Socialism

{{bronze}}[[File:Madrid may day375.jpg|thumb|right|165px|May Day in Madrid, 2006.]]{{economics}}{{cquote|Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called [[Social Security|social security]]. Socialism is what they called farm price supports. Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance. Socialism is what they called the growth of [[Trade union|free and independent labor organizations]]. Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.|||[[Harry S. Truman]]<ref>[https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/library/public-papers/289/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-new-york Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in New York] by Harry S. Truman (October 10, 1952) ''Harry S. Truman Library & Museum, National Archives''.</ref>}}
'''Socialism''' is a wide movement proposing a fairly broad set of related [[Sociology|socio]]-[[Economics|economic]] systems, aiming to create a more egalitarian society where the bulk of the means of production are owned by the workers or the community at large (typically through state ownership as an intermediary).<ref>{{wpa|socialism}}</ref><ref name="ebsocialism"/><ref name="iep"/><ref name="stanford"/> [[Alternative facts|Alternatively]], for most [[conservative]]s and [[libertarian]]s, socialism is widely regarded as "when [[The powers that be|the gummint]] does stuff".<ref>socdoneleft (June 4, 2016). [https://youtu.be/rgiC8YfytDw "Socialism Is When The Government Does Stuff"]. ''Youtube''.</ref> 

Socialists are also commonly defined as those who wish to abolish [[Communist glossary#Private property|private property]], which has led to opponents claiming "socialists are coming for your toothbrush!" and the like. However, this comes from a misunderstanding of what most socialists mean by "private property". For them, it relates to the dynamic between the owner and the actual user of the property, such as the one a business owner and their employee have in an average capitalist firm. In this context, the former is able to profit despite not actually needing to do the work themselves. Socialists consider this exploitative, as it deprives the employee of the "fruits of their labor" for an individual's self-gain. They contrast this kind of property with one's actual possessions, often called "[[Communist glossary#Personal property|personal property]]".<ref>Sunkara, Bhaskar (February 13, 2016). [https://jacobin.com/2016/02/socialism-marxism-private-property-person-lennon-imagine-kenny-loggins/ "End Private Property, Not Kenny Loggins"]. ''Jacobin''. Retrieved December 7, 2024.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date=February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume=1 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=B.3.1 What is the difference between private property and possession? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionB.html#secb31 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Liberation Staff |title=Eight myths about socialism–and their answers |date=November 9, 2011 |url=https://www.liberationnews.org/10-09-23-eight-myths-about-socialismand-html/ |website=Liberation News}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |date=February 1848 |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ |title=Manifesto of the Communist Party |chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm |via=Marxists Internet Archive |chapter=Chapter II. Proletarians and Communists ||quote=Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.}}</ref> 

People who believe in socialism are referred to variously as "socialists" or "[[communist]]s" — the technical difference being that communists see socialism as a "transitory phase" towards a communist society,<ref name="State and Revolution">{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |title=The State and Revolution |chapter=Chapter V: The Economic Basis of the Withering Away of the State |chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch05.htm |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ |via=Marxists Internet Archive }}</ref> while socialists may not, meaning not every socialist is a communist. One of the main distinctions between a communist and a socialist society is that within socialism, society follows the idea of "{{wpl|To each according to his contribution|to each according to their contribution}}". Within communism, society instead follows "{{wpl|From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs|from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs}}".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |title= Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First |publisher= South-Western College Pub |year= 2003|isbn= 0-618-26181-8|page = 118|quote=Under socialism, each individual would be expected to contribute according to capability, and rewards would be distributed in proportion to that contribution. Subsequently, under communism, the basis of reward would be need.}}</ref><ref name="gotha">{{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Marx |title=Critique of the Gotha Programme |chapter=Part I |chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ |date=1875 |via=Marxists Internet Archive }}</ref>

Historically, most attempts at establishing socialism have turned out less than ideal, often turning into [[Soviet Union|horrifying]] [[North Korea|dictatorships]]. Many socialists tend to promote methods of implementation that differ from the ones used in these dictatorships, hoping to avoid the mistakes of the past. Others argue these regimes were actually [[denialism|vibrant democracies]], and figures such as [[Stalin]] were [[Stalin apologetics|the good guys]], injustly framed by the [[bourgeois]] [[media]]. That, or they were only bad because of [[Western]] sabotage.

==Context==
[[File:Commune de Paris barricade Place Blanche.jpg|thumb|right|350px|The {{wpl|Paris Commune}} in 1871 was an early implementation of socialist ideas.]]
In the {{wpl|developed world}} during the [[Industrial Revolution]], workers often felt underpaid for their labour, and dangerous working conditions became commonplace.<ref>Montgomery, David. [https://www.dol.gov/general/aboutdol/history/chapter3 "Chapter 3: Labor in the Industrial Era"]. ''U.S. Department of Labor''. Retrieved December 7, 2024. "Shifting seasonal demands, crippling illnesses caused by industrial poisons, and alternating spasms of relentless work and forced idleness caused by the drive of each employer to capture as much of the market as possible--all these made for many long days without income."</ref> This laid the foundations for the modern idea of "socialism,"<ref group="note">Although it can be argued its roots trace back to ancient history.</ref> which advocated for a better society where the workers would be liberated from such harsh conditions brought by [[capitalism]].<ref name="ebsocialism">Dagger, Richard; Ball, Terence (December 20, 2024). [https://www.britannica.com/money/socialism "Socialism"]. ''Encyclopedia Britannica''.</ref> 

While the need for a radical change in the system has grown weaker in the last few decades, partly due to the acquisition of stronger labor rights and better conditions for a large part of the population, support for socialism still exists.<ref name="bhaskar the guardian">{{Cite news |last=Sunkara |first=Bhaskar |date=1 May 2019 |title=This May Day, let's hope democratic socialism makes a comeback |work=[[The Guardian]] |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/this-may-day-lets-hope-democratic-socialism-makes-a-comeback |access-date=January 9, 2025 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> While different variants of socialism may advocate for different goals, most of them aim to fix some major perceived issues within capitalism, including [[economic inequality]] and concentration of power in the wealthy, exploitation of workers and underdeveloped countries, production for profit at society's expense (aggravating issues such as [[poverty]] and [[climate change]]), and so on.<ref name="stanford">{{cite web | last=Gilabert | first=Pablo | last2=Neill | first2=Martin | title=Socialism | publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | date=May 25, 2024 | url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socialism/ | access-date=2025-01-09}}</ref><ref name="iep">Arnold, Samuel. [https://iep.utm.edu/socialis/ ''Socialism'']. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed January 8, 2025.</ref><ref name="whysocialism"/><ref>{{cite news |last=Saltmarsh |first=Chris |title=Capitalism Is What’s Burning the Planet, Not Average People |work=[[Jacobin]] |date=August 11, 2021 |url=https://jacobin.com/2021/08/ipcc-sixth-assessment-report-climate-change-denial |access-date=January 9, 2025}}</ref> 

Proponents of capitalism consider a radical change of economic system to be unneeded. On the reformist and more left-leaning side, defenders may agree unregulated capitalism indeed features major flaws, but argue these issues can be fixed or greatly mitigated by letting the government become more involved in the economy without abolishing capitalism. These can advocate for policies such as welfare programs, stronger regulations for private enterprises (including greater labor, [[environment]]al and {{wpl|antitrust}} laws) and partial, rather than full, public ownership, as is the case for modern [[social democrat]]s. They believe a system like this is more ideal than full socialization, citing the failures of socialist attempts throughout history and the success of reformist practices in countries like [[Sweden]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Acemoglu |first=Daron |title=Social Democracy Beats Democratic Socialism |date=February 17, 2020 |website=Project Syndicate |url=https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/social-democracy-beats-democratic-socialism-by-daron-acemoglu-2020-02 |archive-url=https://archive.is/20221026160735/https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/social-democracy-beats-democratic-socialism-by-daron-acemoglu-2020-02#selection-581.38-581.43 |archive-date=October 26, 2022}}</ref>

On the more "purist" side (including, for example, right-libertarians), they may claim some of the critiques to be nonissues or highly exaggerated. For example, they may defend economic inequality being good for economic growth and prosperity,<ref>{{cite web |url=https://manhattan.institute/article/inequality-does-not-reduce-prosperity-a-compilation-of-the-evidence-across-countries |last=Winship |first=Scott |date=October 29, 2014 |title=Inequality Does Not Reduce Prosperity: A Compilation of the Evidence Across Countries |website=Manhattan Institute }}</ref> poverty actually being the fault of [[blaming the victim|"poor people not working hard enough"]].<ref>{{cite news |last=Ferdman |first=Roberto A. |title=One in four Americans think poor people don’t work hard enough |date=October 9, 2014 |website=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/09/one-in-four-americans-think-poor-people-dont-work-hard-enough/}}</ref> or even that externalities which harm the climate aren't actually a big deal as [[denialism|"climate change is a commie hoax"]].<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20130720065636/http://history.ucsd.edu/_files/base-folder1/Challenging_16Oct07..pdf Challenging Knowledge: How Climate Science Became a Victim of the Cold War (preprint)] by Naomi Oreskes & Erik M. Conway (2008) In: ''Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance'', edited by Robert Proctor & Londa Schiebinger. Stanford University Press. ISBN 0804759014.</ref><ref>[http://www.prisonplanet.com/global-warming-or-global-governance.html Global Warming or Global Governance?] by George Stamm (Aug 8, 2008) ''The Epoch Times'' via ''Prison Planet''.</ref><ref>{{cite news |author=((Reuters Fact Check))|title=Fact Check: Climate change is not a ploy for communism; a Greta Thunberg meme has been digitally altered |date=August 18, 2021 |website=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/climate-change-is-not-a-ploy-for-communism-a-greta-thunberg-meme-has-been-digit-idUSL1N2PP0YK/ }}</ref> Meanwhile, others in the same camp might recognize the difficulties the modern status quo faces, but instead argue how it's the ''lack'' of capitalism that is the problem. They may believe issues like inequality and monopolies are actually caused by the government distorting the infallible [[free market]], with the true remedy being economic liberalization, instead of interventionism or a full system transformation.<ref>{{cite web |last=Patil |first=Soham |title=The Myth of Market Failure |date=July 12, 2024 |website=Mises Institute |url=https://mises.org/mises-wire/myth-market-failure}}</ref>

==Economic models==
Different socialists propose different methods of organizing an economy. The following is a summary of how different types of economies would work within a socialist context. Note that some of the proposals shown have few to no examples of them in practice, meaning they remain mostly speculative and lack empirical data on their feasibility.
===Planned economy===
A planned economy is a type of economic system where production, distribution and investment is predominantly done according to economic plans rather than through the market and its participants. Plans may determine which and how many goods need to be produced, who produces them and what resources they will have available, how these goods will be distributed and to who, what will be the prices of these goods (if any), etc.<ref>''Cambridge Business English Dictionary. [https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/economic-planning "Economic planning"]. ''Cambridge University Press''. Retrieved December 8, 2024.</ref><ref>{{wpa|planned economy}}</ref> 
====Central planning====
[[File:JStalin Secretary general CCCP 1942 flipped.jpg|thumb|left|220px|Former [[USSR]] general-secretary (and dictator) [[Joseph Stalin]].]]
{{main|Command economy}}
A centrally planned economy, often called a [[command economy]], is a form of planned economy where economic plans are made by a central body, normally the state bureaucracy. Individual central planners design the plans based on the information they have available about the productive capacity of firms and the national demands.<ref name="stanford"/><ref name="iep"/>

