Why Most America Want And Vote For Democratic Socialism Vs. Communism in USA

Why Most America Want And Keep Vote For A Democratic Socialism Vs. Communism In USA Socialism and Communism both place much value on creating a more equal society and removing class privilege. The biggest difference between them is that socialism is compatible with liberty and democracy, while communism depends on an authoritarian state to create an “equal society” that denies basic liberties. Political Independents Who They Are, What They Think. ?Show more

Independents often are portrayed as political free agents with the potential to alleviate the nation’s rigid partisan divisions. Yet the reality is that most independents are not all that “independent” politically. And the small share of Americans who are truly independent – less than 10% of the public has no partisan leaning – stand out for their low level of interest in politics.

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2019/03/14/political-independents-who-they-are-what-they-think/

The primary difference between communism vs socialism is the nature of ownership of assets. In communism, the ownership of the factories, residential properties, and agricultural lands is state-owned without any private ownership. However, in socialism, the ownership of land, factories, and agricultural land lie with the private sector or individuals. Socialism can exist within the framework of democracy, whereas democracy has no place in communism. In communism, there is no religion besides the state. Socialism allows people to practice their religion.

How Are Socialism and Communism Different? Though the terms are often used interchangeably, socialism and communism are different in key ways.

Both socialism and communism are essentially economic philosophies advocating public rather than private ownership, especially of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods (i.e., making money) in a society. Both aim to fix the problems they see as created by a free-market capitalist system, including the exploitation of workers and a widening gulf between rich and poor.

But while socialism and communism share some basic similarities, there are also important differences between them.

Key Differences Between Communism and Socialism
Under communism, there is no such thing as private property. All property is communally owned, and each person receives a portion based on what they need. A strong central government—the state—controls all aspects of economic production, and provides citizens with their basic necessities, including food, housing, medical care and education.

By contrast, under socialism, individuals can still own property. But industrial production, or the chief means of generating wealth, is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

Another key difference in socialism versus communism is the means of achieving them. In communism, a violent revolution in which the workers rise up against the middle and upper classes is seen as an inevitable part of achieving a pure communist state. Socialism is a less rigid, more flexible ideology. Its adherents seek change and reform, but often insist on making these changes through democratic processes within the existing social and political structure, not overthrowing that structure.

Today, communism and socialism exist in China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos and Vietnam—although in reality, a purely communist state has never existed. Such countries can be classified as communist because in all of them, the central government controls all aspects of the economic and political system. But none of them have achieved the elimination of personal property, money or class systems that the communist ideology requires.

Likewise, no country in history has achieved a state of pure socialism. Even countries that are considered by some people to be socialist states, like Norway, Sweden and Denmark, have successful capitalist sectors and follow policies that are largely aligned with social democracy. Many European and Latin American countries have adopted socialist programs (such as free college tuition, universal health care and subsidized child care) and even elected socialist leaders, with varying levels of success.

In the United States, socialism has not historically enjoyed as much success as a political movement. Its peak came in 1912, when Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs won 6 percent of the vote. But at the same time, U.S. programs once considered socialist, such as Medicare and Social Security, have been integrated into American life.

What Is Democratic Socialism?

https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2022/1/26/democratic-socialism-and-socialism-are-increasingly-salient-among-democrats

Democratic socialism, a growing U.S. political movement in recent years, lands somewhere in between social democracy and communism. Like communists, democratic socialists believe workers should control the bulk of the means of production, and not be subjected to the will of the free market and the capitalist classes. But they believe their vision of socialism must be achieved through democratic processes, rather than revolution.

Socialism and communism have the same roots in worker exploitation but different characteristics.
Communism fully controls the production of goods and services. In contrast, socialism controls only the essential factors of production. But both reject capitalism.
There is no democracy, class, religion, or private sector in communism. Whereas socialism is integral to democracy, promoting private ownership, wealth as per efforts, and independent religious beliefs.
Market forces are not present in communism, unlike socialism, where the government regulates trade and business through its policies and personnel.

What Is Communism?
Communism is a form of political doctrine that aims to build a classless society by ending capitalism. It, therefore, emphasizes equalizing wealth distribution. As a result, communism advocated for a global revolution to end the rich and exploitative class to create a classless society. In the communist party, workers control society through a central authority. So, the proletariat or the members of the society have common ownership under communism. Hence, they equally own the factors of production and the produced goods and services. The government acquires all the private property. The government itself becomes a religion. Therefore people worship it.

The communist party has full authority and controls everything under the communist regime. So, under the system, people have to contribute to the economy and government as per their abilities. People are given a share in the state livelihood concerning the collective needs of the society. Moreover, the group of heads of the communist party owns the manufacturing factors like land, capital, and entrepreneurship. Although the head group does not own the labor, the central group decides the deployment of the labor. According to historical records, communist systems have always failed to some extent.

What Is Socialism?
Socialism is a broader concept referring to an economic and political theory where the government, society, and private sector collectively own the the production of goods, dispensation, and interchange equally for homogeneity. Hence, socialism promotes a democratic form of government.

Land ownership, agricultural plots, and factories are in private individuals’ hands. So, they can use it to their benefit and earn profits for themselves. However, the government owns all those production factors that positively affect society. Examples include the power sector, railways, health care, and education. Private businesses are also allowed in other sectors that may not be feasible for the government to own, like dairy, crop production, pen, pencil, paper, water supply systems, etc.

However, in socialism, capitalism in some sectors exists in some form. It does not require a centrally controlled group to dictate and own everything. Therefore, it also does not require a single party to implement socialism. Therefore, even a democratically elected government can implement and own those aspects of society that may adequately fulfill the basic needs like water, electricity, healthcare, housing, and education.

