I am confused again.
The recent posts have had so many definitions and/or description of socialism, social democrat, communism, Marxism, etc., that things are getting very cloudy for me.
The basics as I see them (mostly from reading posts since I have joined):
Capitalism: bad -- since means of production is in the hands of an elite which controls workers' abilities to meet needs.
Communism: corrects problem of ownership by elite by having workers own means of production. But isn't there a possibility of an elite growing among the workers which would behave in the same way as the owner elite used to do? Seems there needs to be some measure (democracy) to insure that the workers representatives do not lose sight of who they are acting on behalf of.
Socialism: here is my big confusion. From what Wojtek writes it seems that socialism could be seen as capitalism that tries to be more considerate of the worker (mostly through a strong government devoted to the citizenry rather than corporate interests). There would still be a market, but it would be a carefully regulated one.
So what would a social democrat want?
Marxism (to me) is a tool for analyzing economic structures/practices (especially capitalism) with an emphasis on the debilitating effect of separating a worker from the product of his labor.
I know that there is not any one answer/definition, but I also believe that there must be some differences in approach that can be delineated.
Also, I am not mentioning anarchism since I have yet to get a firm grasp of the particular dynamics of this approach despite what I have read.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister