Communism vs. Socialism


In a way, communism is an extreme form of socialism. Many countries have dominant socialist political parties but very few are truly communist. In fact, most countries - including staunch capitalist bastions like the U.S. and U.K. - have government programs that borrow from socialist principles. "Socialism" is sometimes used interchangeably with "communism" but the two philosophies have some stark differences. Most notably, while communism is a political system, socialism is primarily an economic system that can exist in various forms under a wide range of political systems.

Comparison chart



Philosophy From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Free-access to the articles of consumption is made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance. From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution. Emphasis on profit being distributed among the society or workforce to complement individual wages/salaries.
Economic System The means of production are held in common, negating the concept of ownership in capital goods. Production is organized to provide for human needs directly without any use for money. Communism is predicated upon a condition of material abundance. The means of production are owned by public enterprises or cooperatives, and individuals are compensated based on the principle of individual contribution. Production may variously be coordinated through either economic planning or markets.
Religion Abolished - all religious and metaphysics is rejected. Freedom of religion, but usually promotes secularism.
Political System Usually takes the form of totalitarianism as Marx described in The Communist Manifesto. Cronyism common. Can coexist with different political systems. Most socialists advocate participatory democracy, some (Social Democrats) advocate parliamentary democracy, and Marxist-Leninists advocate "Democratic centralism".
Ideas All people are the same and therefore classes make no sense. The government should own all means of production and land and also everything else. People should work for the government and the collective output should be redistributed equally. All individuals should have access to basic articles of consumption and public goods to allow for self-actualization. Large-scale industries are collective efforts and thus the returns from these industries must benefit society as a whole.
Definition International theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the community or state. Rejection of free markets and extreme distrust of Capitalism in any form. A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of most property in common, with actual ownership ascribed to the workers.
Key Proponents Karl Marx, Fredrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Leon Trotsky. Robert Owen, Pierre Leroux, Karl Marx, Fredrick Engels, John Stuart Mill, Albert Einstein, George Bernard Shaw, Thorstein Veblen, Emma Goldman.
Social Structure All class distinctions are eliminated. Class distinctions are diminished.
Economic coordination Economic planning coordinates all decisions regarding investment, production and resource allocation. Planning is done in terms of physical units instead of money. Planned-Socialism relies principally on planning to determine investment and production decisions. Planning may be centralized or decentralized. Market-socialism relies on markets for allocating capital to different socially-owned enterprises.
Private Property Abolished. The concept of property is negated and replaced with the concept of commons and ownership with "usership". Two kinds of property, personal property, such as houses, clothing, etc. owned by the individual. Public property includes factories, and means of production owned by the state but with worker control.
Political movements Leninism, Trotskyism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, Left-Communism, Stalinism. Democratic Socialism, Communism, Libertarian Socialism, Anarchism, Syndicalism.
Free Choice Either the collective "vote" or the state's rulers make economic and political decisions for everyone else. All choices, including education, religion, employment and marriage, are up to the individual. All health care and education is provided through a socialized system funded by taxation. Citizens have free and equal access.
Key elements Centralized government, planned economy, dictatorship of the "proletariat", common ownership of the tools of production, no private property. equality between genders and all people, international focus. anti-democratic. One party system. Economic activity and production especially are adjusted to meet human needs and economic demands. "Production for use": useful goods and services are produced specifically for their usefulness.
Way of Change Government in a Communist-state is the agent of change rather than any market or desire on the part of consumers. Change by government can be swift or slow, depending on change in ideology or even whim. Workers in a Socialist-state are the agent of change rather than any market or desire on the part of consumers. Change by the workers can be swift or slow, depending on change in ideology or even whim.
Discrimination In theory, all members of the state are considered equal. The people are considered equal, laws are made when necessary to protect people from discrimination.
Ownership structure The means of production are commonly-owned, meaning no entity or individual owns productive property. Importance is ascribed to "usership" over "ownership". The means of production are socially-owned with the surplus value produced accruing to either all of society (in Public-ownership models) or to all the employee-members of the enterprise (in Cooperative-ownership models).
Examples Ideally, there is no leader; the people govern directly. This has never been actually practiced, and has just used a one-party system. Examples 0f Communist states are the erstwhile Soviet Union, Cuba and North Korea. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR): Although the actual categorization of the USSR's economic system is in dispute, it is often considered to be a form of centrally-planned socialism.