Hence, in a nutshell, one can say that socialism’s prime goal is to promote mixed ownership of all kinds of production. This ownership is also by the public sector instead of completely by the private sector for fulfilling all human beings’ basic economic and social needs. Thus, even if it’s communism vs socialism, these two systems are relatable but not identical.

Some striking similarities between communism and socialism are discussed below:

The communism vs socialism definition clarifies that both communism and socialism aim at social welfare. The former aims at fair, whereas the latter aims at equal distribution of wealth.
Both are political and economic systems.
Both the systems want to eliminate class differences and equalize income distribution
When it comes to social welfare; every government is slightly communist social welfare.
Both beliefs are based on Karl Marx’s notion that capitalism allows the exploitation of workers by the owners. So, they reject capitalism and support equal economic power in society.
Both advocate the production of essential services and goods under the government’s control.
Moreover, both result from the workers’ opposition to their exploitation by the rich classes during the industrial revolution.
Communist and socialist countries include the People’s republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, to name a few.
Communism vs Socialism vs Capitalism
The prime difference between capitalism from the other two systems is its central aim. The central aim of this system is to maximize profits. Whereas in communism, the prime aim is to maximize social welfare. So, the government completely controls the resources and factors of production. In socialism, the state partially controls the resources. However, in capitalism, the state does not intervene in the markets. It promotes a free market and free economy.

Fascism is a dictatorial form of political ideology. Socialism, on the other hand, is an ideology where individuals of a society own the means of production. A fascist ruler wields supreme power and authority over a country. In contrast, rulers of socialist nations distribute power and authority among the states.

A dictator does not tolerate any criticism, opposition, or rebellion; freedom of speech takes a back seat. Compared to fascist regimes, socialist states allow more freedom of speech. Dictators control industries; but in socialist states, the ownership of the means of production lies with the public sector.

Fascism is an ideology that supports dictatorship and authoritarian reigns. The whole nation is ruled by a single leader who has complete control over industries. Dictators permit private ownership only when it seems beneficial for the state. Under a fascist rule, people don’t have any freedom of speech—any form of criticism or rebellion is suppressed.

The origin of fascism can be traced back to 1919. After World War I, Benito Mussolini and his fascist party came to power in Italy. Mussolini believed that a fascist ruler should take firm control over the state; people should not be given the liberty to speak up.

It was a ‘nation above everything’ ideology. The primary aim of the fascist ideology is to build a strong nation by prioritizing the country over its people.

Some of the basic features of fascism are discussed below:

It is a dictatorial rule—run by military regulations.
It is a kind of authoritarian leadership that promotes nationalism or patriotism.
It is against democratic and capitalist ideologies.
It exercises firm control over the public, industries, and society.
It doesn’t allow any freedom or right of expression to individuals and suppresses those who raise their voices in criticism.
It accepts the difference in social class and doesn’t take any steps to curb this discrimination.
What is Socialism?
Socialism is a political agenda where public welfare is prioritized over everything else. Here, people own the means of production, trade, and commerce. The nation makes it a priority to ensure that no citizen is deprived of basic necessities. In a socialist country, the central government distributes power and control among the states for better governance.

In the 19th century, socialism aimed to discourage widespread industrial revolution—under the capitalist system. The industrial revolution caused widespread unemployment and exploitation of labor across Europe. In that context, socialists Marx and Engels promoted a socialist ideology across Italy. Socialists consider the social class system discriminative and try to eliminate it.

Some of the key characteristics of socialism are as follows:

All the production factors are government or public-owned.
It aims to bring equality in society by prioritizing public welfare; for instance, healthcare facilities are made free for all.
Socialists respect all religions and believe that the state is independent of religion.
The central government distributes power and responsibilities to the states—for fair governance.
It opposes capitalism. Parallels can be drawn between democracy and socialism.

Now, let us look at some of fascism vs. socialism similarities. Both fascism and socialism are political ideologies followed by rulers or a ruling party. Despite the contrasts, fascism and socialism share the following similarities:

Significant Economic Impact: Both fascism and socialism have the potential to impact the economy significantly. The outcomes could be positive or negative.
Requires Strong Leadership: Both ideologies require superior leadership and governance.
Discourages Free Market: Fascism and socialism are both anti-capitalist in their philosophy. They are against free-market practices. Fascism restricts private ownership of industries, and socialism emphasizes public ownership of the means of production (instead of private owners).
Drives Social Movements: Both ideologies provoke widespread protests and resistance. Massive revolutions and activism coincide with these governance models.
Government Involvement: There is extreme government intervention and interference in the nation’s economic activities and social decisions—individual freedom takes a back seat.

The primary difference between the ideologies of communism and fascism lies in their motto. The communistic ideology aimed for a classless society where the control of production belonged to the state and there is economic equality between individuals. Fascism is a system, that executes strict class roles in society often controlled by a solo dictator. It relies on extreme nationalism among its people and suppresses all forms of oppositions. It supported private production as long as it served nationalistic purposes.

Communism was rooted in the concept of full control of production by a central authority, eliminating economic inequalities. Fascism concentrated more on the idea of building a strong nation, fed by a sense of unity fueled by belongingness and patriotism.
Communism did not entertain but rather wanted to abolish the concept of private ownership. Fascism supported private production as long as it supported and contributed to developing a self-reliant nation.
Regardless of ideological differences between Communism vs Fascism, they both depart from the concept of democracy.

Communism
is an ideology that intends to replace private property and a profit-based economy
with public ownership. In communism, the community controls the major means of production and the natural resources present in society. It can therefore be described as a higher form of socialism. It is an economic and political philosophy founded by Karl Marx along with Friedrich Engels in the latter half of the 19th century. The belief that the wealthy exploited worker populations and that societies would develop class consciousness was the start of this concept. Leaders believed that it would lead to a conflict that would be resolved by way of a revolutionary struggle. This conflict will make the proletariat (worker population) rise against the bourgeoisie and finally establish a communist society.