This socialist model is arguably the most (in)famous, being the face of socialism throughout the whole world. Command economies have been popularized by the [[Soviet Union]] and the Soviet model of economic planning, later adopted by various other nations such as [[Cuba]] and most countries from the [[Eastern Bloc]].<ref>{{wpa|Soviet-type economic planning}}</ref>{{efn|Some scholars have argued that calling these economies "planned" is mistaken, as the central management was often prioritized over the plans themselves, meaning an "administered economy" would be a more accurate label.<ref>{{cite journal|title=The Soviet Union Has an Administered, Not a Planned, Economy|last=Wilhelm|first=John Howard|year=1985|journal=Soviet Studies|pages=118–130|publisher=Taylor & Francis, Ltd|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/151614|volume=37|issue=1|jstor=151614}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Ellman|first=Michael|chapter=The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning|title=Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti|editor1-first= Saul|editor1-last=Estrin|editor2-first=Grzegorz W.|editor2-last=Kołodko|editor3-first=Milica|editor3-last=Uvalić|location= New York|publisher= Palgrave Macmillan|year=2007|isbn=978-0-230-54697-4|page=22|quote=Realization of these facts led in the 1970s and 1980s to the development of new terms to describe what had previously been (and still were in United Nations publications) referred to as the 'centrally planned economies'. In the USA in the late 1980s the system was normally referred to as the 'administrative-command' economy. What was fundamental to this system was not the plan but the role of administrative hierarchies at all levels of decision making; the absence of control over decision making by the population [...].}}</ref>}} The first five-year plan in the USSR was implemented under [[Joseph Stalin]], with results of catastrophic proportions, leading to one of the worst famines in history.<ref>{{wpa|first five-year plan}}</ref> Later central planning performances, while not as destructive, still struggled with rampant authoritarianism and various economic problems such as shortages and irrational allocation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Nove |first=Alexander |date=May 4, 1993 |title=An Economic History of the USSR: 1917-1991, 3rd Edition |url=https://archive.org/details/aneconomichistoryussrnove/page/295/mode/2up |publisher=Penguin Books|isbn=978-0140157741}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kornai |first=János |date=1980 |title=Economics of shortage |url=https://archive.org/details/economicsofshort0000korn |location=Amsterdam, New York |publisher=Elsevier Science Ltd |isbn=978-0444860590}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bideleux |first1=Robert |last2=Jeffries |first2=Ian |date=September 11, 2007 |title=A History of Eastern Europe: Crisis and Change, 2nd Edition |publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0415366274| quote=[The development strategies] involved the relative neglect of consumer needs and the service sector (with the partial exceptions of education and health care), unprecedentedly rapid urbanization, acute urban overcrowding, chronic shortages, massive recruitment of women into mostly menial and/or low-paid occupations, widespread use of coercion, repression, ‘show trials’, purges and intimidation, and major errors and waste in the over-centralized resource allocation and distribution.}}</ref> 

Unsurprisingly, central planning has received its fair share of negative academic reactions. Some of the most notable critiques come from economists of the [[Austrian school]], particularly by [[Friedrich Hayek]]. One of Hayek's major critiques include the difficulty of gathering and using relevant information, which is tacit and dispersed in a whole economy, due to the lack of {{wpl|price signals}} for conveying such information.<ref>Hayek, Friedrich (1945). [https://www.kysq.org/docs/Hayek_45.pdf "The Use of Knowledge in Society"]. ''The American Economic Review''.</ref> Another critique by him is the inevitability of central planning to result in authoritarianism, since the kind of power that comes from planning would inevitably give great coercive powers to the state, enabling it to act in the benefit of the state bureaucracy at the expense of society as a whole.<ref>{{cite book|last=Hayek|first=Friedrich|author-link=Friedrich Hayek|title=The Road to Serfdom|publisher=Institute of Economic Affairs|date=1944|url=https://mises.org/library/book/road-serfdom}}</ref> Other scholars note that, even assuming central planners possess the correct information about the economy, central planning may also lead to a "bureaucratization of economic life", as these planners may lack the incentives to act on that information, a problem resolved by market economies through pressure from competition and profit as a reward for success.<ref>[https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Socialism.html "Socialism"]. Adapted from "The World After Communism" by Robert Heilbroner, published on ''Dissent'' (Fall 1990). ''Econlib''. Accessed May 23, 2025.</ref> 

Some leftists have taken this criticism for a bourgeois attack against the glorious socialist states and their extremely efficient economies.<ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/m4rcfo/why_was_the_planned_economy_of_the_ussr_so/?rdt=46072 "Why was the planned economy of the USSR so inefficient and how can its problems be avoided in the future?"]. r/socialism101. Via [[Reddit]].</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/1i3ph64/why_do_people_not_like_planned_economies/ "Why do people not like planned economies?"]. r/socialism101. Via [[Reddit]].</ref> Others have abandoned the Soviet model of planning, but still advocate for alternative models involving central planning that are (hopefully) more democratic and efficient. One such example is the model of planning through supercomputers described by Paul Cockshott and Allin Cottrell.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cockshott |first1=Paul |last2=Cottrell |first2=Allin |date=April 1, 1993 |title=Towards a New Socialism |publisher=Spokesman Books |isbn=978-0851245454}}</ref>

====Decentralized planning====
[[File:MIchael Albert at B-Fest 2009 II.jpg|thumb|right|230px|Economist Michael Albert, known for participatory economics.]]
As the name suggests, decentralized planning (often called "participatory" or even just "democratic planning") proposes a form of horizontal and bottom-up economic planning, aiming to fix some core issues with central planning while still avoiding common problems from market economies such as market failures.<ref name="stanford"/><ref name="iep"/><ref name="demplan">{{cite book |last=Hahnel |first=Robin |date=2021 |title=Democratic Economic Planning |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-003-17370-0 }}</ref> This model distinguishes itself from the market mechanism, the other decentralized method of coordination, by having interdependent decisions be made collectively and in advance, instead of being done atomistically and in isolation like in the market.<ref name="demplan"/>{{rp|170–171}}<ref>{{cite book | last=Devine | first=Pat | title=Democracy and Economic Planning: The Political Economy of a Self-governing Society | publisher=Polity Press | date=1988 }}</ref>{{rp|24}} 

Its advocates commonly propose utilizing council [[democracy]] and more federalist and self-managed forms of economic organization. A well-known modern proposal is {{wpl|participatory economics}} (or "parecon"), by the economists Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, featuring a system of negotiation between federated workers' and consumers' councils, intermediated by a specialized agency meant to facilitate the planning process.<ref name="demplan"/> Proposals in a similar vein have also been presented in the past, notably in the works of Anton Pannekoek and then later of Cornelius Castoriadis. Participatory planning was also put in practice, to an extent, in the socialist experiments of the Paris Commune and [[Spain]] during the [[Spanish Civil War]].<ref>Spannos, Chris (2012). "Examining the History of Anarchist Economics to See the Future". [https://files.libcom.org/files/The%20Accumulation%20of%20Freedom,%20Writings%20on%20Anarchist%20Economics%20-%20%20Deric%20Shannon%20et%20al.pdf ''The Accumulation of Freedom'']. AK Press.</ref> 

Though there's not much empirical data available on their performance, some discussion and speculation has been made. For example, market socialist economist Alec Nove, responding to older forms of democratic planning, has argued how there is no alternative to the market for horizontal coordination, as a voting process would be impracticable due to the sheer scale of an economy and could also devolve into a [[mobocracy|majority tyranny]], further criticizing the vagueness of assertions by [[Marxist]]s that "society would decide what to produce" and arguing such an ideal would inherently require centralization and hierarchy.<ref>{{cite book |last=Nove |first=Alec |date=1991 |title=The Economics of Feasible Socialism Revisited|url=http://digamo.free.fr/nove91.pdf|edition= second|location=London |publisher= HarperCollinsAcademic |pages=29–30, 219–221}}</ref> Critics of parecon may also invoke similar sentiments to the first point, arguing the planning procedures would be too cumbersome and time-consuming for the average person, though its creators deem such critiques to be exaggerated, offering various suggestions to make the process easier and arguing the amount of paperwork needed wouldn't be much more than under capitalism.<ref name="iep"/><ref name="demplan"/>{{rp|163–172}}

===Market economy===
[[File:Josip Broz Tito prezident of communistic Yugoslavia.jpg|thumb|left|190px|[[Josip Broz Tito]], former leader of socialist [[Yugoslavia]].]]
A market economy is one where the production and distribution of goods and services is determined by the forces of supply and demand through price signals.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |title=Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century |publisher= South-Western College Pub |year= 2003|isbn= 0-618-26181-8|page=538|quote=Market Economy: Economy in which fundamentals of supply and demand provide signals regarding resource utilization.}}</ref> While socialism is often associated with planning, the idea of social ownership is by no means incompatible with markets. In fact, market socialists have existed before socialism was even popularized by Marx and later socialist experiments.<ref>{{wpa|market socialism}}</ref>

Historically, a form of market socialism has been practiced in [[Yugoslavia]]. While the means of production were publicly owned, the actual management of enterprises was, for the most part, done by the workers themselves.<ref name="yugoslavia">{{Cite journal |last=Estrin |first=Saul |date=1991 |title=Yugoslavia: The Case of Self-Managing Market Socialism |url=https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.5.4.187 |journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives |language=en |volume=5 |issue=4 |pages=187–194 |doi=10.1257/jep.5.4.187 |issn=0895-3309}}</ref> Under [[Tito]], Yugoslavia did actually enjoy a relatively healthy economy, with no major shortages of consumer goods, in contrast to the many other socialist regimes of that time (though the same can't really be said on the "democracy" department). Yugoslavia's economy suffered from major downturns in its later years, however. Considering its many reforms and peculiarities, it's hard to tell whether it was because of fundamental flaws of market socialism or not.<ref name="yugoslavia"/>{{rp|193}} Yugoslavia was eventually dissolved after major internal ethnic conflicts.<ref>Allcock, John B ; Lampe, John R (December 15, 2024). [https://www.britannica.com/place/Yugoslavia-former-federated-nation-1929-2003 Yugoslavia]. ''Encyclopedia Britannica''. Accessed 19 January 2025.</ref> 

