Talk:Utopian socialism

message: Someone I know has purposely corrupted this page. Please examine and edit immediately— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.175.47.160 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Fix 

message: There are a lot of spelling mistakes in the article.English is not my first language so i am not sure whether i can edit it or not.pls somebody  clarify the errors
Ok. I've resolved the mistakes now
Dared111 (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Spelling Mistakes 

message: Despite what this article says, utopian socialism is all socialist thought going back to the very first socialist text, Utopia by Thomas More. I'd like to ask if anyone has any challenges to this before I spend the time heavily editing this article. --MQDuck 11:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As an Anarcho-Capitalist, my knowledge in this area is probably lacking in comparison, but it seems that most articles about Socialism as well as Socioeconomics etc are all to a large extent written in a way that is rather subjective (though I acknowledge that I consider all socialist political ideologies to be subjective) and very much in a specifically Marxist fashion and view. They don't seem representative at all of how, I would think, most socialist actually view these topics. 78.69.217.113 (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: After a brief read-through of the article, I noticed that it seems to be in need of serious revision. Not only does it appear to be poorly formatted, it also lacks a cohesive definition of what utopian socialism actually is. Most of what is provided in the article is merely a brief history of it and how it was reacted to by different socialist branches. --15 March 2008
: Indeed. Zazaban (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. And the text only develops around Robert Owen and Charles Fourier while Saint-Simon is as important, while some other names mentioned as "Thinkers", don't seem to belong: Thomas More and Tommaso Campanella — while Christianity have inherent "socialist" traits, [Apg 4:32-37], [Luk 14:33], Anabaptism etc., it is a largely independent movement and doesn't share the antireligious sentiment that true socialism inherited from the Enlightenment. More and Campanella can at most be considered "inspirational sources", but so should then Shakers, Quakers and why not Hutterites? Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 20:43, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a whack at it. I tried to include more influential thinkers, but I left the religiously-inspired ones, because they seem to be crossovers between religious and secular socialism, and influenced secular socialists with their ideas. I also mentioned the religious socialists in the lead-in and added a wikilink to that article. We're still weak on refernces, but I used lots of wikilinks to other articles. Ghostofnemo (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

text: I think the reason some Marxists and some anarchists call it "utopian" socialism is that they feel it is an unrealistic method to achieve radical social change, which they feel requires class struggle and revolution. However, both Marxism and anarchism are utopian in the sense that they envision societies that are far superior to the current system - such societies would be almost perfect (i.e. with little conflict, crime, poverty, disease, etc.), and thus they are utopias. Anarchism is even more utopian than Marxism in the sense that Marxists advocate leaving government in place as a temporary measure during a transition period to a stateless society, while anarchists propose abolishing the state immediately. Ghostofnemo (talk) 06:50, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems as if editors feel these issues have been resolved, since they are no longer being discussed, so I'm going to remove the banners at the top of the article about fundamental issues that need to be resolved on the talk page. Ghostofnemo (talk) 23:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible revision of the entire article 

message: "the term "Utopian socialism" was introduced by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in The Communist Manifesto in 1848, although Marx shortly before the publication of this pamphlet already attacked the ideas of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in Das Elend der Philosophie (originally written in French, 1847)"
Except that Proudhon, in 1846, was attacking dick socialists of his time (Saint Simon, Fourier, etc.) for being utopians. Fair enough, he never used the term "utopian socialism" but Marx did AFTER reading "System of Economic Contradictions" in which Proudhon critiqued the socialists as utopians and argued that socialism needed to base itself on developments within capitalism rather than visions of perfect communities... 
'Marx and Engels used the term "scientific socialism" to describe the type of socialism they saw themselves developing.'
And Proudhon proclaimed the need for in "What is Property?" (1840).
I would suggest the article gets re-written to better reflect the actual development of the notion of utopian socialism, particularly the contribution of Proudhon's critique which pre-dated Marx's  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.109.238 (talk) 21:15, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a quick read through Proudhon's "System of Economic Contradictions" here: http://etext.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/ProMise.html but didn't see a concerted attack on utopian socialism (other than to mention that socialism is itself a utopian idea). He does seem to favor a "scientific" approach though. Can you cite the section that you are referring to? Ghostofnemo (talk) 00:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proudhon and Utopian Socialism 

message: Why is there a Syndicalism banner at the bottom of this article? What is the connection? Ghostofnemo (talk) 21:06, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Since utopian socialism and syndicalism are different variants of socialism, I'm going to remove the Syndicalism banner at the bottom of the article, unless someone can give a convincing reason there is a special relationship between utopian socialism and syndicalism. Ghostofnemo (talk) 23:27, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syndicalism banner at bottom of article 

message: The "Development" section of the article, which is supposed to be about the development of utopian socialism, is actually about utopian socialism as viewed or defined by Marxists. Maybe this could be improved? Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development section dominated by Marxism 

message: "The term was used by later socialist thinkers to describe early socialist or quasi-socialist intellectuals who created hypothetical visions of egalitarian, communalist, meritocratic, or other notions of "perfect" societies without considering how these societies could be created or sustained." 
Actually, this was Proudhon's criticism of those socialists he himself called "utopians" in System of Economic Contradictions. As its stands, the discussion of "utopian socialism" is basically repeating Marxist notions and failing to mention that he is often just repeating Proudhon -- while distorting Proudhon's actual ideas.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:630:301:4621:7040:BE01:294B:825C (talk) 10:56, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Marx was critiquing those he later labeled utopian years before Proudhon's book was published, not to mention bourgeois authors were using "utopian" even earlier to describe Owen, the Fourierists, and Saint-Simonians. At the end of the day the concept of "utopian socialism" as understood by Marx and Engels ended up becoming influential. Proudhon's understanding didn't, and in fact Marx and Engels accused Proudhon of utopianism. --Ismail (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Where is the reference for this affirmation? 38.25.27.14 (talk) 17:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proudhon and Utopian Socialism 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Communitarian socialism. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 3#Communitarian socialism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Communitarian socialism" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Use this talksection as a permission to do an edit as non-user and anonymous, IP user. Signed up users can edit with permission Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 06:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why's that? As far as I can see, this article is not semi-protected or extended confirmed protected. They have as much right to be WP:BOLD and edit as you or I. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 13:15, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right. It must be protected from vandalism and this page needs 1 year or 6 month semi protection. Thanks @Apparition11 for this correction. Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 13:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: We must wait before anonymous users edit and vandalise it. I did do reverted edits from @2604:3D09:AE7D:93D0:7918:EEC8:52AA:D8B9 from the article "She (pronoun)" and I copy his edit. Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 13:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I only see 1 instance of vandalism in the past 2 years. We don't want articles to be protected unless there is a need to. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 13:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: And I do not revert the latest edit. If the vandalism continues or many, then the page will be protected or semi-protected Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 14:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I will keep the latest revison of this page. Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 14:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks @Apparition11 Shalomie ☮️ (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 14:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous edit permission