Talk:socialism

Idea wasn't proposed by Marx
The British Social Democratic Federation may also have proposed reforming capitalism into communism, the creating an intermediate stage. Can anyone fill in on this?

Etymology
The word "socialism" dates back to the early nineteenth century. It was first used, self-referentially, in the English language in 1827 to refer to followers of Robert Owen. In France, again self-referentially, it was used in 1832 to refer to followers of the doctrines of Saint-Simon and thereafter by Pierre Leroux and J. Regnaud in l'Encyclopédie nouvelle. Use of the word spread widely and has been used differently in different times and places, both by various individuals and groups that consider themselves socialist and by their opponents.

While there is wide variation between socialist groups, nearly all would agree that they are bound together by a common history rooted originally in nineteenth and twentieth-century struggles by industrial and agricultural workers, operating according to principles of solidarity and advocating an egalitarian society, with an economics that would, in their view, serve the broad populace rather than a favored few.

According to Élie Halévy, the term "socialism" was coined independently by two groups advocating different ways of organizing society and economics: the Saint-Simonians, and most likely Pierre Leroux, in the years 1831-33, and the followers of Robert Owen, around 1835.

Source: http://www.answers.com/socialism

WRONG
"4.Classical Marxism) The international communist society where classes and the state no longer exist."

This is mistaken. Marxists don't think that socialism has no classes, socialism has the dictatorship of the proletariat. Communism has no classes. Lenin clearly explains this in his State and Revolution, by extensive quotation of Marx. therefore I'll edit this because it doesn't make sense.

Also for 2. the state doesn't control the market, the market does not exist under socialism, but the economy is a planned one. Please someone make these changes because I'm wikipedia illiterate.


 * Yes, to my knowledge, you’re right. I’ve made the changes. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 08:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for verification
RfV-sense for “The international communist society where classes and the state no longer exist.” — Nah-ah. This form of society is called. This sense, if the term is used in this sense, is wrong. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 08:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yourright. Delete. --88.112.43.243 05:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, sense removed. —Ruakh TALK 01:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Vietnamese
The Chinese characters in the Vietnamese translation are incorrect and should be removed. This is not a direct borrowing from Chinese as the two pairs of characters are reversed. This Vietnamese word is of Chinese origin but the word order is reversed. Also, Chinese characters are no longer used in Vietnamese so the Chinese origin should be given only in the entry for the Vietnamese word, not here. 71.66.97.228 18:09, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Why locked?
Why is this entry locked for editing? 71.66.97.228 18:09, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Potential Improvement of Language Precision
The definition of "socialism" currently seems overly strict in a very subtle way. Please read the following excerpt:

"Any of various economic and political philosophies that support social equality, collective decision-making, distribution of income based on contribution and public ownership of productive capital and natural resources, as advocated by socialists."

I propose to modify this section to read as follows (modification indicated by bold type):

"Any of various economic and political philosophies that support social equality, collective decision-making, distribution of income based on contribution and/or public ownership of productive capital and natural resources, as advocated by socialists."

I think it is important to make it clear that socialism need not incorporate all those aspects strictly and without exception in order to be deemed "socialism".

If anyone would like to discuss, my cell phone number is [removed by Mglovesfun (talk) 16:48, 27 January 2011 (UTC)].

Best Regards, Paul Sherrill

Seriously Flawed Definition
Comments on this definition (numbers inserted):

"economic and political philosophies that support (1) social equality, (2) collective decision-making, (3) distribution of income based on contribution and (4) public ownership of productive capital and natural resources, (5) as advocated by socialists."

(1) Many liberals (e.g., Ronald Dworkin) also support social equality. (2) There is collective decision-making in a capitalist stockholders' meeting. (3) Many socialists prefer distribution according to need. (4) Many socialists prefer public control to nationalization. (5) This makes the definition circular.

I propose:

"economic and political philosophies that support public ownership and/or control of productive capital and natural resources, and distribution of income according to contribution or need."

Asocialist 23:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

What was wrong with what used to be here before?
The definition that I have been using and teaching to my students came from this site:

“Etymology: Attested since 1832; either from French socialisme or from social +‎ -ism;

(1) Any of various economic and political philosophies that support social equality, collective decision-making, distribution of income based on contribution and public ownership of productive capital and natural resources, as advocated by socialists; (2) The socialist political philosophies as a group, including Marxism, libertarian socialism, democratic socialism, and social democracy; (3) (Leninism) The intermediate phase of social development between capitalism and full communism. This is a strategy whereby the state has control of all key resource-producing industries and manages most aspects of the economy, in contrast to laissez faire capitalism.”

This seems less biased, more accurate, and reasonable than what is here now. In particular, the words "which are typically based on principles of community decision making, social equality and the avoidance of economic and social exclusion, with economic policy giving first preference to community goals over individual ones" and the accompanying quotation seem to imply that all people who believe in these ideals are necessarily socialists and that only socialists support these ideals. If this is the definition then everyone is a socialist!

The only problem with the previous wording was the ambiguity of the words "as advocated by socialists." I admit that number one still needs some work, but the current definition is a terrible, misleading alteration.

Shawn Tickle 204.111.168.129 22:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)


 * User:Hauskalainen mades changes, saying that he (1) "Changed the order to put the main definition first (and amended context to Marxism)"; (2) "definition 1 is Marxist and oldest historically. Amended def 2 to show them as later interpretations not needing full control nor communism"; and (3) "The third definition is just part of second, so merged them. Extended the quote to clarify." See this edit. This was the only edit that I checked. There were subsequent edits, but I did not look at them. —Stephen (Talk) 05:28, 22 June 2016 (UTC)