#Socialism is a socio-economic path where the production (factories, mines, machinery, tools, raw materials, land, buildings, means of transport, etc.) are owned and controlled by the public. The goal is to create a basic equitable distribution of wealth and power by reducing the disparities seen in capitalist societies. Socialism abolishes private control of the means of production, to transition to a system where goods and services are produced for use rather than profit. The guiding economic principle of socialism is “from each according to their ability, to each according to their work.”

Public Ownership: Big industries and resources are owned and managed by the people, democratic governance and cooperatives.

Economic Planning: Planning is used to allocate resources efficiently and equitably. With the digital transition and technology, this becomes practical.

Social Welfare: Social programs like healthcare, education, and social security ensure a basic standard of living for all people.

Reduced Income Inequality: The gap between the rich and the poor is reduced.

Democratic Control: Workers and the public control the economic decision-making processes.

Where #capitalism is an economic system run for private ownership of the means of production and profit. This includes capital accumulation, competitive markets, a price system, private property, and wage labour.

Private Property: Individuals and corporations own and control the means of production, and thus survival.

Market Economy: Goods and services are produced for and traded in competitive markets, where prices are determined by supply and demand. In today’s world, this means strong monopolistic control for private power and profit.

Profit Motive: The driving force behind economic activity is individual greed and the pursuit of profit.

Capital Accumulation: The accumulation of capital is central to economic growth and expansion. This leads to huge “external damage”, that’s the degradation of the poor and the environment we all live in.

Wage Labour: Workers sell their labour to owners of capital in exchange for wages. Over the last 40 years, this has seen a widening disparity.

It should be obverse to us all that capitalism leads to inequality and exploitation. Some Marxist theory:

Exploitation: In capitalism, workers do not receive the full value of their labour. Instead, the surplus value (the difference between what workers produce and what they are paid) is appropriated by capitalists as profit. We can see this plainly happening over the last 40 years.

Alienation: Workers are alienated from the products of their labour, the labour process, their fellow workers, and their own human potential because they work primarily for wages rather than for personal fulfilment or communal benefit. We have no idea how production happens anymore, our “economy” is a god we worship.

Inequality: Capitalism concentrate wealth and power in the hands of a few, leading to significant social and economic inequalities. This builds social strife.

Instability: Capitalist economies push cycles of boom and bust, leading to periodic crises of overproduction and under consumption.

Means of Production The means of production are the physical, non-human inputs used for the production of economic value. This includes factories, machinery, tools, raw materials, land, and buildings. In a capitalist society, these are owned by private individuals and corporations.

Exploitation refers to how capitalists extract surplus value from workers. Workers produce more value through their labour than the wages they are paid; this excess value is taken by the capitalists as profit.

Surplus value is the difference between the value produced by labour and the actual wage paid to the labourer. It is a fundamental concept in Marxist economics, describing how capitalists generate profit by exploiting workers.

Capital refers to wealth in the form of money or assets that are used to produce more wealth. This includes investments in factories, machinery, raw materials, and labour.

Class struggle is the conflict between classes in society, primarily between the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production) and the proletariat (working class). This struggle is the driving force of historical development in Marxist theory.


Social Democracy vs. Socialism

Social democracy advocates for a mix of capitalism and socialism. It supports a market economy, but with significant government intervention to ensure social justice and equity. Policies include welfare programs, labour rights, and regulation of markets to reduce inequalities and provide public services.

Socialism transitions away from capitalism, to abolish private ownership of the means of production altogether. The goal is to establish a classless, stateless society where resources and wealth are distributed according to need.

Communism is the final stage of #Marxist theory, where the state has withered away, and a classless, stateless, and moneyless society has emerged. All means of production are owned communally, and goods and services are distributed based on need rather than market dynamics. The guiding principle is “from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.”


To actually move on this path, we would need a #Revolution, to overthrow one class by another. In Marxist terms, a socialist revolution involves the working class (proletariat) overthrowing the capitalist class (bourgeoisie) and establishing a socialist state as a transition to communism. This process entails significant social and economic upheaval to replace capitalist structures with socialist ones. Understanding these concepts provides a clearer path for ongoing debates and action.

17 Comments

  • @info

    "The guiding economic principle of socialism is “from each according to their ability, to each according to their work.”"

    And who decides on what those are? Who decides how much work each is able to do, and how much they need?