The current system found in [[China]] is officially named "socialism with Chinese characteristics" and features predominant use of markets, but it might more closely resemble a form of state capitalism,<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Szamosszegi |first1=Andrew |last2=Kyle |first2=Cole |title=An Analysis of State-owned Enterprises and State Capitalism in China |url=https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e41c6f5227c7b05e81bb87a/t/5ebc4f41cb51d10a41c54989/1589399365069/AZS-CK-China-SOE.pdf |website=U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission }}</ref> as it still features private property. The {{wpl|Lange model||,}} idealized by Oskar Lange during a debate with Friedrich Hayek, is often regarded as an important market socialist model, though perhaps erroneously, as the model was created with the intention of replacing the market with planning.<ref name="marxtomises">{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David Ramsay |title=From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court |date=September 1992 |isbn=978-0-8126-9862-6 }}</ref>{{rp|252}}

Many on the left in the modern day have proposed different models of market socialism, including John Roemer's model of "coupon socialism"<ref>{{cite book |last=Roemer |first=John |date=January 1, 1994 |title=A Future for Socialism |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0674339460}}</ref> and David Schweickart's model of "economic democracy".<ref>{{cite book|last=Schweickart |first=David |title=After Capitalism |date=July 23, 2002 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. |isbn=9780742513006}}</ref> Some influential figures, such as [[United States|American]] politician [[Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez]], have advocated for a market socialist system.<ref name="AOC">{{cite news |last=Croucher |first=Shane |title=Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Explains Socialism During Instagram Live Stream: 'It Does Not Mean Government Owns Everything' |url=https://www.newsweek.com/ocasio-cortez-instagram-live-explains-socialism-aoc-1444534|website=Newsweek |date=June 18, 2019 }}</ref> Interestingly, even some Marxists have advocated for a market socialist economy, including the economist Richard D. Wolff.<ref>{{cite web |last=Wolff |first=Richard D. |url=https://www.democracyatwork.info/eu_capitalism_vs_socialism_is_not_markets_vs_planning |title=Economic Update: Capitalism vs Socialism is NOT Markets vs Planning |date=November 7, 2022 |website=Democracy at Work}}</ref>

==Ideologies==
===Utopian socialism===
[[File:Claude_Henri_de_Rouvroy.jpg|thumb|right|180px|Portrait of Henri de Saint-Simon, by Godefroy Engelmann.]]
The first person who theorized of the initial modern concept of socialism was {{wpl|Henri de Saint-Simon||,}} a political, social, and economic philosopher. The term socialism itself was coined in 1832 by a follower of Simon, Pierre Leroux, when describing the system Simon had theorized.<ref>https://www.etymonline.com/word/socialism</ref> The term "utopian socialism" was coined by [[Karl Marx]] to refer to those who generally believed in a classless and stateless society but had not hammered out any specific theories for getting there.<ref name="utopian>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |date=1880 |title=Socialism: Utopian and Scientific |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref> 

Utopian socialism is also among the earliest forms of theorized and practiced socialism globally. A group known as the Owenites, followers of 19th-century Welsh social reformer Robert Owen, formed several utopian socialist communities organized along [[communitarian]] and cooperative principles. The most famous of the communities located in New Harmony, Indiana, was where Owen himself chose to reside. 

The Owenite communities largely failed in short order (New Harmony's Owenite community only lasted two years). Still, Owenism is largely thought to have been the first socialist movement in American history,<ref>https://archive.org/stream/cu31924030362721/cu31924030362721_djvu.txt</ref> and former Presidents [[John Adams]] and [[Thomas Jefferson]] both attended his lectures.<ref>Rowland Hill Harvey (1947). Robert Owen: Social Idealist. University of California Press. pp. 99–100.</ref> While the Owenites largely failed in their goals, Owen's ideas on labor vouchers influenced later socialist thinkers such as [[Daniel De Leon]], while the Owenites' most lasting legacy on the socialist movement is most likely the cooperative movement.<ref>http://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/143150/files/weavers.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm2zSSg4Y5rV3zYlNxXbdy4Fw5QoCQ&nossl=1&oi=scholarr</ref>

===Blanquism===
<!-- Note to self, update and rewrite using actual primary sources and secondary scholarship instead of the pop history most of the internet relies on. -->
Blanquism refers to the short-lived socialist current derived from the ideas of Louis Auguste Blanqui. Blanqui's volunteerist, populist, and education focused view held that a dedicated revolutionary secret society could lead a popular uprising, during which time a radical republican regime could be established with the support of a patriotic populace.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hallward |first=Peter |title=Blanqui's bifurcations |year=2014 |journal=Radical Philosophy |url=https://blanqui.kingston.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/Hallward-Blanquis-Bifurications-Radical-Philosophy-185-2014.pdf}}</ref><ref>The Blanqui Reader, pages 202-230</ref>

Blanquists were an influence to the socialist experiment of the Paris Commune. But, contemporarily, Blanquism is only really mentioned in comparison to Leninism and its offshoots, which similarly advocated for a small group of trained revolutionaries to lead the revolution and seize power (in the case of the latter, through the vanguard party), though Leninists will often distinguish the two by arguing the party was simply an "extension of the worker-class".<ref group=note>See these [[Reddit]] posts for examples: [https://www.reddit.com/r/CapitalismVSocialism/comments/w39lp0/marxistleninists_isnt_marxismleninism_just/ <nowiki>"[Marxist-Leninists]</nowiki> Isn't Marxism-Leninism just Blanquism with Marxist window-dressing?"], r/CapitalismVsSocialism; [https://www.reddit.com/r/communism101/comments/5kxur2/how_is_marxistleninism_not_blanquism/ "How is Marxist-Leninism not Blanquism?"], r/communism101; [https://www.reddit.com/r/Socialism_101/comments/4hvbjs/difference_between_blanquism_and_leninism/ "Difference between Blanquism and Leninism?"], r/socialism101.</ref>

===Anarchism===
[[File:Manifestación CNT Bilbao.jpg|thumb|left|300px|Anarcho-syndicalist demonstration in Spain.]]
{{main|Anarchism}}
{{cquote|To be governed is to be kept in sight, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-​driven, numbered, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right, nor the wisdom, nor the virtue to do so.|||Pierre-​Joseph Proudhon, ''The General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century'' (1851).<ref>{{cite book |last=Proudhon |first=Pierre-Joseph |date=1851 |title=The General Idea of the Revolution in the 19th Century |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/pierre-joseph-proudhon-the-general-idea-of-the-revolution-in-the-19th-century |via=The Anarchist Library }}</ref>}}
[[Anarchism]] is an ideology which advocates for the replacement of hierarchical authority and subordination with self-management and voluntary association within and between groups of people. It is also often defined solely for its opposition to the state and government, though some anarchists believe this characterization to be limited.<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 1 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Section A.1 - What is Anarchism? |chapter-url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca1 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref> This is especially important in regards to [[anarcho-capitalism]]. While anarcho-capitalists argue it is a legitimate form of anarchism due to its opposition to the government, anarcho-socialists may believe that capitalism is incompatible with anarchism due to the former requiring hierarchies and disparities of power between different economic classes.<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Appendix -- Is "anarcho"-capitalism a type of anarchism? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/append13.html |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref> 

Anarchism is a wildly varied ideology. The first self-styled anarchist was {{wpl|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon||,}} who was also the first [[Anarchism#Mutualism|mutualist]], an anarchist school of thought. Other influential figures include the [[Anarchism#Anarcho-collectivism|anarcho-collectivist]] {{wpl|Mikhail Bakunin}} and the [[Anarchism#Anarcho-communism|anarcho-communist]] [[Peter Kropotkin]], who both created/popularized their respective anarchist ideologies and advanced some of the fundamentals followed by most anarchist in the current age. Anarchism has also inspired movements in various countries, such as the [[Anarchism#Anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalist]] one in [[Spain]] during the [[Spanish Civil War]] and the anarcho-communist one in [[Ukraine]] during the {{wpl|Ukraine War of Independence||.}}<ref name="impossible"/>

This ideology is often a victim of [[straw man|strawmanning]] by political opponents. One common misrepresentation is that anarchists support "absolute freedom", meaning there wouldn't be restrictions for any sort of crimes. Anarchists consider many crimes (including [[murder]], theft, [[rape]], etc.) to be "violations on the freedom of others", meaning those would be prohibited much like in current society, but with alternative systems of enforcement which don't require a state.<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 2 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Section I.5.8 What about crime? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionI.html#seci58 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref> Conversely, anarchism shouldn't be confused with a [[mobocracy]], as the main anarchist principles are based on voluntary association, with coercion only being used to deter the previously mentioned violations. Additionally, most anarchists don't oppose organization, nor do they expect everyone to vote on the most menial decisions at all times, as they favor federations of communes and temporary delegates for administrative positions which can be recalled at any time by the people that chose them.<ref name="dirdem">{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 1 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Section A.2.11 Why are most anarchists in favour of direct democracy? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca23 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref>     

For ''actual'' critiques, one of them is on its infeasibility, particularly when considering the lack of successful, large-scale experiments which prove an anarchist society could deal with the various political and economic complexities without the reemergence of the state (or any other hierarchical or coercive mechanism anarchists despise). In addition, most anarchist movements historically were short-lived, taken down by external opponents or internal sabotage and infighting. However, whether this is the fault of the movements themselves or simply because of unique circumstances is debatable, considering how, for example, the Makhnovshchina Ukrainian movement was managing its fight against the White Army relatively well, only falling after the [[Bolshevik|Red Army]] ganged up on it.<ref>{{wpa|Makhnovshchina}}</ref> 

Anarchists have also been criticized for terrorism and other brutally violent tactics. Many of these tactics were influenced by the "propaganda by the deed", a type of direct action intended to influence public opinion by serving as a catalyst for social revolution.<ref>{{wpa|propaganda of the deed}}</ref> Other examples of anarchist violence include the killings and tortures in the [[Spanish Civil War]], in which the anarchists were involved,<ref>{{wpa|Red Terror (Spain)}}</ref> as well as the {{wpl|1919 United States anarchist bombings||,}} one of the inciting incidents of the first [[Red Scare]]. Regardless, it's worth mentioning pacifist anarchists do exist, such as the [[Christian]] writer Leo Tolstoi.<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 1 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Section A.3.4 Is anarchism pacifistic? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionA.html#seca34 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref> Less pacifistic anarchists may still aim to minimize violence and instead favor other forms of direct action such as mass strikes, only making exceptions in cases where violence is required for "self-defence against oppression and authority".<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 2 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter= Section J.7.3 Doesn't revolution mean violence? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionJ.html#secj73 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref>