In a communist society, the aim is to achieve a state where the government would abolish all private ownership. In other words, the means of production belong to the entire community and not be concentrated only in certain pockets. Therefore, a common motto throughout the communist movement is that everyone gave according to their ability and received according to their needs. As a result, the requirements of society would take precedence over the needs of an individual.

What is Fascism?
Fascism is an ideology that advocates the superiority of the nation. “Nation” here can refer to a group or collection of people with a sense of belonging. It could be based on geography, ethnicity, or culture. All these could follow a fascist path, elevating nationalism above all other forms of loyalty. Here, the goal was to create a strong sense of nationalistic dictatorship that regulated and steered the economy. In addition, it wanted to transform the nation into something magnificent with a self-determined structure and culture. In short, it can be described as a type of authoritarian ultra-nationalism that didn’t mind achieving results by suppressing opposition.

It opposed liberal democracy and favored a one-party system. In addition, it was a system that rejected the ideas of socialism and capitalism
. Fascism, unlike these ideologies, advocated self-sufficiency through economic control. Besides, history shows that fascism supported violence in the name of politics. This was perceived as legitimate for the purpose of domination. Hence, we can understand that the yearning for national unity under strong leadership was a reason for the rise of fascism.

Communism vs Fascism – Similarities
Democracy:

In a democracy, the political system allows private ownership of goods and services. It allowed private enterprises to have the liberty of producing goods and services. Communism was against this kind of freedom and hence opposed the idea of democracy in this form.

Fascism, on the other hand, was hand-rooted in dictatorship and supremacy of the sense of belonging. It overthrew the cries for freedom of the oppressed and therefore opposed democracy.

Origin:

Communism originated in the second part of the 19th century in Europe. Fascism also emerged in the 19th century after being triggered by the World war in Europe.

Sense of individualism:

Communism puts society’s needs before the satisfaction of individual needs. On the other hand, fascism wanted to build a nation and wanted people to support it, valuing nationalism beyond a sense of individualism.

Free enterprise in economics refers to the private sector that operates at will without government interference. Also referred to as free trade and free-market enterprise, this means an economy where companies can trade, operate, and set prices without restrictions. In other words, the business owners set the regulations themselves.

A free enterprise offers the citizens the freedom to utilize their money as they wish and pursue job opportunities they want. Moreover, unlike the government-controlled systems, which limit people to start business opportunities, a free market enables multiple companies to compete with each other.

Free enterprise is the freedom of general economic activity within a nation.
Free enterprise examples include a private restaurant chain run without government interference or a person starting an online business.
Its characteristics include market competition, private property, specialization, voluntary exchange, a price system, and entrepreneurship.
Some common types of free enterprises are liberal market economies, coordinated market economies, and mixed market economies.

Free enterprise is an economic system that allows citizens to operate it freely. One might have often heard of “laissez-faire
” markets, the French term for “leave-alone .” The idea of free enterprise is pretty much the same, in that the market itself determines the prices.

Central to this idea is that competitive markets exist and operate driven by the consumer. Since there is demand for a product, people will create a market to fill the demand. In theory, households and consumers own most of a country’s economic resources and decide what to do with them – not governments.

The laws of supply and demand
are paramount to the concept of free-market enterprise. Those who believe staunchly in free enterprise believe that governments should allow supply and demand to run their course, regardless of its natural by-products.

Let us explore the idea further with two free enterprise examples. First, with nowhere to go and lots of time on their hands, consumers in 2020 largely turned to online shopping to fulfill their daily needs. As a result, free enterprise businesses like Amazon profited greatly.

Amazon’s net profit increased 84% during the pandemic. Increased demand for delivery services allowed Amazon to fulfill the supply needed.

In reverse, as we all know, retail businesses and restaurants took a devastating hit. With almost no demand for in-house dining and people going to brick and mortar stores, large swaths of businesses were forced to close permanently.

Another example of free enterprise can be the competition for cheap labor and manufacturing. A good portion of products sold throughout the world is manufactured in China. Even something as ubiquitous as the iPhone has many of its components manufactured in the country. China has cheaper labor and manufacturing capacities than other, more developed countries.

Although the United States is more than capable of producing all of these products domestically, the forces of supply and demand prove it more efficient for companies to produce their goods in China and sell them in the United States for a higher profit margin.

Characteristics of Free Enterprise
While there are different types of free enterprises, there are six basic principles under which the theory operates. They are:

Market Competition
Businesses or people competing against each other is considered market competition. It is the basis for the free-market enterprise. The opportunity to compete is the foundation of the free-market movement.

Private Property
Property is owned by individuals and companies, not the federal government. In other markets run by communist or socialist governments, this is not the case.

Specialization
People or businesses can focus on producing one specific product or service. Specializing in one area allows businesses to sell products at higher prices and supply higher wages.

Voluntary Exchange
Also referred to as consumer freedom, the ability for people to buy and sell whatever they want is voluntary exchange. For example, a consumer gives the money in exchange for bread because they feel like it. But in a communist market, for example, the consumer could be given certain amounts of coupons for the bread that is allocated to them.

Price System
Prices act as the direction of the value between products and services. The higher the price, the higher is the current value of items. It is the cornerstone of demand and of free enterprise businesses. The ability of the supplier and consumer to set price levels based on demand is crucial to free-market movement.

Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship is what allows people to start their own businesses. In a free market, people have limited restrictions for starting their own business. Therefore, the level and ease of business ownership within a country largely reflect the strength of its free-market enterprise.

Types of Free Enterprise
Although an ideology on its own, free enterprise is essentially the foundation for capitalism
. Most of the world’s largest and most developed economies currently function as capitalist societies. Alternatives to capitalism, which we currently see in the international market, are communism, socialism, and some forms of religious dictatorships. These types of markets control the socio-economic affairs of that country, the jobs created, consumer freedom, and goods and services available to citizens.

