The difference between socialism and communism is very broad, anyone could say Leninism isn't even communism. The term "communism" refers to a Marxist utopia in which absolutely everything is owned by everyone and there is no state. Leninism is basically the state controlling everything while having vanguard communists run the show. Communists claim that the goal of socialism is communism, but history has demonstrated that is not the case so far. Especially with the huge growths in capitalism that are about to take over the world via economic globalization. Again, socialism is what you call it. There are simply too many levels of government regulations and tax payer control. You could have one "socialist" nation that offers public schooling and welfare and has all retail businesses nationalize, or you could have an economy where the government controls welfare, public schooling, healthcare and trade but retail businesses are left in private hands. Cuba is socialist as small private shops exist in that nation.
Socialism in theory is when the workers take control of the factories, the work places, and the means of production. Some think it should be a revolutionary take over, others say it should be democratic and peaceful. The new system of workers ruling would help create an egalitarian society.
Communism is the next step for Marxist revolutionaries. In theory, the people would all be provided for and there would be no use for the government. Thus, the government would "wither away." The world would be a classless, stateless society.
Now, these are the very basics. There are many theories of Socialism and Communism.
To the creator of the topic, how can you justify Leninism? Lenin was not interested in creating a socialist or communist society. He was in the revolution for himself and his own lust for power. I'm very left wing, but I despise Leninism.
To the creator of the topic, how can you justify Leninism? Lenin was not interested in creating a socialist or communist society. He was in the revolution for himself and his own lust for power. I'm very left wing, but I despise Leninism.
How do you know that? If war-communism is your proof then I'd say that many leaders did horrible things during war and did great things during peacetime!
And as a credit to Lenin's common sense for the people, he gave up war-communism because farmers stopped growing crops they knew the government would just take. So he made temporary capitalist reform until the civil war and the unstable economy ended.
Hopefully, you all realize that both communism and socialism have one major problem, that the government is in control of something. I'm not saying that having the government in control is bad, but they can take months to debate over a simple thing, and also, politics start becoming a company issue. The way they control the buisness is bad.
"The term "communism" refers to a Marxist utopia in which absolutely everything is owned by everyone and there is no state. Leninism is basically the state controlling everything while having vanguard communists run the show. Communists claim that the goal of socialism is communism, but history has demonstrated that is not the case so far." -- It is more accurate to point out that every attempt at socialism with 'vanguard communists' running the show has turned into a spectactular failure.
This failure is a result of a structural flaw in the socialist system: absolute power is vested in one body, the vanguard. They in turn impose absolute control on the lives of the citizenry, the economy, and society in general. At first they may believe in their values, but the system itself runs itself into the ground over time. Total control by the vanguard means that representative democracy as such is a meaningless concept for Leninists. It is hardly suprising that a system that does not contemplate the existence of laws as such--for the vanguard is the law--should lead to totalitarianism, particularly once the total economic failure of the system leads to cynical feeling on the part of its leaders.
But again, as you point out, Leninism is not 'socialism', because that term has no fixed meaning. Liberal democratic government and representative democracy is compatible with the beliefs of many people who call themselves socialists, but are not Leninists. In the broadest sense these 'socialists' think that government should have a say in certain areas of life. For instance they might support government-run infrastructure, health care programs, and so forth. However, a person can support these things without calling himself a socialist. So the term socialist is quite a vague one.
