healthcare and rid them of the state triing to interfere with what they want to do.

It's in the socialist society, where the state gives all the people free eduvation, healthcare, etc. In liberal(or capitalist) society evryone must care only for themselves.

no if you work hader in capitalism your life will inprove but in communism nothing happens you only get more teierd.
capitalism givs oppritunity but in communism your life will always be the same standar no survival of the fittets natures lawa erased.

OMG Thats the stupidest thing I've ever heard!

There is no opportunity under capitalism, only a rigid class system in which you have little to no opportunities to rise to a significantly higher socio-economic strata.

oligarch wrote:

There is no opportunity under capitalism, only a rigid class system in which you have little to no opportunities to rise to a significantly higher socio-economic strata.

Yeah. That's true. I've read a memoir from a Chinese immigrant from the 1800s (Gold Rush, I think...) and while he got rich, he also questioned the so-called "American Dream".

He concluded that "nobody really cared" and was completely unhappy for the rest of his life.

That's capitalism to you.

Jeiro Sijakeuigwan wrote:

oligarch wrote:

There is no opportunity under capitalism, only a rigid class system in which you have little to no opportunities to rise to a significantly higher socio-economic strata.

Yeah. That's true. I've read a memoir from a Chinese immigrant from the 1800s (Gold Rush, I think...) and while he got rich, he also questioned the so-called "American Dream".

He concluded that "nobody really cared" and was completely unhappy for the rest of his life.

That's capitalism to you.

The American Dream is a piece of shit.
It states that everyone has the liberty to pursue the American Dream and everyone has an equal opportunity of obtaining it but the only scenario in which everyone has equal opportunity is in a communist society.

man that was a heated discussion

oligarch wrote:

Jeiro Sijakeuigwan wrote:

oligarch wrote:

There is no opportunity under capitalism, only a rigid class system in which you have little to no opportunities to rise to a significantly higher socio-economic strata.

Yeah. That's true. I've read a memoir from a Chinese immigrant from the 1800s (Gold Rush, I think...) and while he got rich, he also questioned the so-called "American Dream".

He concluded that "nobody really cared" and was completely unhappy for the rest of his life.

That's capitalism to you.

The American Dream is a piece of shit.
It states that everyone has the liberty to pursue the American Dream and everyone has an equal opportunity of obtaining it but the only scenario in which everyone has equal opportunity is in a communist society.

I aggre that the american drea is a peic of shit but I'll give stories from my own life.
my grandfather was the son of a farmer, din´t wan't to be a farmer,
he wanted a better like for himself so whent fishing for 40 years
he nearly never got to meet his five children and had to be at sea for weeks if not months with nearly no sleep. But he dosen´t regret it, his children got education something he had worked for he was a part of the econamy he bult a littel part of it. Under communism it wun't have mattered wether he lved in the cuntry r in a town his living conditins would have been just as crappy.
nothing changes in communis, you can't get what you want, only what the goverment thinks you need.
hears another exampel: a man whent broke tow decades ago. he then got an idear, beer, a good idear. he and his father built a big factory in russi then they sold it and now they had more money, then they bouht companies and changed them so that they were better and ect. the mans nme is irrelivant but his net worth is 5.5billion usd. that in tow decades,
under CAPITALISM, under communism he wun't even be abel to go broke he wun't be abel to buld a factory and make his life better.

mattabesta wrote:

I aggre that the american drea is a peic of shit but I'll give stories from my own life.
my grandfather was the son of a farmer, din´t wan't to be a farmer,
he wanted a better like for himself so whent fishing for 40 years
he nearly never got to meet his five children and had to be at sea for weeks if not months with nearly no sleep. But he dosen´t regret it, his children got education something he had worked for he was a part of the econamy he bult a littel part of it. Under communism it wun't have mattered wether he lved in the cuntry r in a town his living conditins would have been just as crappy.

First of all, you speak as if you had ever seen a communist society working, or as if you knew how communism works. Since you haven't seen how a communist society works and you don't know what communism pursues, then, you can't speak of what would happen under communism.