Free enterprise societies as such differ greatly from their more restrictive counterparts. That said, they also differ greatly amongst themselves. The degree of ‘freedom’ each of those societies allows may vary.

Free Enterprise Economy
Here are the 3 types of Free Enterprise Economy –

#1 – Liberal Market Economy
One of the best examples of a free market enterprise is a liberal market economy. Liberal market economies are a type of economy
that aims to function with the lowest possible amount of government interference to prices and wages. The United States and Great Britain are examples of liberal market economies.

#2 – Coordinated Market Economy
While arguably labeled a free enterprise economy when compared to communist countries, coordinated market economies have quite a bit of regulatory oversight. As a result, these governments tend to directly influence wages within their unions and manufacturing industries. Often called “Western Christian Democratic Economies,” Germany, Austria, Japan, and Sweden are all examples.

#3- Mixed-Market Economy
MMEs have components of both a liberal and coordinated market economy. They have both liberal and socialistic elements under which the economies operate. For example, MMEs allow price levels to run their course and allow private property. But large swaths of industry are state-owned.

For example, healthcare may be universal and state-run, but pharmaceuticals may be privatized. Also called “Mediterranean market economies,” Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal are all examples.

Important to Note
Free enterprise is a fluid, constantly changing concept. As we see with the different varieties of capitalism, a country and economy are only as “free” as it is compared to another country. If we compare Germany to Cuba, we can call it liberal. However, one might argue Germany is more restrictive compared to the United States.

These labels have evolved and changed over the last decade as they continue today. What makes these economies different is the level of government interference or “red-tape” that exists.

Even liberal market economies have some degree of government regulation. For example, while the notion of free enterprise is heavily guarded in the United States, there are still market and trading caps, emissions caps, monopoly reducing strategies, legislation that controls who can conduct certain business, etc.

Essential to note is that a truly “free” market cannot and does not exist. There is a belief that free enterprise is in and of itself a market failure. If left unregulated, a free market will always result in information asymmetry and be controlled by only certain players, who will try to monopolize and take away its freedom.

For these reasons, we can think of free enterprise as a guiding light rather than infallible doctrine.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is a free enterprise?
A free market functions by the rules and regulations set by itself and experience limited restrictions from the government. A private-sector market that functions without government interference is one of the free enterprise examples.

How does the free enterprise system distribute jobs?
Free enterprise systems offer individuals the freedom to pursue job opportunities of their liking. It enables people to start their businesses and work in an industry of their choice. The free market also encourages the free learning and distribution of skillsets.

What countries have free enterprise economies?
Two of the most liberal free enterprise economies are Great Britain and the United States. Although countries like Germany offer free functioning of markets to an extent, they still have more restrictions compared to countries like the U.S.A.

Economies of scale is the cost advantage of ramping up production. When a business scales up, production cost per unit comes down—the fixed and variable costs are spread over more number of units.

After scaling up, businesses own superior machinery and get volume discounts
on raw materials
. Larger firms have a competitive edge over smaller players who have limited production capacity and higher production costs
. In addition to production, businesses can scale up by investing in advertising or Research & Development.

Economies of scale concept state that an increase in production reduces the production cost per-unit.
Scaling up could be internal or external. Internal factors include efficient machinery, specialization of labor, container principle, and bulk-purchase discounts. External factors include tax benefits, government subsidies, improved transportation, and joint ventures.
Upscaling is very expensive—could require mergers or acquisitions. Most smaller firms cannot raise that much capital.

When firms become more efficient in large-scale production, the total production cost increases but their cost per unit
declines. This is achieved by using competent machinery and procuring raw material in bulk, at a discounted price. Although there is an increase in production and raw materials, the firm’s fixed cost
remains the same. Therefore, the fixed cost distributes evenly across the entire output. Ultimately profit margin
increases.

In contrast, small businesses price their goods or services higher than large organizations—low scalability. After all, small businesses cannot afford discounts—the cost of production is high. In addition, most small firms employ labor-intensive processes instead of machinery, inflating their per-unit cost. Similarly, some businesses do not get discounts due to low purchase volume. Upscaling resolves all such issues.

Supermarkets are the most common example of economies of scale. Since they buy goods in bulk, they avail discounts. Therefore, they enjoy the benefit of reduced average cost
.

Another example is an airline company that invests millions in buying a new plane. If it had only a few customers, the airline would have to charge very high. Airlines serve millions of customers. By doing so they can recoup expenses
despite low charges. Increased volume of production—reduced average cost.

The technology giant Intel Corporation is another good example of upscaling advantages. The company invests massively in semiconductor chips and microprocessors. The company manufactures in large quantities. Therefore, Research & Development costs are very low for one unit.

Firms can achieve economies of scale by working over internal or controllable factors.

Division of Labour and Specialization: Each worker should have a particular task. Specialization improves the efficiency of individual personnel.
Commercial: Like Walmart, many companies purchase goods in sizable quantities to avail discounts.
Container Principle: If the area of production or storage is increased by 100%, the volume accommodated will increase by 200%. This way, the benefit of expansion is twice that of construction costs.
Marketing: Spending heavily on advertising and promotion is another up-scaling strategy. Accelerated sales can easily recover the marketing cost. The marketing expenditure per unit is miniscule.
Technical: Technology-based companies spend excessively on Research & Development. But they recover the investment when a successful product or service takes the market by storm.
Financial: Large-scale businesses can get leveraged funds at a lower cost due to established relationships and goodwill
. Also, big firms can release initial public offerings (IPOs)
to raise capital.
High Risk: Large-scale firms can afford bigger risks.
External Factors
Following are external factors that help in upscaling.

