• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Socialism is a transition between capitalism and communism where social ownership is the rising aspect of society and the working class runs the state. Communism is a fully collectivized global economy. Neither socialism or communism require everyone to be “good.”

    • Rynux@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Communism is I think fragile. When it works then not so much but it’s almost impossible to build that big and stable community.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            4 hours ago

            No? China has a communist government over a socialist system. The working classes run the state, and social ownership is the principal aspect of its economy. Fascism would be a bourgeois-run state with private ownership supplemented by state control.

          • Narri N. (they/them)@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Let me guess: you listened to a German christian fundamentalist, who has never set a foot on Xinjiang, hallucinate lies about Uygurs in concentration camps?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            54 minutes ago

            The term was used to show how, through development, future structures “rhyme” with those in the past. Early communalism, as I prefer to call it, shares in common with communism classless, stateless, and moneyless society, but the key difference is the scale and the level of development of the productive forces. The sheer difference in what we use to produce what we need, and how we distribute it, makes these entirely distinct modes of production and distribution.