A271-共產主義vs社會主義 (下) JCW, 2009/04/18.版權所有.
★☆★☆★ 超快速交通車： 用滑鼠左鍵點一下就可進入 ▼
(1). "未來世界的政治主張" 原稿，請看：https://city.udn.com/61613/forum 世聯WodFed城市
(2). "未來世界的政治主張" 整理後稿件，請看：http://blog.udn.com/jcwang00/article 世聯城的部落格
(3). 說笑雜項，請看：http://blog.udn.com/jctheoldman 用膝蓋想部落格
(4). 接龍創作，請看：http://blog.udn.com/JC00 外太空的009部落格
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
二十世紀，世界上有兩個共產主義國家 (見Soviet Union-Wikipedia中文 和 People's Republic of China-Wikipedia中文)；一個是蘇聯(USSR，Union of Soviet Socialist Republics，1922-1991)，另一個是中華人民共和國(PROC，People's Republic Of China，1949-)。USSR由它的共產黨(Communist Party「Bolsheviks」中文.[8]) 執政，PROC則由中國共產黨(CCP，Communist Party of China中文) 執政。這是眾所週知的事。但是，為何共產黨執政的國家要聲稱是實行社會主義的國家呢？假使拿這個問題去問CCP人士，我猜想，最佳答案可能是 "共產黨主張實行共產主義，馬克斯說世界將從資本主義、經過社會主義為中間過程、而進入共產主義，我們現在正在這中間過程、推行社會主義之中；我們最後的目標是共產主義"。那末，二十世紀中期CCP在大陸所實行的應該還不是共產，而是為共產舖路的一種社會主義手段嚕；對不對？……假使 "對"，那末，莫非共義主義所主張的階級鬥爭等等還在前途等著；我們中華人民的前途還有的是坦白、公審、三反、五反、清算、鬥爭、下放、勞改等等……要進入共產主義的境界會有那麼多的手段等著我人嗎？
我的 "未來世界的政治主張" 認為我人既要揚棄絕對的共產主義，也不容無節制的資本主義，而要以隨時、隨機調節、修正的社會主義為 "政治經濟Political economy中文 " 的政策……此言錯了嗎？
這是一個非常重要的論題；必須找資料來辯明：
(續前)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(3)★★★ Socialism and Communism, http://www.scn.org/~toddt/ - 這是一個美國Commie(共產黨員) 的網頁所載文章的大部分；仔細讀，可以發現很多值得討論的事：
The quick and easy way to remember the difference between Socialism and Communism is: Socialism is "from each according to their ability, to each according to their DEEDS," whereas Communism is "from each according to their ability to each according to their NEEDS."
Socialism is the stage between Capitalism and Communism. It builds upon the previous system (Capitalism) by nationalizing the "means of production" (i.e. corporations, resources, banks, etc.), but not by making everyone equal. In other words, people will be paid wages based on several factors (social need, difficulty, amount of schooling required, etc.), so not everyone will make the same wage -- as is often a misinterpretation of Socialism.
Communism is the point where the state "withers away". This will be quite a few years in the future. If I had to guess, I'd say at least 10 generations of established Socialism has to occur before people evolve enough to realize that hurting others or the system ends up hurting themselves.
As Communists we advocate Socialism because it is the next necessary step to get to Communism. That is, it's not that we've given up on building a house, we just realize there is a need for a sturdy foundation first.
Communists believe in human evolution. We evolve in accordance to the system we live within. Capitalism has allowed us to evolve out of our feudalistic ways (for the most part), and slavery does not exist in our country anymore (for the most part). But Capitalism, which is driven by the need to always increase profits, creates a "dog eat dog" mentality. This is not a sustainable system, either for humankind or for the environment.
Under Socialism people will evolve to the point where they care about each other regardless of their location or race or whatever. If we are to survive as a species, we need to evolve.
One misconception people often have about Communism is that we are looking to make everyone poor. On the contrary, we want everyone to enjoy as much as possible the fruits of our vast wealth.
(4)★★★ Communism vs Socialism , http://www.diffen.com/
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Socialism
☆Philosophy：
Communism - From each according to his abiliy, to each according to his needs.
Socialism - From each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds.
☆Communism is an extreme form of socialism：While the word "socialism" is sometimes used interchangeably with "communism", the two are not the same - communism is an extreme form of socialism.
☆Economic differences between socialism and communism：
In a socialist economy, the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
In a communist society, there is no centralized government - there is a collective ownership of property and the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
☆To eolve：
For a capitalist society to evolve, the first step is socialism. From a capitalist system, it is easier to achieve the socialist ideal where production is distributed according to people's deeds (quantity and quality of work done).
For communism, to distribute production according to needs, it is necessary to first have production so high that there is enough for everyone's needs. In an ideal communist society, people work not because they have to but because they want to and out of a sense of responsibility.
☆Political differences between socialists and communists：
Socialism rejects a class-based society. But socialists believe that it is possible to make the transition from capitalism to socialism without a basic change in the character of the state. They hold this view because they do not think of the capitalist state as essentially an institution for the dictatorship of the capitalist class, but rather as a perfectly good piece of machinery which can be used in the interest of whichever class gets command of it. No need, then, for the working class in power to smash the old capitalist state apparatus and set up its own—the march to socialism can be made step by step within the framework of the democratic forms of the capitalist state.