Tax Reduction: When the government relaxes the tax liabilities on certain products or services—demand can shoot up—higher profits for the business.
Government Subsidies: Producers of certain goods or services receive subsidies from the government—low production cost.
Superior Transportation Network: Companies can take advantage of transportation facilities by speeding up raw material procurement and finished goods distribution.
Skilled and Talented Labour: If labor markets
become efficient, companies can employ talented workforce at nominal wages.
Joint Ventures and Partnerships: The fastest way to scale up is via mergers
and acquisitions
.
Disadvantages
Following are the disadvantages of scaling up.

Diversification Risk: When firms expand their business operations
across different industries, some of the subsidiaries might underperform.
Huge Capital Investment: Scalability is expensive—most small firms cannot raise that much capital.
Limited Market Demand: Customer preference is unpredictable; therefore, the demand for a particular product can fall unexpectedly. In such a scenario, ramped-up production can result in huge losses and dead stock.
Requires Higher Degree of Control and Management: Scaling up results in a new team of individuals—it takes time for them to function smoothly. Mergers and acquisitions often result in contrasting work cultures.

In contrast, the diseconomy of scale
occurs due to the inefficiency in existing production methods. As a result, the average cost rises when the output is increased. Sometimes, diseconomies of scale occur when firms outgrow their potential. Employee costs, compliance costs, and administration costs get out of hand.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
What is an example of economies of scale?
A small bakery employs five bakers to prepare cakes, the production is low, and so is the profit. Consequently, the firm expands the business by introducing automation into baking. After considerable investment, the bakery increased production by ten times. Over time, the fixed cost spreads over total increased output—per cake upscaling cost is low.

Who classified economies of scale into internal and external?
It was introduced by Alfred Marshall. Marshall was an English economist from London. He emphasized the distinction between internal and external upscaling.

What causes economies of scale?
Businesses scale up by ramping up production, specializing in labor, procuring raw materials in bulk, advertising, investing in research, and raising capital.

The primary difference explained in capitalism vs communism is that capitalism is an economic system that allows private ownership and promotes the idea of a free market; in contrast, communism favors collective ownership and restricts the free market with government intervention portraying a planned economy.

While pure capitalism in a country represents a free market economy, the elements of communism are easily seen in command economies. Furthermore, capitalism motivates entities to work hard and innovate to make a profit, whereas communism does not emphasize or focus on providing an incentive to trigger hard work.

The primary difference between capitalism and communism emerges from the ownership of factors of production. In capitalism, it is owned by individuals, whereas in a communist nation, the ownership lies in the hands of the government.
Capitalism exhibits private ownership, profit motive, minimal government intervention, competitive market, capital accumulation, class system, etc.
Communism exhibits common ownership, central planning, no competition, classless society, etc.
In the socialism vs. capitalism vs. communism debate, socialism and communism oppose capitalism and stand to attain collective ownership and equal distribution of resources. Furthermore, socialism additionally allows individuals to own properties, unlike communism.

Capitalism Vs communism are two different political and economic ideology that has been existing in the global history for a long time. They are two separate approaches that are used to organize the social, economic and political method of distributing resource and wealth.

In the system of capitalism, the means of production is privately owned. The business and industries operate with the aim of making profit. This system depends on the market forces of demand and supply to fix the product prices, where the main criteria is consumer choice and their willingness to pay for the products available in the market. Due to high competition, the factors concentrate on improvement of efficiency and innovation. However, this often leads to disparity in income and wealth.

In case of communism, there is a classless society where the factors are commonly owned and allocated as per the ability and need of consumers. There is no private ownership at all and there is no reliance in demand and supply because everything is fixed by the government. However, even though there is equality in the resource distribution it is not based on individual contribution.

However, it is essential to note in the capitalism vs communism debate that no country has taken the path of complete capitalism or communism. Most countries have taken up a mix of both so that there is a balance between efficiency, welfare, and freedom.

What Is Capitalism?
Capitalism occurs when people are allowed to own and control capital assets, use them according to their self-interest, and earn profit by producing valued goods and services utilizing capital resources. In a capitalist economy, government intervention will be minimal; hence, the production of goods and services is driven by supply and demand. It creates an environment that promotes individualism, innovations, competition, efficient allocation of resources, the efficiency of the private sector, presenting consumers with better choices, and improving living standards. capitalism vs communism.

On the other hand, capitalism is often blamed for favoring the rich. The opponents of the system advocate that in capitalism, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer instigating the unequal distribution of wealth and inequality, creating social division. Moreover, in the wake of producing profit, the capitalist model exploits the workers, and unfair competition can also lead to the emergence of monopoly in specific sections. All these disadvantages communicate the need for the reformation of capitalism.

What Is Communism?
Communism ideology aims to establish common ownership and eliminate the private property concept. It simply focuses on replacing private ownership and introducing state-owned organizations, projects, resources, and properties, ensuring economic equality and fairness. Such economies work towards achieving social development, the welfare, and the overall development of all the citizens of a nation.

Examples
China has long been a significant example of a communist government where the government-controlled major resources, funds, products, and services, but later due to globalization and certain other aspects, has started implementing some elements of capitalism to grow business and take advantage of trade opportunities. Similarly, it has been observed that many nations turn their heads toward capitalism to obtain more opportunities, attain industrialization, and reap the benefits of globalization hence strengthening the capitalism vs communism debate.

Capitalism and communism are inherently contrasting concepts. While capitalism propagates individualism, communism is associated with collectivism. Industrial capitalism was popularised in the 18th century, and modern communism was propagated in the 19th century.

