It is this type of inaccuracy and disinformation which confuse and distort discussions of Socialism and Communism in the US.

First the basics: the difference between Socialism and Capitalism. Under Capitalism, the means of production, namely: means which humans use to produce goods to supply their needs — and there are two basic forms of the means of production, land and factories — are owned by private individuals either singly or in groups. This enables the owners of the means of production to appropriate any surplus value, namely value over and above that needed to feed, clothe and shelter the workers, for themselves. Roughly, and for the purposes of illustration, this is profit (but only roughly.) Profit is created by all the workers in a company through their activity but profit does not go to the workers but to the owners. Under Socialism as under Communism, the means of production are owned collectively (I will be more precise on “who” is this “collectivity” further on). Hence, surplus is appropriated collectively. It may not take the form of higher wages. Instead, it could take other forms such as free housing, free education, free health care etc. But this is most important distinction between Capitalism and Socialism/Communism. Hence, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance or Obamacare or anything Bernie Sanders says are not Socialism as long as the fundamental characteristics of the political/economic system of a society are unchanged. They are intended merely to ameliorate the most vicious aspects of unfettered Capitalism where every individual is forced to fend for themselves, thrust on a harsh, brutal, impersonal market.

Now, as to the difference, at least in theory, between Socialism and Communism. The difference is the existence of the State as what Lenin calls “an armed body of men” or what Max Weber called “the legitimate use of force within a prescribed area.” Socialism requires a State. Why? The creation of Socialism requires the expropriation of the owners of the means of production. In other words, the means of production, land and factories, must be taken away from the private owners and placed under the control of the State, i.e.,” collective ownership of the means of production.” This and the creation of the foundation for a Socialist Sate are the main tasks of the Revolution.

The former owners of the means of production are not happy about their expropriation nor are other groups who benefited from the private ownership of the means of production such as managers, bankers, financiers, etc. As a result, the new Socialist society is filled with contradictions and antagonisms and the State must be ruthless in routing out and suppressing these as well as the people interested in returning to the status quo ante. Initially, there is little room for democracy and hence Lenin called for a “dictatorship of the proletariat” in the early years of a Socialist Society.

In addition, the State must perform two other functions. First, it must consciously take over a function previously performed unconsciously by the market: coordinating and controlling the economy. The economy must be redirected from the accumulation of private profit, as it was under Capitalism, to the satisfaction of the basic needs of everyone in the society with a minimum of labor time or exertion. Second, the State must craft a new type of individual. One who does not feel that greed and avarice are normal and natural human emotions, does not feel that stepping on others is the only way to advance and does not feel for one person to gain another must lose. In other words, an individual psychology diametrically opposed to the individual psychology needed to survive in Capitalist Society. Both are formidable task which can take an extended period of time. But Socialism is not to be an end in itself but only a transition to Communism.

Communism can only occur once Socialism has fulfilled its historic mission: routing out and eliminating the contradiction and antagonism in society, developing an economy directed towards fulfilling needs and creating free time in which individuals can explore their individuality and creating a new type of individual. Once society has reached that state, there is no longer any need for the Sate as an “armed body of men” whose chief functions have been to maintain order and insure that transition to Communism. Since the State is no longer needed, it, to use Lenin’s term “wither’s away,” i.e. it undergoes atrophy, from lack of use. At the same time, Communism is also “the end of history.” History moves through the struggle of classes and groups in a society. If all struggles have been eliminated, there is no change and hence no history.

Obviously, Communism is utopic and Socialism are quasi utopic. In point of fact, most so-called “Communist” societies on the face of the earth are Socialist because we see in all of them a state. Moreover, if Socialism is viewed as a “100-mile journey” to Communism, most of these State have not even gone the first mile and most seem to be moving backwards. But to discuss these things, we must first understand them. Unfortunately, there is little clear and complete understanding of these concepts in the popular American discussions of Socialism and Communism. I doubt if this piece will make a difference but I am so tired of seeing these inaccuracies, especially the use of the term “Socialism” by people who clearly don’t have the slightest inkling of what the term means.