===Marxism===
{{hatnote|For more information, see: [[Communism#Marxism|Communism § Marxism]]}}
[[File:Marx and Engels.jpg|thumb|right|320px|Marx and Engels.]]
{{cquote|The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.||| Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, ''Communist Manifesto'' (1848).<ref name="manifesto">{{cite book |last1=Marx |first1=Karl |last2=Engels |first2=Friedrich |date=1847 |title=Manifesto of the Communist Party |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>}}
In contrast to utopian socialism, [[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]] formulated what they called "scientific socialism".<ref name="utopian/> This variant of socialism came to be from an analysis of the history of civilization based on [[Communist glossary#Class struggle|class struggle]] and [[Communist glossary#Historical materialism|historical materialism]]. They believed that the conditions created by capitalism would result in the conflict between the ruling class (the bourgeoisie, ''i.e.'' the class that owns the means of production) and the ruled class (the [[proletariat]], ''i.e.'' the class of wage-earners who only own their own labor-power) which would build the foundations for a proletarian revolution where the workers would gradually seize the means of production.<ref name="manifesto"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Marx |date=1845 |title=The German Ideology |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive |quote=Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |date=1847 |title=The Principles of Communism |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>

Marx believed that all socio-political orders, except in the [[myth]]ical pure communism, were "dictatorships" in which one class dictated to the rest; the bourgeoisie was assigned that role in his characterization of capitalism. For Marx, the path towards communism would not be any less a dictatorship, but it would be a "dictatorship of the proletariat" where the ''workers'' would dictate to everyone else. The term "dictatorship of the proletariat" was initially coined to differentiate between Marx's idea of a grass-roots worker-run state and the more elitist ideas of Blanquism; but the "dictatorship" part is not meaningless, since he said in the ''[[Communist Manifesto]]'' that this dictatorship would have to resort to "despotic" measures at first (''e.g.'', control the army to conquer other capitalist territories).<ref name="manifesto"></ref> Engels also advocated for the state to be used "not for the purpose of freedom, but of keeping down its enemies".<ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |date=1875 |title=Engels to August Bebel In Zwickau |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/letters/75_03_18.htm |via=The Marxists Archive |quote=The people’s state has been flung in our teeth ad nauseam by the anarchists, although Marx’s anti-Proudhon piece and after it the Communist Manifesto declare outright that, with the introduction of the socialist order of society, the state will dissolve of itself and disappear. Now, since the state is merely a transitional institution of which use is made in the struggle, in the revolution, to keep down one’s enemies by force, it is utter nonsense to speak of a free people’s state; so long as the proletariat still makes use of the state, it makes use of it, not for the purpose of freedom, but of keeping down its enemies and, as soon as there can be any question of freedom, the state as such ceases to exist.}}</ref>

After the dictatorial period, society would then begin to transition towards a classless, stateless and moneyless society. "Classless" and "stateless" were tightly bound together in Marx's theory. Within Marxism, the state is defined as the tools of class oppression and subjugation,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Marx |first1=Karl |last2=Engels |first2=Friedrich |date=1891 |title=The Civil War in France - Engels 1891 Postscript |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/postscript.htm |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive |quote=[..] [T]he state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another[..]}}</ref> meaning a society without social classes would, consequently, have no state.<ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |date=1880 |title=Socialism: Utopian and Scientific |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive |quote="As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon our present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from these, are removed, nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary."}}</ref>{{efn|Note that the definition of state by anarchists contrasts with this Marxist definition, as they define the state as a form of minority rule. In other words, a "stateless society" in an anarchist context might not mean the same thing as in a Marxist one. In fact, certain interpretations of the "worker's state" can be very similar to what anarchists consider to be a stateless society. In these cases, anarchists argue defining these forms of organization to be a state is unhelpful and can be dangerously ambiguous.<ref>{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 2 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=H.2.1 Do anarchists reject defending a revolution? |chapter-url=https://www.anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionH.html#sech21 |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref>}} As the socialist order is established, Marx divided what he called the lower and higher phases of a communist society, with the main distinction being that the lower phase would use {{wpl|labour voucher|labor certificates}} as a basis for reward, while the higher phase would distribute according to need.<ref name="gotha"/> Traditionally, these phases would simply be called "socialism" and "communism" respectively. However, Marx used both terms interchangeably. Only later would Marx's ideas be reinterpreted to separate the two definitions, making socialism this transitory phase (and also fusing the lower phase with the dictatorship of the proletariat, which initially ''preceded'' the phases of communism).<ref name="marxtomises"/>{{rp|90–91}}

Marxism was arguably the most influential socialist school of thought, having inspired countless movements and theorists in history. It has also created a great amount of enemies and critics all across the [[political spectrum]], including from other socialists. For example, the anarchist Mikhail Bakunin was an ardent critic of Marx, predicting the dictatorship of the proletariat would be seized by a small elite of false representatives of the worker-class.<ref>{{cite book |last=Bakunin |first=Mikhail |title=Statism and Anarchy |date=5 October 1873 |url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/bakunin/works/1873/statism-anarchy.htm |publisher=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref> Libertarians (and, to an extent, supporters of democracy in general) from both sides often share similar sentiments. The fact that this [[Stalin|basically happened]] probably helps their case.{{efn|Although some Marxists would contest that the Soviet Union was in any way actually Marxist. To their credit, Marx ''probably'' didn't have something like the Soviet Union in mind when writing about socialism, considering how he believed ''everyone'' should be part of the government, comparing it to a [[trade union]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Marx |title=Conspectus of Bakunin’s Statism and Anarchy |via=Marxists Internet Archive |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1874/04/bakunin-notes.htm |date=April 1874 – January 1875}}</ref>}}

Marx's ideas have also been criticized by members of the scientific community from various fields. The philosopher [[Karl Popper]] has criticized Marxism on the grounds of it not being scientific (contrary to what "scientific socialism" might suggest) and its reliance on [[historicism]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Popper |date=1945 |title=The Open Society and Its Enemies|publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-691-15813-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Popper |date=1944 |title=The Poverty of Historicism |publisher=Routledge |isbn=0-415-06569-0 }}</ref> Marxism also sees little relevance in mainstream economics, with most economists rejecting the ideas put forth on Marx's economic works (such as ''[[Das Kapital|Capital]]'').<ref>{{cite journal|last=Stigler|first=George J.|date=December 1988|title=Palgrave's Dictionary of Economics|journal=Journal of Economic Literature|volume=26|pages=1729–36|jstor=2726859|number=4|quote=Economists working in the Marxian-Sraffian tradition represent a small minority of modern economists, and that their writings have virtually no impact upon the professional work of most economists in major English-language universities.}}</ref><ref>{{cite report |last=Acemoglu |first=Daron |last2=Robinson |first2=James |title=The Rise and Decline of General Laws of Capitalism |url=https://www.nber.org/papers/w20766 |publisher=National Bureau of Economic Research |publication-place=Cambridge, MA |year=2014 |doi=10.3386/w20766}}</ref> Despite this, it still finds some relevance in the social sciences more broadly, with 18% of American professors in the field identifying themselves as Marxists, according to a 2007 survey.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gross |first1=Neil |last2=Simmons |first2=Solon |chapter=The Social and Political Views of American College and University Professors |pages=19–50 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=D1vCAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA19 |editor1-last=Gross |editor1-first=Neil |editor2-last=Simmons |editor2-first=Solon |title=Professors and Their Politics |date=2014 |publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press |isbn=978-1421413358 |via=Google Books}}</ref> Scholars who describe themselves as such may follow more "updated" traditions, which includes {{wpl|Analytical Marxism||,}} a variant of Marxism largely prompted by the philosopher G. A. Cohen and other members of what was endearingly called the "Non-[[Bullshit]] Marxism Group".<ref>Leopold, David. [https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2022/entries/marxism-analytical/ "Analytical Marxism"]. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.)</ref>

Marxism is also used as a boogeyman by right-wing [[crank]]s and [[fascist]]s in various [[conspiracy theories]], notably in [[Cultural Marxism]]. It's common for these groups to make baseless accusations against those to the left of them by claiming they're [[Red-baiting|actually secret Marxists]] trying to bring communism through [[progressive]] policies. Tactics like these were also used during the American {{wpl|Red Scares||.}}

===Leninism===
[[File:Idn.duke.edu Soviet propaganda poster 1929 - Deni, V. N. Long Live the First of May, Moscow & Leningrad Да здравствует первое мая No known copyright.jpg|thumb|left|260px|"Under the Lenin banner of the Comintern - forward! Long Live the First of May". USSR, 1929.]]
{{hatnote|For more information, see: [[Communism#Leninism|Communism § Leninism]]}}
{{cquote|Attention, must be devoted ''principally to raising'' the workers to the level of revolutionaries; it is not at all our task ''to descend'' to the level of the “working masses.”||| Vladimir Lenin, ''What Is To Be Done?'' (1901).<ref name="whatdone">{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |date=1901–1902 |title=What Is To Be Done? |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1901/witbd/ |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>}}
Leninism was the current which spawned from the [[Bolshevik]] revolutionary [[Vladimir Lenin]]'s works and interpretations of orthodox Marxism leading to, and after, the Russian Revolution, which occured in during the beginning of the 20<sup>th</sup> century.

Lenin was an extensive critic of "evolutionary socialism," a current developing within his time. Evolutionary socialists, such as {{wpl|Eduard Bernstein||,}} promoted the idea of a gradual change towards socialism. They believed that, since the conditions of the workers actually improved as the years went by, it was indeed possible to implement socialism without a revolution.<ref name="ebsocialism"/>  

In contrast, Lenin advocated for a violent revolution as the only means to achieve socialism, arguing the improvement of conditions was due to the exploitation of poorer countries, condemning Bernstein of being revisionist. [[Ironically]], Lenin himself held positions which went against traditional Marxist beliefs, such as how he wished to skip capitalism and go straight to socialism, rejecting the notion that a period of capitalism would be needed to develop both the productive forces of the country and the revolutionary proletariat.<ref name="ebsocialism"/> 

Lenin considered the dictatorship of the proletariat to be democratic, but also argued that the "exploiters and oppressors of the people" should be excluded from democracy, with democracy for all only being possible after reaching a classless society.<ref name="State and Revolution"/> In practice however, the worker's state was mainly controlled by the Communist Party rather than the workers, meaning that, in the end, there was no democracy at all.<ref name="ebleninism">The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica (October 8, 2024). [https://www.britannica.com/topic/Leninism ''Leninism'']. Encyclopedia Britannica.</ref>
 
Lenin was distrustful of a spontaneous revolution, i.e. that the workers themselves would realize how ''wonderful'' communism is through the natural development of history, which was the prediction made by the more traditional Marxism. Instead, he promoted the use of a central "vanguard party", organized through [[democratic centralism]]. The vanguard party was to be composed of the most [[Communist glossary#Class consciousness|class-conscious]] and intelligent members of the worker-class, who would bring the masses to the revolution by spreading revolutionary thought and would seize the power from the ruling classes.<ref name="ebleninism"/><ref name="whatdone"/><ref name="intertrotsky"/>{{rp|13–14}} Democratic centralism was (on theory) based on "freedom of discussion, unity of action", where discussion was completely permitted until a decision was made by a vote from the party, in which case any actions which may derail the reached resolution are strictly forbidden.<ref>{{wpa|democratic centralism}}</ref><ref name="intertrotsky"/>{{rp|13–14}} 