The instances reflecting the conflict based on these ideologies were prevalent from the old times. For example, ideological conflict, capitalism vs. communism in the Cold War of the 20th century. During the Cold War, the United States and Western European nations were based upon capitalism and democracy. In contrast, the Soviet Union was based upon communism and dictatorship, and Eastern European nations were under Soviet communist control. Many of the significant events in the Cold War contributed to explaining whether capitalism was better than communism or not.

Here we find capitalism vs communism simplified and similarities are shown clearly.

Communism and capitalism can result in an improved living standard for the people.
Capitalism vs Communism explanations indicates that the foreign trade policies differ in both systems. However, both utilize globalization.
Which Is Better?
Both the concepts of communism and capitalism are forms of social organizations that are related to industry, trade and economy. They discuss the concept of property ownership, either by the government of private owners.

However, just as every concept has positive and negative sides and effects, same is the case with the capitalism vs communism activity. It is necessary to understand the effects of both clearly. In case of capitalism, there is private ownership or resources, leading to a profit motive, which again promotes innovation and economic growth. Since consumers have a wide range of choices, there is more competition, and which may lead to innovation but at the same time over utilization of resources. There is personal freedom in the process of decision making, which allows people to exercise choice, creativity, skill and knowledge, but personal choice may be prioritized rather than social welfare.

But in the case of communism, there is no income disparity, and resources are evenly distributed, but individual contribution is not looked into. But there is an expectation of community feeling and collective responsibility towards each other. It is not easy to point out any system as better than the other since both capitalism vs communism activity have pros and cons. Their effectiveness depends on the economic situation, implementation method, and cultural, political, and historical factors.

Democratic Socialism is a left-wing political philosophy that supports political democracy and some form of a socially owned economy. It emphasizes economic democracy, workplace democracy, and workers' self-management within a market socialist economy or an alternative form of a decentralised planned socialist economy. Democratic socialists believe that capitalism is incompatible with the values of freedom, equality, and solidarity and that these ideals can only be achieved through the realisation of a socialist society. The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, with over 96,000+ members and chapters in all 50 states. They believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few.

Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society.

We believe there are many avenues that feed into the democratic road to socialism. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy and leaves behind authoritarian visions of socialism in the dustbin of history.

We want a democracy that creates space for us all to flourish not just survive and answers the fundamental questions of our lives with the input of all. We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation. We want the multiracial working class united in solidarity instead of divided by fear. We want to win “radical” reforms like single-payer Medicare for All, defunding the police/refunding communities, the Green New Deal, and more as a transition to a freer, more just life.

We want a democracy powered by everyday people. The capitalist class tells us we are powerless, but together we can take back control.

Democratic Socialist Countries 2023
Democratic socialism describes a socialist economy where production and wealth are collectively owned, but the country has a democratic system of government. The goal of democratic socialism is to achieve socialist goals of equality while opposing socialist ideologies. Democratic socialism is opposed to the Soviet economic model, command economies, and authoritarian governance.

Under democratic socialism, the ownership of private property is limited. The government regulates the economy. Different programs offer assistance and pensions.

What is a Democratic Socialist?
A democratic socialist believes that the government should provide a range of essential services to the public for free or at a significant discount, such as health care and education. Unlike socialists, democratic socialists do not believe the government should control all aspects of the economy, only help provide basic needs and help all of its citizens have an equal chance of success.

What is Social Democracy?
Social democracy and democratic socialism are often used as synonyms; however, there are differences. Social democracy has a mostly capitalistic economy (i.e.: a less-regulated market and fewer rules against private ownership of land, utilities, etc.), but also with large-scale social welfare programs.

Social democracy is seen in the Nordic model, which includes a welfare state based on free market capitaliam. The model also include multi-level collective bargaining, a high percentage of the workforce unionized, and a large percentage of the workforce employed by the public sector. The Nordic countries were shaped by social democracy. Many other European countries have social democracies.

Socialism vs. Communism
Socialism and communism are both built on the premise that individuals contribute to society based on their ability to do so. Both concepts have the government playing a larger role in economic planning, investment, and government control institutions. Both also remove private business as a producer of goods and services.

There is a big fundamental difference between socialism and communism. Individuals under a proper communist system would not have money and would be given what the government thinks you need in terms of food, clothing, housing, etc. The people would not need to work harder to receive the same amount as anyone else. Under socialism, individuals are compensated based on their individual contribution; therefore, those who work harder would receive more.

Furthermore, communism views all property as public property, while socialism allows individuals to still have their own private property. Communism is an economic and political philosophy, and socialism is an economic philosophy. Lastly, communism abolishes class distinctions as everyone is effectively treated equally, while socialism allows class distinctions to exist, as there is the opportunity for some to achieve more wealth than others.

Democratic Socialism vs. Socialism
Both democratic socialism and socialism advocate for a redistribution of wealth and power to meet public needs, not make profits for a few. Both aim to weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of the working people.

Democratic socialists, however, do not think the government should immediately take control of all aspects of the economy. Democratic socialism focuses more on providing basic needs to all people, such as health care and education. Democratic socialism, unlike socialism, would achieve this through democratic means and not an authoritarian rule.

Failed Socialist Countries
The largest of the failed socialist countries is the Soviet Union, which fell in 1991. Following World War II, the United States helped rebuild Western European countries, all of whom were free marketing economies that rebuilt rapidly by establishing the European Union and trading with one another. On the other hand, the Soviet Union seized government control of Eastern European nations, all of which became socialist states. These included: Bulgaria, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Czechoslovakia, Belarus, and Ukraine. While East Germany reunified with West Germany and joined the thriving EU economy, the rest of the Eastern European countries faced economic hardship after the Soviet Union fell. Many of these countries remain the poorest European countries today.

Additionally, both Cuba and Venezuela are currently socialist states facing their own economic crises deemed a result of socialism.

Successful Socialist Countries
Some argue that there has been no completely socialist country that has been successful, only countries that have seen success in adopting socialist policies.

