Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Who's on First

[glennds]

Could someone provide an explanation of the differences, if any between Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Bolshevik Leninism?

If US Democrats, using Bernie Sanders as a representative example, are Marxists, then is Canada a Marxist country? Because many of the Sanders policies they speak of, such as immigration reform and health care for all, they point to Canada as an example. Maybe sometimes European countries like France and Germany? So same question applies, are France and Germany Marxist?

If symptoms of Socialism are programs like welfare and health care, then is the US already Socialist insofar as we have Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Unemployment, Food Stamps and other welfare programs, not to mention bailouts and other forms of corporate welfare and subsidies?

I caught a thing on Fox that talked about the rise of Socialism, but their most vivid examples were centered on the Bolshevik period under Lenin when basically all property became state owned. Is that the model that Bernie and the Democrats are promoting? The Fox program warned so.

According to what research I have done, there are only four truly self-described communist countries in the world; Cuba, China, Laos and Vietnam (with the possible addition of DPRK). Are the Democrats proposing that the US join this list and become truly one party communist?

Any help clearing it up would be appreciated, thx

[shekels]

Could someone provide an explanation of the differences, if any between Marxism, Socialism, Communism, Bolshevik Leninism?

If US Democrats, using Bernie Sanders as a representative example, are Marxists, then is Canada a Marxist country? Because many of the Sanders policies they speak of, such as immigration reform and health care for all, they point to Canada as an example. Maybe sometimes European countries like France and Germany? So same question applies, are France and Germany Marxist?

If symptoms of Socialism are programs like welfare and health care, then is the US already Socialist insofar as we have Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Unemployment, Food Stamps and other welfare programs, not to mention bailouts and other forms of corporate welfare and subsidies?

I caught a thing on Fox that talked about the rise of Socialism, but their most vivid examples were centered on the Bolshevik period under Lenin when basically all property became state owned. Is that the model that Bernie and the Democrats are promoting? The Fox program warned so.

According to what research I have done, there are only four truly self-described communist countries in the world; Cuba, China, Laos and Vietnam (with the possible addition of DPRK). Are the Democrats proposing that the US join this list and become truly one party communist?

Any help clearing it up would be appreciated, thx

It confuses me as to all the different "ism's" there are.
They are suppose to be all technically separate.
I Don't care for each of the technical nuances , so I look at from a broader scope and just refer to them as Collectivism.
Where you are part of the Collective or you are not.
Do you have control over Central Government, or does Government have control over you.


Looking at the "ism's" that way, right or wrong, is to help me simplify it .


Cute little cartoon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI_RlkKAogE

[pp4me]

You should probably ask Bernie Sanders and AOC who proudly claim the label of Socialist what they see as the difference between Socialism and Marxism/Communism.

You would hope that what they call "Democratic Socialism" eschews the totalitarianism and murder associated with Communism but I haven't heard either one of them condemn BLM which is a group of "trained Marxist revolutionaries" according to their own descriptions. As a matter of fact, AOC and the squad is applauding the violence.

So I'm not too inclined to like their vision of Socialism.

[I Shrugged]

glenn, it would take a very deep dive to cover the differences. I think you are really asking, what is Bernie.
My take, as a practical matter, Marxism was the theory.
Leninism made the theory militant.
Maoism and Stalinism turbocharged the imperative that enemies be re-educated or eliminated. Let's remember that an estimated 60 to 100 MILLION people died at the hands of their governments in the 20th century, and most of them were under Communists.
Socialism is certainly a foundation of communism, but since we also have democratic socialism, it also exists on it's own.

Socialism is what eventually happens in a democracy when popular will is more important than property and other basic rights. Democracy is when four wolves and one sheep vote on what's for dinner. Once the individual's rights to his own body, labor, and property are subsumed to the "rights" of everyone else to his stuff, that's socialism. We certainly have some of that, and the wolves want more. They think there is a sweet spot. Maybe there is. For a while.