Critics may argue how such method of organizing the revolution is not only oppressive towards dissident members due to the nature of democratic centralism, but can lead to the alienation of the worker-class as a whole in favor of the small minority of "great thinkers" leading the revolution's vanguard, which is exactly what happened in practice.<ref name="statesocialism">{{cite book |last1=McKay |first1=Iain |last2=Elkin |first2=Gary |last3=Neal |first3=Dave |last4=Boraas |first4=Ed |date= February 22, 2024 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/index.html |volume= 2 |version=Version 15.6 |chapter=Section H - Why do anarchists oppose state socialism? |chapter-url=https://anarchistfaq.org/afaq/sectionH.html |publisher=The Anarchist FAQ Editorial Collective}}</ref> 

====Marxism-Leninism====
[[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-11500-0994, Berlin, III. Weltfestspiele.jpg|thumb|right|340px|Parade in East Berlin, 1951.]]
Marxism-Leninism is the communist ideology created by Joseph Stalin, according to his own interpretation of Marxism and Leninism. Marxism-Leninism advocates for a centrally planned economy with a one-party socialist state and brutal repression of anything deemed "bourgeois" or "counter-revolutionary", which, for virtually all Marxist-Leninist leaders, includes anyone or anything they don't like.<ref>{{wpa|Marxism-Leninism}}</ref>

Marxism-Leninism became the official state ideology of the Soviet Union, as well as many communist regimes following Stalin's rule. Many different ideologies can be found within it, including [[Stalinism]] under Joseph Stalin, [[Maoism]] under [[Mao Zedong]], [[Juche]] under [[Kim Il-sung]], and so on, each altering or adapting Marxism-Leninism in different ways under different contexts. It's one of the most followed communist ideologies to date, with many of the former and existing self-described socialist states advocating it in some form.<ref>{{wpa|list of socialist states}}</ref>

From the Great Purge and [[Holodomor]] of Stalin to the "Year Zero" of [[Pol Pot]], most Marxist-Leninist societies featured some kind of event leading to mass death as a result of abuse of power. Similarly to [[fascism]], there are still those who deny the atrocities committed under these regimes, including [[Stalin apologetics#Grover Furr|Grover Furr]] and [[Stalin apologetics#Michael Parenti|Michael Parenti]]. Apologists of these regimes may pejoratively be called [[tankie]]s, in reference to those who were in support of the Soviet Union sending tanks to stop protests, such as the ones in [[Hungary]] during 1956.<ref>{{cite web |author=<!-- not stated --> |date=April 23, 2019 |website=Dictionary |title=Tankie |access-date=February 8, 2024 |url=https://www.dictionary.com/e/politics/tankie/}}</ref>

As the state controlled speech, so too was science controlled. This came from a desire to follow the principles of Marxism and [[dialectical materialism]] to a tee while avoiding all the "[[bourgeois pseudoscience]]". This was ''especially'' notorious in the Soviet Union under Stalin, where publications in scientific journals and books, granting of degrees, promotions and demotions, and so on, were all controlled by the Party. This also resulted in stuff like the [[theory of relativity]] and [[quantum mechanics]] to be labeled bourgeois.<ref name="sovietscience"/>{{rp|122–123}} It also gave rise to the [[pseudoscience]] of [[Lysenkoism]], a modified version of the [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck|Lamarckian]] [[evolutionary theory]] used for [[biology]] research and "agricultural techniques".<ref>{{wpa|Lysenkoism}}</ref> Despite Trofim Lysenko's theories being a load of bullshit dressed in the garb of dialectical materialism, this still didn't prevent him from becoming highly influential, almost turning into a "dictator" of his field.<ref name="sovietscience">{{cite book |last=Graham |first=Loren R. |date=1993 |title=Science in Russia and the Soviet Union: a Short History |chapter=Stalinist ideology and the Lysenko affair |publisher=Cambridge Univesity Press |isbn=0-521-24566-4 }}</ref>{{rp|124–127}} Science was still used for political purposes even after Stalin's rule, like how the Soviet Union utilized a made-up diagnosis named {{wpl|sluggish schizophrenia}} against political dissidents, with these "patients" being deprived of their basic rights.<ref>{{wpa|sluggish schizophrenia}}</ref>

It's claimed by many anti-Soviet socialists that these Marxist-Leninist regimes were a departure from socialism, on account of the means of production being in the hands of an undemocratic state instead of the workers. Many of these critics argue these regimes were a form of "state capitalism", as they did not erase the general relations of management and ownership which exist in capitalism (''i.e.'' a small unaccountable minority owning the means of production and telling the workers what to do).<ref name="statesocialism"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Goldman |first=Emma |date=1935 |title=There Is No Communism in Russia |via=The Anarchist Library |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Chomsky |first=Noam |date=1986 |url=https://chomsky.info/1986____/ |title=The Soviet Union Versus Socialism }}</ref> On the other hand, Stalinists would argue that these parallels were all fabrication by the oppressive bourgeois media and then send thugs to beat up anyone who said otherwise.

====Trotskyism====
[[File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-R15068, Leo Dawidowitsch Trotzki.jpg|thumb|left|200px|[[Bolshevik]] revolutionary, [[Leon Trotsky]].]]
{{main|Leon Trotsky#Trotskyism}}
[[Leon Trotsky]] attempted to become the leader of the Soviet Union after Lenin died, but was defeated by Stalin and later exiled. Initially, the key difference between Stalinism and what later became known as Trotskyism was whether the socialist revolution should be exported to other countries as quickly as possible ("permanent revolution", as advocated by Trotsky) or if socialism should be strengthened in a single country before ("socialism in one country", as advocated by Stalin). Later on, Trotsky would harshly criticize the Stalinist rule of the USSR, calling it a "degenerated worker's state" taken over by the bureaucracy.<ref>{{cite web |author=((The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica)) |title=Trotskyism |date=January 18, 2025 |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Trotskyism |access-date=February 7, 2025}}</ref> He didn't denounce his Leninist principles, however. In fact, Trotsky's followers tend to believe they're the true heirs of Lenin's ideas.<ref name="intertrotsky">{{cite book |last=Alexander |first=Robert J. |date=1991 |title=International Trotskyism: A Documented History of the Movement |publisher=Duke University Press |isbn=0-8223-0975-0 }}</ref>{{rp|14}}

Contemporarily, Trotsky became a figure of the {{wpl|anti-Stalinist left||,}} sometimes even being considered a more democratic alternative to Stalin.<ref>{{cite book |last=Daniels |first=Robert V. |title=The Rise and Fall of Communism in Russia |date=1 October 2008 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-13493-3}}</ref> An obvious example of this in practice is how [[George Orwell]] made an allegory of Trotsky as the opposition against the tyrannical figure of the story in two separate occasions, first with Snowball in ''[[Animal Farm]]'' and then with Emmanuel Goldstein in ''[[Nineteen Eighty-Four]]'', despite Orwell himself being doubtful that Trotskyists were morally superior to other communists.<ref>{{cite web |last=Orwell |first=George |title=Notes on Nationalism |url=https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat |date=May 1945 |publisher=Polemic |location=GB, London |quote=The fact that Trotskyists are everywhere a persecuted minority, and that the accusation usually made against them, i. e. of collaborating with the Fascists, is obviously false, creates an impression that Trotskyism is intellectually and morally superior to Communism; but it is doubtful whether there is much difference.}}</ref> 

These doubts do hold weight, as Trotsky was himself part of the leadership of the Soviet regime from 1917 to 1922, the period which featured the dissolution of the elected constituent assembly by the Bolsheviks and the outlawing of all other parties, as well as factions within the Communist Party itself. He would later defend these actions as "temporary" necessities caused by the context of the Civil War. To his credit, he would also criticize how "the prohibition of other parties, from being a temporary evil, ha[d] been erected into a principle", advocating for the reintroduction of rivalling parties and factions.<ref name="intertrotsky"/>{{rp|15–16}}

Aside from the regular Trotskyists, there are also more bizarre and niche Trotskyist movements. One of the most notorious is [[Posadism]], which affirms a [[nuclear war]] is both inevitable and ''desirable'', arguing it would be the perfect opportunity for the socialist revolution to happen.<ref name="intertrotsky"/>{{rp|663–664}} It's also known for adopting elements of [[Ufology]] in a Marxist conception, despite its actual importance to the ideology being overblown.<ref>{{wpa|Fourth International Posadist#Ufology}}</ref>

===Libertarian socialism===
[[File:Murray Bookchin mountains.jpg|thumb|right|250px|[[Murray Bookchin]], a proponent of libertarian municipalism.]]
Libertarian socialism, also named left-libertarianism, is the most anti-authoritarian form of socialism. While anarchism is found within libertarian socialism and both terms are frequently used interchangeably, not all libertarian socialists call themselves anarchists, preferring instead a limited government rather than a complete abolition of it.<ref name="impossible">{{cite book |last=Marshall |first=Peter |title=Demanding the Impossible |date=2008 |publisher=Harper Perennial |isbn=978-0-00-686245-1 }}</ref>{{rp|13, 641}} 

Some of the most prominent libertarian socialist theorists can be found within the libertarian Marxist tradition, which emphasizes direct democracy and autonomy in a Marxist conception. Within this tradition are included Rosa Luxemburg and the council communists, who were both contemporaries of Lenin but critical of his ideas. Another example is [[Daniel De Leon]], who was heavily inspired by anarcho-syndicalism.<ref>{{wpa|Libertarian_socialism#Marxist}}</ref> Another important figure in libertarian socialism is [[Murray Bookchin]] and his [[communalism]], which later influenced the political system of [[Rojava]]. Bookchin's communalism was based on libertarian municipalism, where each municipality would be largely autonomous in managing its own affairs and would be connected with each other through a confederation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Bookchin |first=Murray |title=What is Communalism? |via=The Anarchist Library |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/murray-bookchin-what-is-communalism |access-date= February 5, 2025}}</ref>

Due to their similar natures, the critiques against anarchism can be made against libertarian socialism as well, though to a lesser extent in its more moderate variations. In addition, right-libertarians often criticize left-libertarians for not actually advocating for liberty. The libertarian philosopher [[Robert Nozick]] argued that, for an egalitarian society much like socialism to exist, it would require forbidding "capitalistic acts between consenting adults", thus undermining freedom. The analytical Marxist philosopher G. A Cohen contested this, arguing that inequality itself becomes disparities between power, which diminishes the liberty of the majority in favor of the wealthy and property-owning minority. He further argued that most of these acts shouldn't be considered "consensual", as the workers have no other choice but to subordinate to a property-owner under the threat of starvation.<ref>{{cite web |last=Burgis |first=Ben |date=December 23, 2024 |title=How Capitalism Undermines Freedom |website=Jacobin |url=https://jacobin.com/2024/12/capitalism-freedom-nozick-cohen-philosophy}}</ref>