Contents: Communism vs Socialism

Economic differences between socialists and communists

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. On the other hand, 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.

For a Capitalist society to transition, 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

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. Socialism is primarily an economic system so it exists in varying degrees and forms in a wide variety of political systems.

On the other hand, 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.

Video: Socialism vs. Communism

The following is a very opinionated video that explains the differences between communism and socialism:


Share this comparison:

If you read this far, you should follow us on:

"Communism vs Socialism." Diffen LLC, n.d. Web. 1 Sep 2014. < >

Stay informed Related Comparisons
Follow Diffen
Make Diffen Smarter.

Log in to edit comparisons or create new comparisons in your area of expertise!

Sign up »
Top 5 Comparisons Recently Compared

Comments: Communism vs Socialism

Comments via Facebook

Anonymous comments (40)

September 5, 2010, 5:47pm

No political system works the way it should because in every system there are always going to be those who have the power and change the system to make themselves more powerful. That is the way of Humanity. Politics is a twin to religion in that no person agrees with every tenet of their party/group/sect and has their own views as to how things should be, or what is the truth. People thrive on conflict/competition and because of that there is no "system" that will work for everyone, or in every situation, because we all seem to "agree to disagree" about almost all issues. Everyone wants more...most cannot be content just being content and need to feel "better" than someone to feel good about their own situation. Political leaders are usually in it for the power that comes with the office, not to really make a change for the good of the many. NO decision is for the good of everyone, except possibly the "keep the stupid from breeding" thing, but, good luck with that!

— 98.✗.✗.193

March 23, 2014, 4:47am

To the person making the cow joke:

A corporate factory farm owns 10,000 cows, which are kept locked up in a tiny stall for their entire lives, pumped full of hormones and antibiotics, and fed genetically modified corn which produces its own insecticide. An immigrant worker is paid minimum wage to care for more cows than he has time for, leading to beatings and horrible animal abuses. The CEO bribes state legislators to pass an agricultural gag law which criminalizes the recording of animal abuse, and which classifies the person recording the abuse as a "terrorist." A giant manure pit pollutes the groundwater, which goes unnoticed by an understaffed EPA which is rendered impotent by regulation loopholes written by corporate lobbyists. Got milk?

— 76.✗.✗.223

November 6, 2013, 12:53am

And to comment on 109, those are all true, but you forgot one. In America, you have 2 cows, the government takes them, and promises to pay you fair price for them, then goes bankrupt.

— 192.✗.✗.2

March 23, 2014, 3:51am

Socialism is a non-profit system in which people pay only for the cost of something, without paying extra to enrich a shareholder who didn't actually do any work. Imagine replacing corporations with nonprofit cooperatives. The workers benefit, because they keep the money they receive for their labor. The consumers benefit, because they get things at cost. We already do this for certain services, like public roads, police and fire departments, libraries, and public parks. Socialism is compatible with democracy and freedom.

Corporate capitalism is an insane system that adds a third party into the transaction who overcharges the consumer, underpays the workers, and pockets billions for himself. Those billionaires use the money they steal to bribe politicians and hire lobbyists who then write the rules to benefit the billionaires and harm you. Billionaires also hire armies of propagandists to get gullible rubes to vote against their own interests, and support policies that give the billionaires more control over the economy. (Some of the comments here are rantings from the brainwashed minions of Roger Ailes.) This is why capitalism is not compatible with democracy and freedom. It degrades into a plutocracy (or oligarchy of the wealthy) in which the masses serve the needs of the elite few. Workers in the US have steadily increased in their productivity since WWII, while their standard of living has decreased. All of the benefit of that extra productively has been siphoned off to create a parasitic class of billionaires. (Billionaires are not something to be proud of, but rather a symptom of a failed economic system in which profits are distributed according to authority, rather than contribution.)