So what's Bernie? By US standards, he is in favor of more redistribution, ie more taking of what rightly belongs to people and giving it to others. He is a Euro Democratic Socialist. By contrast, the BLM, Antifa, and all of the other left wingnuts are more like Maoists, or at least they think they are. I don't know where AOC is. Probably in between.

[glennds]

glenn, it would take a very deep dive to cover the differences. I think you are really asking, what is Bernie.
My take, as a practical matter, Marxism was the theory.
Leninism made the theory militant.
Maoism and Stalinism turbocharged the imperative that enemies be re-educated or eliminated. Let's remember that an estimated 60 to 100 MILLION people died at the hands of their governments in the 20th century, and most of them were under Communists.
Socialism is certainly a foundation of communism, but since we also have democratic socialism, it also exists on it's own.

Socialism is what eventually happens in a democracy when popular will is more important than property and other basic rights. Democracy is when four wolves and one sheep vote on what's for dinner. Once the individual's rights to his own body, labor, and property are subsumed to the "rights" of everyone else to his stuff, that's socialism. We certainly have some of that, and the wolves want more. They think there is a sweet spot. Maybe there is. For a while.

So what's Bernie? By US standards, he is in favor of more redistribution, ie more taking of what rightly belongs to people and giving it to others. He is a Euro Democratic Socialist. By contrast, the BLM, Antifa, and all of the other left wingnuts are more like Maoists, or at least they think they are. I don't know where AOC is. Probably in between.

Thank you, I Shrugged, that gave me some useful insights. I get a visual in my mind of a place that serves Buffalo style hot wings where you can get Mild, Medium, Medium Hot, Hot, Super Hot, Nuclear Meltdown Hot. Like a lot of things in politics, there can be an element of validity that only becomes objectionable once it gets taken out of moderation, or to the absurd level of exaggeration. So before long, it becomes a (perceived) choice between Mild and Nuclear Meltdown Hot, from both sides.

I'm not sure anyone really wants to do things that are quite as extreme as the opposing side is broadcasting.

I really don't believe Bernie and AOC want to cancel the Constitution, seize all private property and convert the United States into a hardcore turbocharged version of Marxism.
On the other hand, I find it equally hard to believe that Trump and Mitch McConnell want to march us toward a globally isolated, white supremacist America where most of the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a dozen or so connected Oligarchs and all non-whites are either deported or effectively function as serfs and indentured servants.
The differences between the camps are real and they exist, but they've also been exaggerated, sometimes to the point of absurdity.

[pp4me]

The differences between the camps are real and they exist, but they've also been exaggerated, sometimes to the point of absurdity.

I agree with that statement which is why I have very little tolerance for campaign ads and speeches.

Having said that, I must say that the DEMs have been doing a very poor job lately of convincing REPs and Independents that their fears aren't exaggerated. Repudiating the rioters would help but It doesn't sound like that is going to happen.

[doodle]

The way I see it wealth itself and the laws of our country are a form of collectivism. People don't live as sovereign independent entities unless you are advocating for complete anarchy. Society in other words requires individuals to collectively buy in to a set of philosophical ideas without which capitalism doesn't get off the ground. That's what's confusing to me about the notion of the elevation of the individual in our capitalist society, it requires a collective buy in to the philosophy by which we organize the means and ownership of production within our society. We have collectively agreed to allow independent entities called corporations and concepts like intellectual property to exist....in other words we have created system that requires a collectivist buy in yet is predominantly focused on the supreme elevation of individualism. It's strange that we overlook the symbiotic connections between all the forms of labor in our system leading to our collective success.

[I Shrugged]

I heard a clip of Pelosi calling Trump and Republicans enemies of the state. Holy cow is that chilling. That is straight out of Lenin, Stalin, Mao. As much as one might like to think it is just a poor choice of words, I think it's very telling. Not that she is a Stalinist, but that she believes A) people on her side are the state, B) the state is what matters, and C) in classifying opponents as enemies of the state. And what do you do with enemies of the state? You eliminate them.