===Democratic socialism===
[[File:Democratic Socialists Occupy Wall Street 2011 Shankbone.JPG|thumb|left|250px|Members of the [[Democratic Socialists of America]] march at the [[Occupy Wall Street]] protest in New York, 2011.]]
Despite socialism being intended to be democratic, various socialists may prefer to use the term "democratic socialism" in order to convey the goal of socialization of the means of production through an accountable democratic government more clearly, in contrast to the many dictatorships that claim to [[Deceit|have their people's best interests in mind]].<ref name="demsocbrit">{{cite web |last=Volle |first=Adam |date=November 28, 2024 |title=Democratic socialism |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/democratic-socialism |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241229102521/https://www.britannica.com/topic/democratic-socialism/ |archive-date=December 29, 2024 }}</ref><ref name="political activism">{{cite book |last=Schweickart |first=David |editor1-last=Anderson |editor1-first=Gary L. |editor2-last=Herr |editor2-first=Kathryn G. |year=2007 |title=Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice |chapter=Democratic Socialism |publisher=SAGE Publications |volume=1 |location=Thousand Oaks, California |isbn=9781412918121 }}</ref> The term is frequently used interchangeably with [[social democracy]], though the latter most often refers to reforms within capitalism ''inspired'' by socialism, rather than a fundamental systemic change.<ref name="demsocbrit"/><ref name="political activism"/>{{rp|447}}

Plenty of folks have declared democratic socialist views but have had their views misconstrued with time, including [[Nelson Mandela]],<ref>{{cite book |last=Sampson |first=Anthony |date=1999 |title=Mandela: The Authorised Biography |location=London |publisher=HarperCollins |isbn=0-00-638845-0}}</ref> [[Albert Einstein]],<ref name="whysocialism">Einstein, Albert (May, 1949). [https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/ "Why Socialism?"]. ''Monthly Review''.</ref> {{wpl|Pablo Picasso||,}}<ref>{{cite web |last=Featherstone |first=Liza |title=Pablo Picasso Was a Communist. Why Don’t We Ever Talk About This? |website=Jacobin |date=June 5, 2023 |url=https://jacobin.com/2023/06/pablo-picasso-brooklyn-museum-gadsby-communism }}</ref> {{wpl|Helen Keller||,}}<ref>Keller, Helen (November 3, 1912). [https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/keller-helen/works/1910s/12_11_03.htm "How I Became a Socialist"]. ''The New York Call''. Via Marxist Internet Archive.</ref> [[Martin Luther King]],<ref>{{cite web |last=Laurent |first=Sylvie |date= April 4, 2023|title= MLK Was an Exemplar of a Black Socialist Tradition |website=Jacobin |url=https://jacobin.com/2023/04/martin-luther-king-jr-mlk-socialism-class-racial-justice-civil-rights-movement}}</ref> and [[George Orwell]].<ref>Orwell, George (1946). [https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/why-i-write/ "Why I Write]. "The Spanish war and other events in 1936-37 turned the scale and thereafter I knew where I stood. Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it."</ref> Other big-name self-described democratic socialists include British politician [[Jeremy Corbyn]]<ref>{{cite news |last=Calamur |first=Krishnadev |date=August 18, 2015 |title=How Jeremy Corbyn Would Govern Britain |website=The Atlantic |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/08/jeremy-corbyn-labour-britain/401492/}}</ref> and American politician Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.<ref name="AOC"/> Former [[Chile|Chilean]] president [[Salvador Allende]] has also been described as democratic socialist, being one of the few Marxist leaders actually elected by democratic means.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=B. |first1=Ben |last2=D'Aprile |first2=Marianela |last3=Allende |first3=Salvador |date=September 11, 2018 |title=Allende and Democratic Socialism |url=https://socialistcall.com/2018/09/11/allende-and-democratic-socialism/ |access-date=2024-02-01 |website=The Call |language=en-US}}</ref> Bernie Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist, although that label has been contested.<ref name="socdem bernie">{{cite news |last=Barro |first=Josh |date=October 20, 2015 |title=Bernie Sanders, Democratic Socialist Capitalist |website=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/20/upshot/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialist-capitalist.html}}</ref> 

Various anti-socialists believe socialism is inherently incompatible with democracy. [[Milton Friedman]] argued the introduction of socialist central planning paves the road to [[totalitarianism]], as the state would possess the ability to command the economy in favor of the elite behind the plans.<ref name="political activism"/>{{rp|447}} However, this argument ignores how democratic socialists largely oppose the Soviet economic model, preferring instead a market socialist or a marketless participatory economy. Some even argue how it's ''capitalism'' that is incompatible with democracy, with its fair share of [[corporate]] meddling present in [[election]]s and policy-making.<ref name="political activism"/>{{rp|448}}

===Religious socialism===
Marxism explicitly criticizes [[religion]], with Marx referring to religion as "the opium of the people"<ref group=note>Some context: in Marx's time, opium was seen (and actually is) a very effective painkiller, and at the time there was nothing more effective that opium, so he's not saying that religion is a dangerous drug, but rather a painkiller used to cope with pain.</ref> to which a pre-socialist state of existence has given rise. Communists have made heavy persecutions of [[church]]es when in power, and in some cases even banned religion altogether. Anarchists are also known for their anti-clerical church-burning activities (although not all anarchists perform such behavior, and [[Anarchism#Christian_anarchism.2Fanarcho-pacifism|some are actually Christians themselves]]).

But Marx did not advocate the banning of religion, instead saying that it is simply a way to cope, and to see something bright at the end of the tunnel when one is faced with the injustices of feudal and capitalist society, and says that the criticism of religion is thus the criticism of the conditions that breed it.

There are also currents of religious socialism, as will be mentioned right now.

====Christian socialism====
{{main|Christian socialism}}
[[File:Giovanni Paolo Pannini 001.jpg|thumb|right|350px|"Jesus Expels the Moneylenders from the Temple" by Giovanni Pannini.]]
It's not uncommon for [[fundamentalist]]s to argue socialism is incompatible with Christianity. However, the tradition of [[Christian socialism]] isn't a new one. In fact, one could even argue a major player in the [[Bible]] actually advocated for something similar to socialism. As to who this figure is, here's a few hints: he is generally portrayed as a tall, blue eyed white man with long hair, wearing a flowing robe, or nailed to a cross, although he was more likely short, had short hair, brown skin, brown eyes and would have never worn a robe, as it would have been a terrible hazard in his carpentry work. A few quotes: 
* {{q|Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.|{{bible|Matthew|19|24}} (KJV)}}
* {{q|Do not store up your treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart is also.|{{bible|Matthew|6|19}}-21}}
* {{q|No man can serve two masters. For a slave will either love the one and hate the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.|{{bible|Matthew|6|24}}}}
* {{q|Sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.|{{bible|Matthew|19|21}}}}
* {{q|Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'|{{bible|Matthew|25|34}}-40}}
* {{q|The love of money is the root of all evil."|{{bible|1 Timothy|6|10}}}}
[[File:Buddy christ.jpg|thumb|right|165px|He's got your back!]]
As recounted in {{bible|Acts|2|44-45}}, the early Christian church practiced a form of religious communism with "all things common."{{efn|In fact, the phrase "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is also an apparent paraphrase of those same verses.<ref>{{wpa|from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs#Origin of the phrase}}</ref>}} Today, there are many Christian socialist throughout the world, particularly in [[South America]], which hold that the teachings of Jesus Christ and Marx line up nicely, and see Christ as a great social reformer and the first socialist agitator. However, these people have been criticized for equating the ''[[poor]]'', spoken of at length by Jesus, with Marx's ''proletariat''; specifically, Jesus said, "For the poor always ye have with you" ({{bible|John|12|8}}), while Marxism aims to do away with the proletariat altogether. There are also small Christian groups such as the Hutterites who also practice a form of voluntary religious communism. Monasteries and other similar religious institutions may also do so.

Oddly enough, his message has been largely ignored by some of his North American followers, who seem to think he was actually ye olde Ronald Reagan or a long-haired [[Going Galt#Who is John Galt?|John Galt]]. [[Cognitive dissonance]] sure is great, isn't it? Although in their defense, Jesus never said give your money to the poor through government. He talked about private self-decided socialism. Of course, they don't do that either.

==Not-Socialism==
The term socialism has a long history of gatekeeping, especially by the radical left, be it anarchists not considering any kind of state socialism to be socialism at all, or Marxists calling anything that doesn't align exactly with (their interpretation of) Marx's theories as a bourgeois distortion. However, sometimes people might get ''too'' inclusive with the term socialism, to the point where it becomes a meaningless term, be it for a [[red-baiting]] tactic, to invoke a message of "I care for the workers", or as a way to not be associated with certain controversial figures. 
===National Socialism===
[[File:Hitler portrait crop.jpg|thumb|right|240px|Portrait of former Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.]]
{{main|Hitler and socialism}}
{{cquote|First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a socialist.|||Martin Niemöller, about the persecution by the Nazis, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.<ref>United States Holocaust Memorial. [https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists Martin Niemöller: "First they came for..."]. Retrieved February 8, 2025.</ref>}}
National socialism, also commonly known as [[Nazism]], was the ideology practiced by [[Adolf Hitler]] during his leadership of [[Germany]]. Some on the right, such as [[Dinesh D'Souza]]<ref>Emery, David (March 14, 2023). [https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/09/05/were-nazis-socialists/ "Were the Nazis Socialists?"]. Snopes.</ref> and [[Elon Musk]],<ref>Gilbert, David (January 9, 2025). [https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-far-right-german-leader-weidel-hitler-communist/ "Elon Musk and Far-Right German Leader Agree ‘Hitler Was a Communist’"]. ''Wired''. Retrieved January 10, 2025.</ref> have tried to argue the Nazis were actually socialists, thus putting the blame of the horrors of Nazism on the left instead of the [[far-right]]. While one might assume that the Nazis are socialist based on their name alone, there are many reasons that prevents them from being so.

For one, the Nazis upheld private property. While [[fascism]] historically advocated for extensive government interventionism to attend the interests of the state, the Nazi economy in actuality functioned through a mix of state and private economic incentives, with avaliable sources making it perfectly clear the Nazis' goal wasn't to have many or all enterprises be owned publicly.<ref name="nazicapitalism"/>{{rp|405}} In fact, reprivatization was furthered ''wherever possible'', while state ownership was avoided unless absolutely necessary.<ref name="nazicapitalism">{{cite web |url=http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/capitalisback/CountryData/Germany/Other/Pre1950Series/RefsHistoricalGermanAccounts/BuchheimScherner06.pdf|title= The Role of Private Property in the Nazi Economy: The Case of Industry|access-date=January 1, 2025|last1=Buchheim |first1=Christoph |last2=Scherner|first2=Jonas|date=June 2006|work= The Journal of Economic History|publisher=Cambridge University Press}}</ref>{{rp|406}} Privatization is, of course, the last thing most socialists would want in order to actually socialize the economy.{{nofact}}

Another key reason is that the Nazi ideology includes the existence of "[[slave]]-[[race]]s" who would perform all the menial tasks a society would need, while the "[[Aryan|superior]]" Germans would have generous social welfare and careers for themselves only. While generous careers and welfare are indeed major goals of most socialists, they also emphasize equality: ''no one'' should be systemically underprivileged and exploited. However, one could argue this kind of society was merely "transitory", and that the ultimate goal was to exterminate these "undesirable races", at which point, depending on how society would develop afterwards, the Germans ''could'' live in some bizarre and vile form of socialism... until they just declared that the grey-eyed and/or strawberry-blonde Germans to be insufficiently German and they are back to slavery again.