Communists believe that as soon as the working class and its allies are in a position to do so they must make a basic change in the character of the state; they must replace capitalist dictatorship over the working class with workers' dictatorship over the capitalist class as the first step in the process by which the existence of capitalists as a class (but not as individuals) is ended and a classless society is eventually ushered in.
http://ask.yahoo.com/20050920.html
http://www.marxmail.org/faq/socialism_and_communism.htm
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.etext.org/
http://www.romm.org/soc_com.html
http://www.pww.org/past-weeks-1999/Socialism%20and%20communism.htm
(5)★★★ The Difference between Communism and Socialism, http://www.enscriptchun.net/
☆It is important to understand that though "communism" and "socialism" share certain ideas, the two are not interchangeable terms, and thus, not identical concepts.
☆To understand communism, one must first be able to understand socialism. Socialism first emerged in the late 18th century as a reaction to liberalism and its emphasis on competition. Like liberalism, socialism emphasized the inherent equality of all individuals, and, like conservatism, socialism thought that a strong, unified government was desirable. But unlike liberals and conservatives, socialists contended that the inequalities created by competition are unacceptable.
Karl Marx, perhaps the most influential socialist thinker of our time, divided modern society into two classes: the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat (Marx & Engels, 193). The Bourgeoisie is the upper class that controls the government, the economy, and all society through their wealth and influence. The Proletariats are the lower class of society that is the basic workers, those who do nothing but produce in the factories and the mills for the Bourgeoisie. The Proletariat is underpaid and mistreated because of the laws of capitalism, which compel Bourgeoisie to act or face extinction as a privileged class. For the factories that produce cheaper products in more quantities, at a lower cost to itself, will outlast those that do not.
The core belief of all socialists is that human beings thrive or die depending on their social relations. As such, socialists believe that our actions are shaped by our social structures, not by an inherent human nature or individual choices. These social structures in turn are influenced by the social classes in a society, which are usually organized along the lines of wealth. "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles," (Marx & Engels, 193). Socialists also dispute the classical liberal conception of private property. To them, everything produced in society is a "social product": that without the society, it could not have been made. Therefore, socialists reason that the product produced belongs to the society as a whole and not to the individual. The product is for the common good of the society. Thomas More, an important influence on later socialist thinkers, summarized the socialist point of view in a line from his book, Utopia. "I have no doubt…that wherever men have private property and money is the measure of everything, there it is hardly possible for the commonwealth to be justly governed or to flourish in prosperity," (More 182). Socialists reason that when property is unequally distributed, this causes tensions between social classes, disrupting social relations. Thus, socialists believe that human happiness and harmony is achieved through the equalization of all social classes to create a single class, lacking any superior or inferior to conflict with.
While the ideas and beliefs of socialism are enshrined in communism, Communists take a more definitive stance on certain key issues. While many socialist advocated gradual and slow change, communists are unhesitant in their support of open, armed rebellion. Karl Marx, the originator of communism, concluded his work, The Communist Manifesto, with, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution," (Marx & Engels, 204). Communists also advocated an all-powerful state, in which a central government wields total control over its people - the economy, the media, industry, education, etc. This is contrary to many socialists who believe that control of these things should belong to people on a de-centralized local level, rather than a centralized national level. Later, socialist revisionists such as Kant argued that socialism should also have a defined moral context and standards. Vladimir Lenin, who interpretations of Marxist socialism have shaped communism, viewed traditional morals and ethics as the tools used to keep the Proletariats in line. In revolution, the ends justify the means, as seen in understanding his infamous quote, "You cannot make an omelette without breaking eggs," (textbook 156). It is probably this cold-hearted ruthlessness that characterizes communism the most in the American mind.
So perhaps communism does deserve the reputation of harshness that it possesses here in America. Countless stories of abuses at the hands of the communist governments in the former USSR and the People's Republic of China fill our minds all the time. But it is a reputation undeserved by socialism. Though communism may be an ideological descendent of socialism, in this case the sins of the child are not the sins of the parent.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
在網上可以找到極多有關本文主題的資料，如下述。我覺得最合裡的說法，不管馬克斯、恩格思、史密斯、列寧、史太林、毛澤東……曾經如何說，所謂主義者、不管它在政治或經濟方面有多少理論支持或反對它，它各有它的歷史背景和或正或反的成就；它的任務應該是 "為用"。共產主義和社會主義這兩個名詞，當初各有歷史背景的起因，今則除了照既往方式延用之外，似乎也有政治手段的有意混用；譬如聽人說某人是共產黨，或聽人說和說某人是社會主義者，你的直覺反影就大概會不一樣。但是，作為經濟理論或政治手段，共產主義都似乎太意識形態化(Ideologic)；易言之，就是不切實際，而所謂實際就是指人性：不容易被正常的人性所認同接納而極容易為不正常的人性所曲解利用。但是，主動方面人有很高的說服的能力，被動方面則有很容易被說服的弱點；批評資本主義，大致不會引起激辯，批評共產主義和社會主義，在華人界，海峽兩岸就會有兩極的反應……大陸同胞會很敏感；台灣同胞會較無為。至於我放言說大陸以前所行的是共產主義，今則已回頭，稍稍引用了資本主義的自由經濟政策，言下影射馬克斯 "從資本而社會，由社會而共產" 的演進方向錯了，恐怕馬上就會被批判。然則，我畢竟還是很固執的……對有興趣談論這三種主義的諸君來說 "未來世界的政治主張" 的選擇是如何，何用多言；還是只要一句話就比足夠還足夠了；而它，不也就說明了我對本文主題 "共產主義vs社會主義" 這論題的解釋呢？它就是：……
/// A206-只要一句話！ JCW, 2009/03/12.版權所有.