Bolivia is an example of a prosperous socialist country. Bolivia has drastically cut extreme poverty and has the highest GDP growth rate in South America.

Other countries that have adopted and enacted socialist ideas and policies to various degrees, and have seen success in improving their societies by doing so, are Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand.

Is Sweden Socialist?
Scandinavian countries are often touted as socialist paradises whose models should be adopted on a larger scale. However, that idealistic statement tells only part of the story. Sweden is a great example. It has a free-market economy, meaning that the government interferes very little in business. There are very few business regulations, particularly regarding workers; in fact, Sweden and other Scandinavian countries do not have minimum wages for their workers.

One area where Sweden does have socialist policies is in its school system. In the United States, the government pays for public schools, and parents who prefer can pay to send their children to private schools instead. Sweden offers school vouchers to all children, meaning that the government will pay for school wherever the parents decide to send the children. The children can go to schools run by religious institutions or those run by the government.

Swedish workers do pay more in taxes than workers in non-socialist countries, like the United States. The reason they do so is so that the government has money for generous social services, including maternity and paternity leave for new parents and the school voucher system. There is also more income equality in Scandinavian countries, like Sweden, than in the United States, because of how the government redistributes wealth.

However, Sweden is not a “pure” socialist country. It has a free-market economy with very few government regulations, something that is a capitalist’s dream. Perhaps the lesson from Sweden is that both socialism and capitalism can co-exist in such a way that children have equal access to education, no matter their income, while workers can enjoy rights that are inferred to them by the company rather than the government.

Is Finland Socialist?
Is Finland socialist? The answer really depends on how you define socialism. Finland, like other Scandinavian countries, has a comprehensive social safety net that helps ensure that people have what they need to live productive, healthy, and happy lives. If your definition of socialism is individuals and businesses paying high taxes to ensure that wealth is being distributed equitably across the population, then yes, Finland is socialist.

However, Finland runs on a free-market economy, something that is contrary to how many people perceive socialism. If your definition of socialism is heavy government regulation of business, then no, Finland is not socialist. In fact, government regulations are so low that Finland does not even have a minimum wage.

The best way to look at Finland’s economy and politics may be to see it as a blend of capitalism and socialism. Some people refer to this as “compassionate capitalism,” meaning that markets can run freely, with minimal government regulation and interference; the role of the government is to ensure social welfare by providing generous benefits to the population through the revenue generated by taxes. Those benefits include free schools, including college, for all students and generous maternity and paternity leave for new parents.

This model may seem like something that other countries should replicate. After all, who wouldn’t want a free market that has few government regulations, coupled with government benefits that ensure everyone is healthy and productive? The challenge is applying that model in countries that are less homogenous and have a significantly higher population than Finland, like the United States.

Finland’s model may work so well because the country’s population is relatively small and homogenous. However, other countries may benefit from applying aspects of their economic and political system.

Is Switzerland Socialist?
Many people equate socialism with communism but doing so is a mistake. Communism describes a complete economic and political system in which the state owns all property and means of production; markets have no power to regulate prices or determine what should be produced. Socialism describes an economic system in which taxes are generally high so that the government can provide a broad social safety net for services such as education, healthcare, and public pensions.

A country can be both capitalist and socialist, as capitalism refers to free markets that, unlike in communism, can determine prices and modes of production. Those who have capital, or a sufficient level of wealth, can begin businesses that employ people and provide a good or service that the market demands. Switzerland is a prime example of a capitalist country that has some socialist policies.

Switzerland’s economy is almost entirely made up of small- and medium-sized businesses because its government promotes policies that are very friendly to entrepreneurship. The education model in Switzerland is also very friendly to businesses, as students are required to gain job training as part of their academic education. It also has relatively low taxes – the average tax rate for individuals is less than 9%, significantly less than in the United States, and even less than countries that are generally classified as socialist.

Healthcare in Switzerland can be understood as somewhat socialist. A public insurer cannot turn anyone down for any reason, including a pre-existing condition. However, the insured individual, rather than the employer or the government, is required to pay the premiums. Education in Switzerland is free, and students who pursue an academic route, rather than a vocational one, are given free admission to universities.

Generally, Switzerland is too decentralized to be genuinely socialist. Much of the government authority is relegated to the various cantons; while a particular canton can have more socialist policies than another one, the country as a whole is capitalist with some socialist elements.

Is Denmark Socialist?
Denmark is generally considered to be a Scandinavian country, and the Scandinavian countries – which also include Finland, Norway, and Sweden – are renowned for their socialist policies and overall high rates of happiness and well-being. That said, Denmark has a free-market economy with generous socialist elements, making it a blend of capitalist and socialist.

Denmark has a very high tax rate, around one-quarter to one-third of income, depending on the individual’s income. The government uses this income to create a wide array of social programs, including healthcare, education, and job training. Because there are so many social programs to support people, businesses are more willing to engage in risks that can improve their productivity. The Danish economy is thereby able to encourage companies and individuals because they know that one risky venture will not lead to catastrophe.

Like other Scandinavian countries, the Danish government has very few regulations on businesses. Instead, its policies are more focused on social programs. As such, there are very few regulations on hiring and firing, and there is no minimum wage. Companies can engage in international trade with very little government interference, thereby giving a boost to the country’s economy and ensuring that its currency remains sound. As a result, Denmark has a very high rating in terms of its free-market index.

Denmark is probably more capitalist than the United States because its government encourages businesses to run solely on market principles rather than government policies. Additionally, it has better rates of healthcare, education, and social security than many other capitalist countries because the high tax rates create a redistribution of wealth in the form of social programs.

There are concerns that Denmark’s social programs are unsustainable, so within the coming decades, we may see substantial changes in this capitalist country that has many socialist programs.