Finally, Hitler and his party also continuously persecuted the left-wing of Germany, ranging from the more radical communists to even the more moderate [[social democrat]]s.<ref>United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. [https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/political-prisoners "Political Prisoners"]. Holocaust Encyclopedia. Accessed February 4, 2025.</ref> He also demonized the [[Jew]]s by claiming they were secretly behind the creation and dissemination of communism, a conspiracy theory labeled "{{wpl|Jewish Bolshevism}}". The only faction of the Nazis which might've taken the "socialist" part actually seriously were the followers of {{wpl|Strasserism||.}} Despite this, they were still ultra-[[nationalist]]s and [[racist]]s, and were mostly killed off by Hitler anyways for being "dissidents".<ref>{{wpa|Gregor Strasser}}</ref>

===Social democracy===
[[File:Sanders presidential campaign kickoff, May 2015 Bernie Sanders (24652409450).jpg|thumb|left|220px|[[Bernie Sanders]], self-described democratic socialist, in May 2015.]]
Unlike what virtually every socialist advocates for, most forms of social democracy explicitly endorse the preservation of capitalist relations such as private ownership. While it differentiates itself from other capitalist systems (such as [[neoliberalism]]) by advocating for a welfare state, ''partial'' public ownership and stronger labor rights, social democracy doesn't fit into the concept of collective/social ownership.<ref name="demsocbrit"/><ref>{{cite web |last=McCarthy |first=Michael A. |date=July 8, 2018 |title=Democratic Socialism Isn’t Social Democracy |url=https://jacobin.com/2018/08/democratic-socialism-social-democracy-nordic-countries |publisher=Jacobin |access-date=December 18, 2024}}</ref> However, while not as prominently, social democracy may also be used in a similar way to evolutionary socialism, which advocated for a gradual and reformist method to overcome capitalism, in contrast to a revolution. This form of social democracy fits with the common definition of socialism, though it's mostly historical and therefore doesn't reflect the interests of most social democrats in the modern day.<ref>{{cite web |author=((The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica)) |date=February 16, 2025 |title=Social democracy |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy/ |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250218104349/https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-democracy/ |archive-date=February 18, 2025 }}</ref> 

A figurehead of the "self-described socialist but actually social democrat" movement is [[Bernie Sanders]]. While describing himself as a democratic socialist, his policies closely align to those of social democrats. This includes his promotion of stronger labor rights and collective bargaining, progressive taxation, in addition to his general praise of [[Denmark]] and other social democratic countries, which he considers to be socialist.<ref name="socdem bernie"/> However, Sanders has also supported worker cooperatives,<ref>{{cite web |last=Sanders |first=Bernie |date=December 1, 2014 |title=An Economic Agenda for America: 12 Steps Forward |website=Huffpost |url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/an-economic-agenda-for-am_b_6249022 |quote=[W]e need to provide assistance to workers who want to purchase their own businesses by establishing worker-owned cooperatives. Study after study shows that when workers have an ownership stake in the businesses they work for, productivity goes up, absenteeism goes down and employees are much more satisfied with their jobs.}}</ref> writing in 1976 that "in the long run, major industries in this state and nation should be publicly owned and controlled by the workers themselves",<ref>{{cite web |last=Schreckinger |first=Ben |date=July 6, 2015 |title=The socialist surge |website=Politico |url=https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/bernie-sanders-socialist-surge-119785 }}</ref> a sentiment which more closely aligns with common socialist ideals.<ref>{{cite web |last=Wolff |first=Richard D. |date=June 27, 2015 |title=Socialism Means Abolishing the Distinction Between Bosses and Employees |website=Truthout |url=https://truthout.org/articles/socialism-means-abolishing-the-distinction-between-bosses-and-employees/ |quote=[...] Sanders’ celebration of worker cooperatives suggests some interest in going further toward a non-capitalist system. }}</ref> 

A similar case can be made with liberal socialism. An ideology which can be traced back to [[John Stuart Mill]], it fuses the ideals of [[liberalism]] and socialism to maximize liberty, prosperity and equality, rejecting [[laissez-faire]] economics and state socialism alike. While liberal socialists support worker-controlled firms, they most often favor a mixed economy where these worker cooperatives ''coexist'' with private enterprises. The term is also sometimes used interchangeably with [[social liberalism]] and social democracy.<ref>{{wpa|liberal socialism}}</ref> 

Liberal socialists have defended its socialist characterization on the grounds that socialism has often been conceived as a moral doctrine, rather than a set of arrangements for a particular system.<ref>{{cite web |last=Schofield |first=Paul |date=February 4, 2025 |title=The Case for a Liberal Socialism |website=Jacobin |url=https://jacobin.com/2025/02/liberal-socialism-mcmanus-review-mill }}</ref> However, it's debatable whether this understanding of socialism is correct or not, considering the history of the term and its usage to refer exactly to that set of systemic arrangements. This morality-based definition is also somewhat unclear and arbitrary as a form of categorization, further blurring the line between what can be considered "socialist" or "capitalist". It has been used and continues to be in use in various countries, however, and especially in Scandinavia, the initial goal of social-democratic parties in building the welfare state was to prepare for socialism, a stance going against the far-left opposition's idea of the welfare state "stopping" socialism from happening.

===Obamunism and successors===
[[File:Joe Biden 2020 (cropped) 2.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Portrait of former [[US]] president 
and known socialist
 Joe Biden.]]
{{cquote|Kamala vows to be a communist dictator on day one. Can you believe she wears that outfit!?|||Elon Musk, on a 
[[Twitter]]
 [[X_(social media)|X]] post, referencing an [[AI]] image of Harris wearing a commie outfit.<ref name="comrade"/>}}
Generally, the [[Democrat]]s are regarded as being a [[centrist]] or center-left party. In the last few decades however, the right-wing in the US has been trying to redefine the term "socialist," with the desired meaning being, "a person who flouts the [[Republican Party|Republican]] party line on more than two issues."<ref>{{cite news |last=Wallsten |first=Peter |date=November 24, 2008 |url=http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/11/24/some-conservatives-push-a-purity-test-for-gop-candidates/ |title=Some Conservatives Push a 'Purity Test' for GOP Candidates |website=[[The Wall Street Journal]]}}</ref> [[President of the United States|U.S. President]] [[Barack Obama]] became the poster-boy for this sort of "socialism" during his presidency, despite having no socialistic tendencies except for introducing [[Affordable Care Act|a reform]] in the [[healthcare]] system (which is arguably not even socialist, as many capitalist countries have ''full'' public healthcare).

More recently, former president [[Joe Biden]] has also been called a socialist. In 2020, when asked on an interview to address voters "worried about socialism", Biden responded by stating “I beat [[Bernie Sanders|the socialist]], that’s how I got elected. That’s how I got the nomination. Do I look like a socialist? Look at my career — my whole career. I am not a socialist”.<ref>{{cite news |last=Kaplan |first=Thomas |title=Biden’s response to voters concerned about socialism: ‘I beat the socialist.’ |date=September 22, 2020 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/22/us/politics/bidens-response-to-voters-concerned-about-socialism-i-beat-the-socialist.html |website=[[The New York Times]] }}</ref> Indeed, one can wonder what exactly makes Biden a socialist. [[Charlie Kirk]] attempted to argue Biden is a socialist by effectively claiming that "socialism is when the government spends a lot of money", but the issues with this are too obvious and have already been addressed previously.<ref>{{cite web |last=Burgis |first=Ben |date=November 8, 2022 |title=I’m a Socialist. Joe Biden Is Not. |website=Jacobin |url=https://jacobin.com/2022/11/joe-biden-socialism-government-spending-tpusa }}</ref>

Former vice-president [[Kamala Harris]] has also been called a communist and even received the nickname "[[Communist glossary#Comrade|Comrade]] Harris".<ref name="comrade">{{cite news |last1=Wells |first1=Ione |last2=Cruz |first2=Jessica |title=Why 'Comrade Kamala' memes are spreading among Latino exiles |date=September 23, 2024 |website=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn8jg11ynj7o}}</ref> [[Donald Trump]] argued Harris is a Marxist on the grounds that her father is a Marxist professor in economics.<ref>{{cite news |last=Medina |first=Jennifer |title=Trump Ties Harris Critically to Her Father, a Professor Who Studied Marxism |date=September 10, 2024 |website=[[The New York Times]] |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/10/us/politics/harris-father-marxist-trump.html}}</ref> Her father, Donald J. Harris, is indeed well-versed in Marxian economics and has taught it in his career,<ref>{{cite news |last=Cassidy |first=John |title=The Economic Philosophy of Donald Harris |date=November 2, 2024 |website=The New Yorker |url=https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-weekend-essay/the-economic-philosophy-of-donald-harris }}</ref> although there's not much evidence of Kamala Harris herself being a Marxist. Donald Trump has also called Harris's anti-price-gouging laws as "socialist price controls", despite these laws not actually proposing price controls like the ones found in existing socialist states, but rather an evaluation of corporate conduct.<ref>{{cite news |last=Giangiulio |first=Davis |title=Trump slams Harris' call for a price-gouging ban, but 37 states already have their own |date=August 21, 2024 |website=NBC News |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-slams-harris-call-ban-price-gouging-37-states-already-rcna167158 }}</ref> Trump's claim also ignores how price controls aren't even inherently socialistic, as they have been used by figures such as [[Richard Nixon]] before.<ref>{{wpa|Nixon shock}}</ref>

The only members of the Democratic Party which could conceivably be called socialists would be the ones who are members of the Democratic Socialists of America, most notably Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Even so, this section of the party is hardly notable in comparison to its [[Third Way]] and [[liberalism|socially liberal]] sections.