★◎★ 未來世界需要的政治經濟(經濟政策)、只要一句話就說明了：------
馬克斯推測說：
(開始)資------->----------(過程)社------------------->共(終極目標)
"未來世界的政治" 主張：
(左)共 |||<----------社(可能修正的範圍) --------->||| 資(右)
[註]：
共 = 共產主義； 社 = 社會主義；資 = 資本主義。
|||<--- 和 --->||| 是指永不達到的 "極端" 和 "無節制"。
有疑問嗎？ ///
(6)★★★ 其他資料源：
(6A) The Difference? " Communism vs. Socialism, http://www.mentalfloss.com/difference/?p=38
Everything you need to feel ... socialism is much more loosely defined and, as such, ... Much of the theory for communism grew out of discontent in ...
(6B).What's the difference between communism, fascism, and socialism?
http://ask.yahoo.com/20050920.html
And just as communism is a form of socialism, Marxism, Maoism, and Leninism are ... Like socialism and communism, fascism uses a central authority to maintain ...
(6C).Informal Communist Discussion, http://www.communism.com/
communism • socialism • marxism. MIA Encyclopedia of Marxism. MIA terms • MIA people ... What is Socialism? science vs. bullshit. Scientific definition: ...
◎MORE LINKS
?Open directory project links on communism and anti-revisionism
Organizations --
? ComInterNet: Listing of World
Communist & Workers Parties
Text Archives --
? Marxists Internet Archive (mia)
? From Marx to Mao (m2m)
FAQ's / Glossaries --
? Wikipedia entries on:
Communism ? Socialism ? Marxism
? MIA terms ? MIA people
Basic Reading --
? Three Sources & Three Component Parts of Marxism, Lenin 1913
? The Historical Destiny of the Doctrine of Karl Marx, Lenin 1913
? A Reading Guide (from the marx2mao site)
Discussion --
? Leftist Trainspotters
An e-mail group about the history
and the present state
of leftist parties and groups.
? The POF-200 discussion list
-- Leftist resources --
? Jay's Leftist and Progressive
Resources Directory
? (List of Marxist sites from above)
(6D). [Communism/Socialism vs Capitalism] By Julien, Newcombe SC, Geelong.
http://www.cnr.vt.edu/boyer/geog1014/TOPICS/109ec_dev/econies.html
☆注意 - 最末一節全錄於下。
Created: 28th November 1996
Last modified: 1st August 1997
Access: Unrestricted
Copyright © 1997, The University of Melbourne
<Introduction:>
<Socialism:>
<Karl Marx and Marxism:>
<Communism:>
<Communism in Russia>
<The Cold War:>
<Communism in China: >
<Capitalism: >
<Conclusion:> - The war between capitalism and communism is an interesting one, with many battles and new developments still to come. I believe that the conflict between these different ideologies is by no means over.
In theory both capitalism and communism have their advantages. In a theoretical capitalist society there is an extremely strong profit incentive which leads to the accelerated development of new products and technological advances which benefit not only those who are strong enough to succeed but also those who are left behind, through the famous "trickle down effect". In a theoretical communist society there is no unemployment, no inflation, higher productivity in times of crisis and no disparity in wealth, status and power.
However, in practice the story is vastly different for both political systems. Capitalism in practice leads to high unemployment, alienation, the boom-slump cycle, poverty and crime. Communism in practice leads to political control, the suppression of free speech, limited travel, the repression of religion and restricted expression of the arts. Marx idea of the ultimate abolition of the state was in practice as far as it could be.
My ideal society would be neither of these two extremes but something in-between, leaning towards the left. My system would operate basically on capitalist principals. Except that there would be strict limits on the profit that individuals or corporations could make. This would be achieved either through taxation or some other means. There would be a fairer distribution of the wealth of the country and greater opportunities for those at a disadvantage. These ideas are nothing new and neither is the notion of Utopia. Utopia, however, will never be anything more than a dream. Because of human imperfections there will always be conflicts between members of a society. As Adam Smith would have said "self-interest is the basic motivator of human action" a consequence of which is the unequal acquisition of wealth and power.
So to finish I think that communism, if it could be made to function in its ideal manner, would be superior. But we live in a world which is, like it or not, filled with greed. The system then is fundamentally driven by greed (capitalism). In the end, I believe that capitalism was and will be inevitable, at least in some form.
