I for one really like socialist policies like national healthcare which I get in the UK etc. But I don't think full communism is the way to go for a modern society. Plus the track record of every time a country tries to head towards full communism, the door is left wide open for a dictator, and someone takes it.

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Thia is kinda the point of the post tho is these guys think theres no room in the middle you must be full blown marx or bust. Which in this day and age is jist stupid

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 hours ago

Then enjoy the continued lurch toward the right that’s been going on for generations, ever since the last time politicians feared socialism enough to make significant concessions. Previously:

When you have to go back 93 years to the Great Depression to find an example, you’ve made my point.

FDR did what he did to save capitalism from the threat of socialist revolution, and politicians have spent the last three generations clawing back the concessions he had made to socialist & labor agitators. They also purged socialists from labor unions, and they purged and even assassinated communists, to avoid any such thing happening again.

Chris Hedges, America: The Farewell Tour:

The New Deal, as Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, saved capitalism. It was put in place because socialists were a strong and serious threat. The oligarchs understood that with the breakdown of capitalism—something I expect we will again witness in our lifetimes—there was a possibility of a socialist revolution. They did not want to lose their wealth and power. Roosevelt, writing to a friend in 1930, said there was “no question in my mind that it is time for the country to become fairly radical for at least one generation. History shows that where this occurs occasionally, nations are saved from revolution.” In other words, Roosevelt went to his fellow oligarchs and said, “Hand over some of your money or you will lose all your money in a revolution.” And they complied. That is how the government created fifteen million jobs, Social Security, unemployment benefits, and public works projects. The capitalists did not do this because the suffering of the masses moved them to pity. They did this because they were scared.

[–] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This is a fundamental misunderstanding of differences between socialism and communism.

Modes of production aside, socialism is just the transition period between capitalism and communism but does not have fundamentally different goals from communism. The goal of socialism is to reach communism. The differentiation is just a matter of how far society has progressed in that transition and their modes of production. Socialists are communists. Any differentiation outside of the above context is colloquial or otherwise a result of the uninformed misusing the terms as you have.

Nationalized healthcare in the UK != Socialism and != a socialist policy, it is a social/welfare program. Social/welfare programs are agnostic of modes of production, which is why they can exist in both socialist and capitalist economies.

Please refer to the socialism entry on Prolewiki as well as the modes of production link I added above. This is one of the most commonly confused things about socialism and communism. If you really want to say you don't like the idea of communism, you should at least be informed about what it is you don't like and don't think applies to our modern society. These are short articles that collectively take <5 minutes to read through.

What you are advocating for is social democracy.

[–] Edie@lemmy.ml 6 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

MrScottyTay cannot see your comment becuaee shit.just.works has defederated from lemmygrad.

[–] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 13 hours ago

Shame. Thanks for the heads up!

[–] m532@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 21 hours ago

Uk is monarchist, not socialist