Is France Socialist?
France is a country with a socialist party that has long had some level of power within its government. Two recent presidents, François Mitterrand and Francois Hollande, were both from the Socialist Party. The tax revenue to GDP (gross domestic product) ratio is 46.2 percent, the highest in the developed world. This high tax revenue that the government collects is spent on social programs, including unemployment benefits, government-sponsored paid maternity leave, healthcare, and education. However, France is also one of the most successful capitalist countries in the world. One might say that its socialist system provides a cushion to its capitalist mindset, thereby encouraging people to take more risks and providing a higher level of social cohesion.

France arguably is a socialist country, considering its high tax rates and extensive social programs. However, it is not communist, as the state does not attempt to control the means of production. Instead, those forces are left to markets, which are remarkably good at regulating themselves. However, some of the largest industries in France have nationalized, meaning that the government owns the largest share in them. Additionally, France’s government has many regulations on businesses, and firing workers is very hard to do. This concept makes hiring workers risky, as they may ultimately cost the company money, but the company may be unable to get rid of them.

Unlike many other socialist countries, France’s taxes are considered by some to be regressive. This idea means that instead of the highest tax burden falling on the wealthy, it actually falls on the middle-class and the poor. While these social classes are more likely to use more of the government-funded social programs, the high taxes that they pay mean that wealth is not being redistributed. In a genuinely socialist model, wealth is redistributed across social classes to ensure that the poor and the rich have equitable access to all services. Meanwhile, the wealth that is among the richest in the country remains among those in that social class.

Is Germany Socialist?
The prospect of calling Germany a socialist country is rather frightening. After all, the Nazis were the Nationalist Socialist party. However, socialism and Nazism are two things so entirely different from each other that they should not be used in the same sentence. Today, Germany is a capitalist, free-market country that has many elements of socialism to help provide people with a safety net.

During the Cold War, Germany was divided into East and West, with the Soviet East being communist and falling into dire poverty, and the capitalist West thriving. The capitalist West did away with all price controls that were established under Hitler’s Nazi party and dramatically cut taxes. The result was that markets, which are remarkably good at regulating themselves, were able to thrive. Meanwhile, the German government established enough welfare programs to ensure that individual people were able to leave happy and productive lives.

Germany’s economic policies helped to ensure that when the East and West were reunited after the Cold War, the two economies would be able to integrate, and the East would be lifted out of its poverty. Germany today has very few regulations on business, but it does have anti-trust laws that allow the government to intervene if one company begins to monopolize an industry.

Germany’s chancellor, Angela Merkel, has promoted many socialist policies to ensure that Germany’s economy remains strong. Healthcare, education, and other social services are universally available. Meanwhile, low levels of government regulation on businesses help ensure that the free-market economy can thrive. Germany is a capitalist country with socialist policies. Those two aspects combined, capitalism and socialism, helped Germany reunite after the fall of the Berlin Wall and keep its economy strong.

Is Norway Socialist?
The Scandinavian countries – which include Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and sometimes Estonia and Iceland – are often characterized as socialist. However, each of these countries has its own economic and political model, which bears hallmarks of both socialism and capitalism. Norway, like other Scandinavian countries, is nearly fully socialist nor fully capitalist.

Norway has some of the strongest social welfare programs in the world. These include free education for all, including university students, and universal healthcare coverage. Workers have public pension plans, which help ensure that they have a livable income should they become unemployed or retired. These services are funded through high taxes. Many people look at these aspects of the Norwegian model and claim that Norway is absolutely a socialist country.

However, Norway also embraces free-market capitalism. This idea means that there are very few government regulations on businesses – significantly fewer than in the United States. Most workers belong to labor unions because the government does very little in regards to workers’ rights. In fact, Scandinavian countries, including Norway, do not even have minimum wage laws. Fifty-one percent of workers in Norway are members of labor unions, and labor unions bargain at a national level to ensure that workers have safe working conditions and fair, livable wages.

In Norway, taxes are higher than in many other capitalist countries. However, the role of the government is not to regulate business. Instead, those taxes fund public services, such as schools and healthcare. Where the government does intervene in business is to provide retraining for workers that are likely to become unemployed or dislocated due to job obsolescence. Rates of private property ownership are higher than in many capitalist countries.

So is Norway socialist? The answer to that question really depends on what your definition of socialism is.

Is Canada Socialist?
Canada is more socialist than the United States, but by and large, classifying Canada as a socialist country requires a very narrow definition of what socialism is. Socialism refers to a broad spectrum of economic systems in which property and wealth are shared equitably. It is not incompatible with capitalism; though some people may theoretically talk about socialism versus capitalism, Canada is an example of a successful capitalist country with socialist elements.

Canada has free healthcare and education, both of which are hallmarks of a socialist system. However, the Canadian economy is seeing more private healthcare and education businesses, which are turning the tide against these socialist elements. The public, government-run healthcare system is underfunded, so people in Canada are looking more to private providers for their healthcare needs. However, because the public healthcare and education systems remain secure, Canadians have better outcomes in both healthcare and education than in the United States.

Other than healthcare and education, Canada’s social safety nets are significantly smaller than those in other countries that are generally classified as socialist, such as Scandinavian countries. Unemployment insurance hovers at 40% of a person’s original income. Additionally, at least partially due to underfunding, many government-run social programs are being rolled back.

At the same time, Canada has a free-market, capitalist economy, where both small businesses and corporations are flourishing. The tech and AI industries are growing rapidly in Canada, thanks to its business-friendly policies, and skilled workers are migrating there from other countries to contribute to its AI boom. This boom would not be possible without an economic system that favors people who work hard, remain competitive and contribute to the financial success of the industry and the country.

There is probably no such thing as a truly socialist country, and Canada is a case in point. Though many American politicians point to Canada as a socialist success story. ?

Show less