Your grandfather didn't improve his conditions for 40 YEARS as you put it, here merely worked as ard as possible for his children so that they could have a "better life" than his, and his children did the same thing and probably you would do the same. It's about working merely for you and your family, to leave your family a legacy, just to your family, and sometimes not even to your family but to your direct heir, and sometimes, not even to them.

Under communism it's not working just for you and your own, it's working under a REALLY HUMAN FRAMEWORK. Since we humans are sociable beings and are interdependant we need to think about ourselves and others, that's unexpendable. We cannot work simply for ourselves or our own interests and expect everything to work. We cannot have an animal society in which we're struggling against those of our kind and have to take advantage of others' needs, desires or even misfortunes.

I'll put it in a way that is clearer to you. Through communism is like if we all, the ones who study and work today think on the future of comming generations, as if we all were "fathers" or "grandfathers" thinking on the wellbeing of all our children and grandchildren. We're thinking not only about our direct heir but about our own future and the future of everyone to come after us. We're paving the road to the comming generations and we have to pave it well. But in common, in general, for everybody.

We eliminate the "nature's survival of the fittest" within our own society because we're not animals, we're beings able of reasoning, we're beings with social structures, we're beings that need to coexist with other beings of our kind for other issues than mere copulation. But that "nature's law" if you really want to call it a natural law applicable to all forms of life is not completely eliminated, we simply change it universally: Instead of being me and my friends against you and your friends is you, me and our friends against all our common difficulties. It's the elimination of a culture of waste, of a culture of consume, of a culture of fights, of greed.It's the elimination of a culture of conflict of mutual exploitation. Substituted by organization, by substituting the aim of having much with the aim of having a really workable society.

mattabesta wrote:

nothing changes in communis, you can't get what you want, only what the goverment thinks you need.

The thing is that living conditions don't change just for you, change for everybody.

But well... tell me something Matthías, do you really know what you want? Are you sure you know what to expect from this life? And do you know why you want what you want? These are important questions my friend, and I would really appreciate if you would answer them after thinking them well.

I'll tell you what I want: I want to be able to work without making out of my work a means of survival. I want to be able to have a comfortable life with a woman (or if possible two ) who loves me by my side. Living in a big enough apartment which for me is 45m² and which I'll be able to increase as my family grows if ever does. I want to live in Russia. I want to see no more conflicts, no more poverty, no more consumerism, no more wars, no more unnecesary violece, no more indifference. I don't want to see a dehumanized world in which we have to act like animals or like machines, either surviving and struggling against each other, or simply mechanically working to satisfy a lifestyle and competing with more efficient machines. I don't want to see more disregard to environment, I don't want to see a more hypersexualized society. I don't want to see an ever increasing number of shallow people.

And guess what Matthías? Communism CAN give me all of that. Even in the matters of women you know? A great deal of women unfortunately give a great focus to the survival factor of this society, most of them search for a man who aside from loving them, understanding them and fucking them the way they like it want a man who can support them economically. If there are no economical problems, then, women instead of focusing on material wealth and security would have no choice but to merely focus on the personal traits of men.

mattabesta wrote:

hears another exampel: a man whent broke tow decades ago. he then got an idear, beer, a good idear. he and his father built a big factory in russi then they sold it and now they had more money, then they bouht companies and changed them so that they were better and ect. the mans nme is irrelivant but his net worth is 5.5billion usd. that in tow decades,
under CAPITALISM, under communism he wun't even be abel to go broke he wun't be abel to buld a factory and make his life better.

*here's or here is. went broke. idea or ideal.

Yeah in communism he would have never gone broke and wouldn't have opened a factory, but, if he had the technical knowledges for something useful he would have been able to manage a factory or be chief of design of something.

Now think about this: Better life than he used to have or a life better than the ones that surround him?

One of the great problems with capitalist ideologues is that they think that wellbeing is measured merely on material wellbeing. That's horrible, as if all we humans needed was having cars, big houses and wipe our asses with 100 dollar bills after defecating on a platinum toilet....

In my view a human being is not worth for what he has but for what he can give to society. And a human being is not worth at all if all he wants is merely having more than others, if he just merely works to survive or to increase his ego.. Humans should merely work for love to their work and for consciousness that through it they'll benefit others and themselves and such can only exist within a communist framework.