    1. People contribute to society based on their abilities and receive compensation proportional to their contributions. Who Decides?

      People assess their own abilities and the type of work they can perform, with adjustments and validations made through mutual agreements with their peers, supervisors and community. Professional evaluations and certifications would play a role in determining a persons abilities, especially in specialized fields.

      In a socialist economy, planning and decision-making are decentralized and democratic. Workers’ councils play a role in organizing work schedules and workloads, creating a more balanced distribution of tasks based on peoples capacities and social needs.

      Unions and worker cooperatives negotiate workloads and conditions, needs assessments are conducted through democratic processes involving the community. For example, participatory budgeting, where community members collectively decide on the allocation of resources.

      Basic Needs Guarantees: Socialist advocate for guaranteeing basic needs (e.g., housing, healthcare, education) for all people, with additional needs addressed through democratic deliberation and some planning.

      The path “from each according to their ability, to each according to their work” emphasizes a fair distribution of work and resources based on people’s contributions. Implementing this principle requires a balance of democratic planning, transparent #4opens evaluation processes, and feedback mechanisms for inclusivity and responsiveness. Yes it is challenging to align peoples capacities and social needs, ideas please.

      1. @info

        That's an awful long answer to be so unsatisfactory. Take this "People assess their own abilities and the type of work they can perform, with adjustments and validations made through mutual agreements with their peers, supervisors and community."

        Suppose the person, their peers, their supervisor, and the community all disagree on what the person is able to do. What then? Who gets the final say?

        1. In a working alternative organization, and they exist, people assess their own abilities and the type of work, with adjustments and validations made through messy mutual agreements with their peers, “supervisors”, and wider community. Yes, conflicts arise when there are disagreements, when disagreements continue, the is typically no final decision made.

          In a conflict, the person makes an assessment of their abilities and preferred work. Peers and “supervisors” feedback with the individual, they talk to each other. The broader community, which includes co-workers and community members, contributes their perspectives. If disagreements persist, a structured conflict resolution mechanism is invoked.

          A neutral mediator helps the people reach a consensus, if this fails a democratic vote among relevant stakeholders determines the outcome. If you need a fast response, in critical sectors an elected or appointed arbitrator makes the final decision.

          This process ensures that the decision is not unilateral but rather a product of collective input, balancing aspirations with community needs and expectations. This needs to be designed to be adaptive, promoting cooperation and mutual understanding.

          By employing these inclusive practices, alternative organizations resolve conflicts, in the end the individual in conflict can simply walk away. This processes all ready works in numerous “invisible” alternative organizations over the last 100 years.

          1. @info

            Good lord, you have a talent for building walls of text without ever actually answering the question.

          2. The answer is in there, “in the end, the individual in conflict can simply walk away.” this is the same path we have in capitalism, “I quit”.

          3. @info

            "In the end, yes, mediated by the community they live in"

            So…."no". The end decision is made by the community they live in, not them.

          4. @info

            "How do you think decisions like this are made in our current world?"

            Which decision, specifically?

          5. “”The guiding economic principle of socialism is “from each according to their ability, to each according to their work.””

            And who decides on what those are? Who decides how much work each is able to do, and how much they need?”

            These, how do we normally do this – good to understand this when looking at alt paths.

          6. @info

            We don't normally make such decisions, because that is not how our economy is set up. We don't decide how much work someone is ABLE to do, we find out how much work someone is WILLING to do in exchange for the available compensation.

          7. “Wage Labour: Workers sell their labour to owners of capital in exchange for wages. Over the last 40 years, this has seen a widening disparity.” for the post, you mean the “invisible hand” ie. the market god decides for us, this is exactly what the post is about, and what the whole blog is about challenging and changing. Remember, what you are talking about has only been “common sense” for the last 200 years, and is likely to stop being “common sense” in the next 20 years. Worth rereading the post on this.

            If you are feeling masochistic and in a need for a brain stretch:

            Hard to read reply on this https://anarchopac.com/2013/08/29/but-wage-labour-is-voluntary-a-response/

            or the original https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/wages.htm

          8. @info

            "you mean the “invisible hand” ie. the market god decides for us,"

            No, I don't. The market is not a god, and it decides nothing. People make decisions.

          9. @info Please drop me a line if you ever come up with a solid answer to who makes these apparently very important decisions.