Marx believed that socialism was a transition to communism, but he was wrong about that, and many other things. Communist movements have all quickly degraded into facist dictatorships. Stalin for example executed the communists and hijacked the Russian revolution. Communism is not a realistic system for any group larger than a small tribe.

— 76.✗.✗.223

May 19, 2011, 12:15am

A Republic isn't the freest from of government! The freest is total anarchy or total democracy. A republic has representatives to make decision for the people. Even though they are chosen by the people that doesn't mean they're decisions reflect exactly what every person they represent wants. Anarchy has no rules whatsoever so total freedom, Democracy has everyone vote on every decision so nearly total freedom. Also no one compares Communism and Socialism with a republic because they are not on the same field. A republic is how a government is run. Communism, Capitalism, Fascism are how business is run by in the country (sometimes they r views too). Liberal, Conservative are views(also parties) of how the current government system should make decisions. So for example the US is a mix of Republic and Democracy, with Capitalism, and the two parties. The USSR was totalitarian and Communist. Also Rome and China both call themselves republics, which they were once, but we no that changed.

— 173.✗.✗.199

April 24, 2010, 2:24am

There are many reasons why the Soviet Union lagged behind the west: moving from a feudal agrarian society to an industrialized one, and the expenditures of WWII and the cold war. But what was it that ultimately prevented the creation of a viable economy? Why was production always of such poor quality, and goods interminably scarce? The USSR certainly had natural resources and an educated workforce. The answer lies in the deincentivization of productivity. When you take away from the productive to give to the unproductive, you punish initiative and reward idleness. The economy stagnates, and a corrupt kleptocracy develops. This is a cautionary tale for the socialists/progressives/liberals of our day. The road to economic hell is paved with the good intentions of those that equate "social justice" with the distribution of private capital (or perhaps even its abolition) rather than its creation. These are the historical facts of the 20th century.
~ Dr. Juan R. Cespedes

— 76.✗.✗.58

November 11, 2009, 3:34pm

capitalism is worse than both, the rich have all the power, despite what you might think, the poor are fucked over by the rich people, the rich people in power give the other rich people more power and money. in socialism the poor and rich would be equal, the harder working poorer people would have a larger share, the people who in capitalism enherit their wealth would become poor because of their lack of skill and motivation. communism is unfair to all parties. i think i prefer socialism.

— 206.✗.✗.253

October 20, 2009, 1:24am

The first colony settled in America tried to use a socialistic approach to get through the first winter...........pooling their resources. The colony was all but wiped out, so they decided to use a capitalistic approach (personal responsibility) to get through the next winter
...........the survival rate was significantly higher. My elementary school teacher described socialism as everyone putting all of their wages in one basket and distributing it equally among everyone despite their contribution. Why would anyone become a doctor, engineer, or a steeple painter if they will receive the same as those that do little or nothing. Capitalism serves as the catalyst to making America the greatest country on earth. Europe has finally learned that socialism does not work and they are turning toward capitalism as we blog. Don't let democrats sell you on the virtues of socialism, or you will eventually lose your freedom and right to live the American dream.

— 74.✗.✗.203

March 1, 2014, 9:11pm

Actually, political terms are always somewhat ambiguous and are used in different ways by different people, often in very self serving ways. To some extent this is true of economic terms as well. I would agree that there are no "pure" systems.

— 71.✗.✗.50

March 1, 2014, 8:58pm

There are NO countries in which "all choices are left up to the individual", even in the listed categories, otherwise you could marry your dog or sister or have 6 husbands, send your kids to a school that bans reading, and practice a religion that involves cannibalism after smoking crack.

— 71.✗.✗.50

June 27, 2013, 10:31am

Hi! I don't know if anyone's mentioned it but Marx (expert? founder?) used the words Socialism and Communism interchangeably. There's a few hints that in its early stages Socialism/ Communism would be different in character from later on. Rock on!

— 81.✗.✗.158

April 17, 2013, 12:24pm

Socialists has been in america since the late 1800s and has played an important role in organizing strikes and unions in the country. With out them there may have been a lot more starving people during the great depression

— 165.✗.✗.67

June 21, 2012, 4:01am

Of course, capitalism hampers the freedoms of everybody except the capitalist class just as much as the other systems; people work because they have to, their jobs are largely determined by economic mandates, not personal preference, and without stringent regulations, human rights abuses are as common and as severe as in communism. No system is perfect.