==Socialism and nationalism==
[[File:Hugo Chávez 2012.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Chávez in some sort of goofy flag costume.]]
Socialism and nationalism are typically in opposition and socialists are generally against the concept of nations, seeing them as an unnecessary division.  To quote [[Eugene V. Debs]], early leader of the [[SPUSA]], "I have no country to fight for; my country is the [[earth]], and I am a citizen of the world."<ref>{{cite web |last=Debs |first=Eugene V. |date=April 2, 1915 |title=In Whose War Shall I Fight? |publisher=Socialist Appeal |via=Marxists Internet Archive |url=https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/themilitant/socialist-appeal-1938/v02n14/debs.htm }}</ref> They often view nationalism as simply ways to divide the working class. Most instead advocate for "proletarian internationalism", where class struggle isn't a localized event, but a single global cause not to be separated by borders.<ref>{{wpa|proletarian internationalism}}</ref>  

However, this internationalism advocated by most socialists sometimes came with support for a "socialist [[patriotism]]". Lenin considered "proletarian patriotism" to be a different concept from "bourgeois nationalism", believing countries subjugated by imperialism had the right to unite and seek national liberation from oppression. Similar ideas were put into practice in various Marxist-Leninist states, where national unity was emphasized with simultaneous promotion of worldwide unity with the socialist cause.<ref>{{wpa|socialist patriotism}}</ref> 

Similarly, [[Hugo Chávez]] of [[Venezuela]] has played on a patriotic and nationalistic appeal, chanting that "{{wpl|El pueblo unido jamás será vencido}}" ("the people united will never be defeated") and complimenting [[Mahatma Gandhi]] for his "sane nationalism" and anti-imperialist sentiment.<ref>{{cite web |last=Chávez |first=Hugo |date=2005 |title=Intervención del Comandante Presidente Hugo Chávez durante cátedra impartida ante estudiantes e intelectuales, en la Universidad Jawajarlāl Nehru de la República de la India |language=es |publisher=Todochávez en la Web |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201204180446/http://www.todochavez.gob.ve/todochavez/3563-intervencion-del-comandante-presidente-hugo-chavez-durante-catedra-impartida-ante-estudiantes-e-intelectuales-en-la-universidad-jawajarl%C4%81l-nehru-de-la-republica-de-la-india }}</ref> [[Gamal Abdel Nasser]] promoted [[Arab nationalism]], similarly advocating for national unity and anti-imperialism.<ref>{{wpa|Nasserism}}</ref>

There are some cases of more traditional (ultra-)nationalism in nominally socialist regimes. For example, [[Cambodia]] under the [[Khmer Rouge]] intensely persecuted various ethnic minorities, as well as [[Buddhist]] monks and educated elites, even placing more importance on race rather than class. Its level of nationalistic violence is sometimes compared to actual fascism.<ref>{{wpa|Khmer Rouge#Khmer nationalism}}</ref>

==Notable organizations==
[[File:redrose.svg|thumb|right|200px|Logo of the 
social democrat
 Socialist International]]
===International===
====International Workingmen's Association====
The International Workingmen's Association, often referred to as the First International, was a left-wing organization founded in the 19<sup>th</sup> century, but dissolved in the midst of the Bakunin-Marx infighting.<ref>{{wpa|International Workingmen's Association}}</ref> Later on, similar organizations were created. The Second International followed, but dissolved in the midst of infighting over support of [[World War I]].<ref>{{wpa|Second International}}</ref> The Third International (the Communist International, or Comintern) was a Soviet-funded body dissolved in [[World War II]].<ref>{{wpa|Communist International}}</ref> The Fourth International, a Trotskyist organization, still exists, though not as a singular or centralized organization.<ref>{{wpa|Fourth International}}</ref>

====Socialist International====
The Socialist International is a worldwide federation of socialist political parties, mostly consisting of [[democratic socialist]], [[Trade union|labor]], and [[social democratic]] parties. Over thirty nations are governed by a Socialist International member-party, such as [[France]], [[Iceland]] and [[South Africa]]. These parties are in practice social democratic or even Third Way/liberal and in recent years have experienced spectacular collapses in the face of polarization.<ref>{{wpa|Socialist International}}</ref>

===American===
====Democratic Socialists of America====
{{main|Democratic Socialists of America}}
The [[Democratic Socialists of America]] (DSA) is, as one can imagine, a democratic socialist organization. In fact, it's the largest socialist organization in America currently. While not a party per se, some members do run on elections, most often as a member of the Democratic Party, including people like AOC. They most often advocate for democratic socialist or social democratic reforms, such as increasing the minimum wage, reforming the healthcare and education system, implementing social and welfare programs, etc. Despite their name, they still have more authoritarian tendencies such as Marxism-Leninism.<ref>{{wpa|Democratic Socialists of America}}</ref> Some members have also shown support for authoritarian figures, such as Lenin.<ref>{{cite web |last=A |first=Ajmal |title=Lenin’s Relevance Today |date=April 22, 2020 |website=Young Democratic Socialists of America |url=https://y.dsausa.org/the-activist/lenins-relevance-today }}</ref>

====Party for Socialism and Liberation====
{{main|Party for Socialism and Liberation}}
The [[Party for Socialism and Liberation]] (PSL) is a Marxist-Leninist American political party.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ford |first1=Derek P. |title=Making Marxist Pedagogy Magical: From Critique to Imagination, or, How Bookkeepers Set Us Free |journal=Critical Education |date=June 1, 2017 |volume=8 |issue=9 |page=10 |url=https://ices.library.ubc.ca/index.php/criticaled/article/view/186183/185417 |quote=I want to turn our attention to the magical thinking of the Party for Socialism and Liberation. As a Marxist-Leninist Party in the United States, the PSL was founded in 2004.}}</ref><ref name=Kroitzsh2019>{{cite news |last1=Kroitzsh |first1=Aleka A. |title=Local socialists see the "fog of anti-communism" lifting |url=https://missionlocal.org/2019/08/local-socialists-see-the-fog-of-anti-communism-lifting/ |newspaper=Mission Local |date=August 2, 2019 |quote=The PSL espouses a Marxist-Leninist ideology, one intent on "fighting the war program in the U.S., fighting imperialism, and fighting for Socialism," said Gloria La Riva, a socialist presidential candidate since 1993 and a PSL founder.}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Community celebrates 14th annual Enero Zapatista event |newspaper=Liberation News |publisher=Party for Socialism and Liberation |date=February 4, 2018 |url=https://www.liberationnews.org/community-celebrates-14th-annual-enero-zaptatista-event/ |quote="As a Marxist-Leninist party we strive to uphold the tradition of the right to self-determination for oppressed nations."}}</ref> They have a pretty radical program, including stuff such as nationalizing the 100 biggest domestic corporations and cutting the military budget by 90%.<ref>[https://votesocialist2024.com/our-program Our Program]. ''Claudia and Karina 2024''.</ref> 

They have a long history of support for authoritarian regimes. For one, they support North Korea, labeling it an "alternative to the global capitalist system" and defending it from accusations of poor [[human rights]] records, calling them "pure fantasy".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Gowans |first=Stephan |date=February 23, 2013 |title=Why North Korea is developing nuclear weapons |newspaper=Liberation News |publisher=Party for Socialism and Liberation |url=https://www.liberationnews.org/why-north-korea-is-developing-html/ |url-status=live |archive-date=December 18, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201218180838/https://www.liberationnews.org/why-north-korea-is-developing-html/ |quote=A North Korean nuclear arsenal does not increase the chances of war—it reduces the likelihood that the United States and its South Korean marionette will attempt to bring down the communist government in Pyongyang by force. This is to be welcomed by anyone who opposes imperialist military interventions; supports the right of a people to organize its affairs free from foreign domination; and has an interest in the survival of one of the few top-to-bottom, actually-existing, alternatives to the global capitalist system of oppression, exploitation and foreign domination.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Wang |first=Mike |date=March 26, 2014 |title=UN hypocrisy and human rights in North Korea |newspaper=Liberation News |publisher=Party for Socialism and Liberation |url=https://www.liberationnews.org/un-hypocrisy-and-human-rights-html/ |url-status=live |archive-date=November 11, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111232945/https://www.liberationnews.org/un-hypocrisy-and-human-rights-html/ |quote=Like the great majority of accusations hurled at North Korea in the past, the UNHRC Report rings hollow as a thinly veiled justification for U.S. aggression toward North Korea. [....] In fact, previous UN specialist agencies’ reports show the UNHRC’s accusations are pure fantasy: no UN specialist agency has identified the North Korean government’s food and health policy in terms even vaguely similar to the UNHRC’s report. To the contrary, conditions in North Korea are vastly better than those in other developing countries.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=North Koreans mourn death of leader Kim Jong Il |first=Crystal |last=Kim |date=December 22, 2011 |newspaper=Liberation News |publisher=Party for Socialism and Liberation |url=https://www.liberationnews.org/north-koreans-mourn-death-of-html/}}</ref> They also support the Chinese government and deny the [[Tiananmen Square Massacre]], arguing the protests were funded by the US government and criticizing the testimonies of eyewitnesses.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Becker |first=Brian |date=June 13, 2014 |title=Tiananmen: The Massacre that Wasn't |url=https://liberationschool.org/tiananmen-the-massacre-that-wasnt/ |website=Liberation School |publisher=Party for Socialism and Liberation }}</ref>

===British===
====British Labour Party====
{{main|Labour Party}}
Historically, the Labour Party were social democrats, or 'reformists', and Labour governments have made some lasting changes in terms of universal welfare, especially the founding of the [[universal health care|National Health Service]].

"[[New Labour]]" (Tony Blair etc.) were arguably [[conservative]]s in all but name, and indeed much has been said about the similarities between their policies and those of Thatcherism.<ref>[http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/2885.html "Thatcherism and New Labour: "The similarities between Thatcherism and New Labour are more important than the differences"].</ref><ref group=note>On the other hand, they dramatically increased the level of public expenditure. Following the 2008 recession, the proportion of public spending in the economy hit 50% of GDP. How this level of state intervention in the economy can be considered "conservative" is anyone's guess (then again, see [[Dubya]]).</ref>  Clause IV of the Labour Party's constitution, which expressed a long-term commitment to redistribution of wealth and common ownership of the means of production, was rewritten in 1994, under Blair's leadership, as a more vague expression of striving for equality, causing some internal conflict and outrage from "Old Labour" socialist members of the party. In 2015, many social democrats won Labour Party contests, signaling a return to the left; there was only one actual socialist who was elected to leadership, however, although being the leader of the party, he (Jeremy Corbyn) does have a lot more say in party policy. In the run-up to the 2017 General Election the party published a report entitled ''Alternative Models of Ownership'' which tried to envision economic and business models without traditional capitalists; even though it ran its most left-wing campaign in years, envisioning more state-run corporations, universal welfare programs and public services, the party stopped far short of actively railing against capitalism in general, and in fact tried to court some businesses over Brexit.

== Notable proponents of socialist theories ==
* [[George Orwell]]
* [[Albert Einstein]]
* [[Noam Chomsky]]
* [[Jean-Luc Mélenchon]]
* [[Karl Marx]]

==See also==
* [[Anarchism]]
* [[Communism]]
* [[Charles Fourier]]
* [[Socialist Alliance]]
*[[Fun:Socialism with Biden characteristics]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}
==References==
{{reflist|3}}


[[Category:Economic philosophies]]
[[Category:Political philosophies]]
[[Category:Forms of government]]
[[Category:Socialism| ]]

Categories: Economic philosophies, Political philosophies, Forms of government, Socialism