— 168.✗.✗.19

June 2, 2012, 2:47pm

Our republic should provide basic laws that generally protect the public harm, Capitalism provides the greatest freedom, who among us want to give up our free will to another man, not I. Every step away from capitalism to a socialistic/communistic system is simply tranferring some degree of our our freedom to another person or group and a step toward human rights violations that are prevalent in places like China (slavery).

Human nature dictates that individuals will prefer freedom over the other systems if they are educated to know the difference, this is why liberals prefer the poor don't get a useful education hence inner city grades.

Some people will never be a doctor because the are either not smart enough or are not interested or generally does not suit that person, yet due to their individual likes may become very succsseful in ways no one could predict much less some bureaucrat.

— 70.✗.✗.158

July 27, 2011, 10:24pm

Socialism is communism with lipstick on and is the stepping stone of losing your rights of proprietorship. Thats right,no more owning your own business or private property. Opportunities to Free Market Capitalism will be annihalated and there will be no more poor,middle or rich class people. The Socialists and Communists will tell you that its the best society and there will be no more racism or poverty.Try telling that to the 4.5 million people in the U.S.S.R who lost there lives as a direct result of Karl Marx' "Utopia". You would have to be a blithering idiot to co-sign on any form of socialism or communism. Capitalism may not be perfect but nothing on Planet Earth is,everything has pros and cons. There will always be greed,people who are homeless and hungry. At least Free Market Capitalism gives us an opportunity to become what we want to instead of having it dictated to us.

— 98.✗.✗.138

May 15, 2011, 3:19am

One common trait shared between communism and socialism is the significant absence of freedom of choice among the individuals. I like how some try to focus the comparison of communism and socialism with capitalism rather than making the comparison with a Republic form of government. A Republic is by far offers the most freedom to individuals and the protection of individuals rights.

— 98.✗.✗.150

October 8, 2010, 1:00am

Socialism is a transition period from capitalism to communism. So it is a low stage of communism.
That I learned in Russia and I am Russian born

— 170.✗.✗.49

June 9, 2010, 5:10pm

ts people. And hopefully these people realize they have the ability to mold it into a form in which it does this.

— 98.✗.✗.49

June 9, 2010, 5:09pm

ss do not have to be at odds. Socialist ideas have been implemented successfully in our society all throughout they 20th century, resulting in improved working and living conditions for its constituents not born into a privileged class. Anyone belonging to a labor union has Socialism to thank for his or her job security and safe working conditions. Anyone not belonging to one can thank the principles of socialism for instilling the fear of unionization into the hearts and minds of management. For anyone working in a factory, remember that the line can never move too fast for the free market. Each form of society has benefits to go along with its detriments, and hopefully one day people won’t regard socialism or communism with the negative connotations instilled in us in elementary school history class. And hopefully we’ll realize that capitalism doesn’t have to be “just the way it is”, but rather part of a societal system that is capable of evolving to meet the needs of all i

— 98.✗.✗.49

June 9, 2010, 5:08pm

In practice, communism and socialism haven’t produced the flawless, utopian societies they purport to foster. Humankind is too diverse, too rife with the self-interest inherent in the human condition. At the same time, it’s ignorant to argue that free-market capitalism bears no responsibility for perpetuating injustice, both in the states and abroad. If it were merely a domestic problem, we could sit here all day and argue amongst ourselves, knowing that we partly have ourselves to blame. However, due to unregulated globalization, a product of the free market, we continue to secure poverty’s chokehold on the third world, making it impossible for our neighbors abroad to import The American Dream at the same time they export our excesses amid squalor. None of the three governmental systems being discussed here are without flaws, but in combining some of the better points of each, we can create for ourselves and each other a society in which social justice and the pursuit of happine

— 98.✗.✗.49

April 14, 2010, 12:22am

If Cuba is so much better than the United States why don't you move there? Of course you have to remember that once you get there you might not be able to leave but what the hell? Don't let that little minor thing get in the way.

— 68.✗.✗.122

April 13, 2010, 10:03pm

Oh my God. I just read where somebody was saying how the people in Cuba are better off than Americans. Now there's a good Democrat for ya.

— 68.✗.✗.122

April 5, 2010, 6:31pm here, sorry, just noticed this is communism vs socialism, not socialism vs capitalism. Sorry for going off topic myself

— 24.✗.✗.146

April 5, 2010, 6:30pm , not sure if your are trying to contribute some sort of point or just elongating the list there. More on topic, I believe socialism relies on human good will, but our history has shown that greed, selfishness, and self gain serve as greater sources of motivation. Workers rallying and union protests for better wages and equal pay are themselves against socialist ideal because most of them want greater or distributed pay to increase their own benefit or atleast not to see others benefit more than them. Everyone wants something, capitalism works to exploit it for progress. Capitalistic monopolies however can impied on that desire so I agree with regulation to that extent and lack of a heavy "anti-fire" market means we do infact need fire departments. However these public services purchasing from a capital markets is what allows a better fire engine, or a powerful water pump, or lightwieght ladders.

— 24.✗.✗.146

March 30, 2010, 12:58pm

"These ideologies are used in powerplays, much like religion and racism, by those that believe they are more intelligent than everyone and want to feed on the labor of others like Clinton, Pelosi and Reid want."...and Nixon, and Reagan, and Bushes, and Greenspan, and Gingrich, and Limbaugh, Beck, Leiberman, Palin, McCain...

— 72.✗.✗.130

March 26, 2010, 2:19pm stated the following on 2009-10-12 23:05:18 "I wish Americans would become more educated and less slaves to the false idea that everyone can be rich. It is entirely illogical and immoral." IT ISN'T "EVERYONE" CAN BE RICH -- IT IS "ANYONE" CAN BE RICH!!

— 64.✗.✗.90

February 6, 2010, 6:36am stated the following on 2009-10-12 23:05:18 "I wish Americans would become more educated and less slaves to the false idea that everyone can be rich. It is entirely illogical and immoral."

I wish that fellow human beings would become more educated, and stop becoming slaves to their own misconstrued generalizations of an entire population.

— 67.✗.✗.133

December 24, 2009, 7:02am

It is a terrible thing when the educational system leaves people wondering which of these are better. The fact is that neither is good for anyone. They are vitually the same except for the manner in which they take control of the population, as Marx said when he chose to use "Communism" because someone else used "socialism" for their movement. Communism uses force and socialism uses deception because no population will voluntarily accept systems that are designed to enslave everyone with no individual freedoms. They are both a modern fuedal system that allows the "ruling class" to make all decisions and dispose of those they feel are not productive for the whole.
These ideologies are used in powerplays, much like religion and racism, by those that believe they are more intelligent than everyone and want to feed on the labor of others like Clinton, Pelosi and Reid want. It is parasitic.

— 98.✗.✗.178

December 16, 2009, 10:33am

@ who says: Which system do you think offers you a better chance? One where an all-powerful government tells you what to do and when and for how long, or you being able to chose your own path through a free-market system.

Except that in a Social Democracy, the PEOPLE are the government -- perhaps you are referring to a Social tyranny, and then I'd agree with you. Since I am the vehicle of my own power in a Social Democracy, and I along with a majority favor, say, government building roads, then that is majority rules. There is no big bad bugaboo government because WE are the government.

— 71.✗.✗.106

December 3, 2009, 6:17pm on 2009-11-18 07:23:18 states that "the poorest individual in the US is better off than any proletariat(look it up) from any Socialist/communist country you can name." Well I would like to compare the homeless population of the US (123,833 people officially, though believed by many to be a lot higher), to the that of Cuba, which successfully houses 100% of it's citizen's. You can also compare the access working class Americans have to Healthcare, and compare it with 100% free and equal care in Cuba. Cuba also has a lower infant mortality rate the United States, and, when compared with the infant mortality rate of only the working class population of the US, Cuba wins out with a hugely larger gap.

— 137.✗.✗.232

November 30, 2009, 7:15am

hello i am bharath from india hyderabad
its very nice to read your points
the political difference i feel wrong. politically socialism is the dictator ship of working class over capitalists. and the communism is simply class less society i.e. no capitalists or workers. so no question of class rule. no question of oppression. regarding overthrough of capitalist rule after the great paris commune karl marx said that with the ready made state of capitalists we can not built socialim hence we have to demolish the system to build a new. and the process in not sudden. we will have to build the socialist administrative peoples committees in capitalism itself as soviats in ussr during the period of com.lenin

— 118.✗.✗.247

November 10, 2009, 4:31am

two things: One, all those "this is bullsh*t" and "this is dumb" people should be taken out and shot, or at least prevented from reproducing. That being said, both systems are based on the philosophy that man is basically good-and as overwhelming evidence shows-nothing based on that can ever be succesful.

— 72.✗.✗.0

November 8, 2009, 3:54am

Ugh, it's just that communism and socialism both sound great in theory but then when you try them in practice, both fail miserably. I can't figure which one Marx and Engels favored more, though. My textbook says they agreed with them both, but they're different when it comes to important issues. This is really frustrating.

— 99.✗.✗.217

November 4, 2009, 5:56am

Though communism utterly failed in the Soviet Union and was a horrible combination of Socialistic ideals. People should not throw out the idea of a state reformed with capitalist and socialist theories. Rather than communist a socialist combination. No form of government is perfect. We must continue to change and reform our countries, to try to prevent corruption and decay.

— 216.✗.✗.9

November 4, 2009, 3:34am

Very interesting, but more information could have been added. Like their impact on history.

— 68.✗.✗.161

October 12, 2009, 11:05pm

I wish Americans would become more educated and less slaves to the false idea that everyone can be rich. It is entirely illogical and immoral.

— 24.✗.✗.143

October 12, 2009, 11:03pm

- "Socialism is the down fall of all great society. Communism never really became reality in Russia it was more a combination of Socialism and very little Communism, and it still failed miserably. The only thing that works is Capitalism, with hard work and vision. If Capitalism was easy, it would be called Socialism! Nothing worth it, is easy. Its hard to make it. If it was easy, then anyone could do it, and it wouldn't be great, it would be nothing. And that is what you are going to get with Obama's health care when the money runs out fast! Nothing!"

The above statement is flatly an uneducated one. The Soviet Union perverted communism. It wasn't really communist. It was a dictatorial socialist society that under Marx is against the very purpose of socialism. Marx says that socialism is by nature democratic. The Soviet Union feel for two primary reasons: 1) They overspent on their military while trying to provide needs to all of their people. You cannot have both.

— 24.✗.✗.143

October 12, 2009, 7:56pm

this is an interesting topic but i would also like to know why in the dictionary socialism can be a synonym for communism too?

— 99.✗.✗.130

October 4, 2009, 8:38am

The average American couldn't tell you the difference between socialism and communism. They equate them as one and the same, mutually interchangeable. They have (in my opinion), either an unreasonable fear of both or such an unrealistic positive view that it almost borders on utopia. (a.k.a. Workers paradise etc.)
I've lived in and/or have visited several "communist/socialist" countries. Some of them had some good points, but generally I've found them lacking in several areas. Capitalism will always have its' faults, but human nature, self-interest, and/or basic greed will almost always triumph over any chance of socialism/communism taking root in a democratic society. In my years of living in Eastern Europe, I've talked to a lot of people. I can count on one hand the individuals that admitted to believing in communism. The average citizen wasn't stupid. They could see past their government's controlled news media, and resented the restrictions and/or controls forced on their lives.

— 98.✗.✗.187

September 10, 2009, 6:28am

Socialism is the down fall of all great society. Communism never really became reality in Russia it was more a combination of Socialism and very little Communism, and it still failed miserably. The only thing that works is Capitalism, with hard work and vision. If Capitalism was easy, it would be called Socialism! Nothing worth it, is easy. Its hard to make it. If it was easy, then anyone could do it, and it wouldn't be great, it would be nothing. And that is what you are going to get with Obama's health care when the money runs out fast! Nothing!

— 173.✗.✗.70


Up next

Capitalism vs. Socialism