If you ๐ want ๐๐ to get ๐ super ๐บ technical ๐ฅ๐คน about ๐ฆ it, socialism ๐ซ really ๐ derived ๐ first ๐ as an ethical ๐๐ philosophy ๐ค๐๐ than a political ๐ or economic ๐ philosophy ๐ค๐๐. It was a reaction ๐๐ โโ๏ธ to the individualism ๐ฑ๐ฝ๐ฑ๐ป๐๐ฝ of the Enlightenment ๐ and kind ๐ of a way โ to explain ๐ฌโ the goals ๐ฅ of the French ๐ฅ Revolution โโ post-Revolution (socialism ๐ as a concept ๐ค did exist ๐ prior ๐ to the revolution โโ, but ๐ itโs in the 1830s we see ๐ an effort ๐ช to really ๐ฏ codify ๐ฑ socialism ๐).
Communism ๐ท๐บ arose โฌ from this line ใฐ of thinking ๐ค. Marx ๐ต๐ญ๐ฒ really ๐ฏ created ๐ฏ a more specific ๐ version โน of socialism ๐๐ which was labeled ๐ communism ๐จ๐ณ. But ๐ Marx ๐ wanted ๐ a stateless society ๐ฅ and didnโt want ๐ any exaltation of the individual ๐ค, meaning ๐ no ๐ฃ central ๐ขโ authority ๐ฎ figure ๐ค๐ง (this is in line ใฐ with earlier ๐ socialist ๐ซ thought ๐ญ๐ค as a reaction ๐ฒ to individualism ๐จ๐ฐ).
In a philosophical ๐ญ sense ๐ฐ, Communism ๐จ๐ณ is just a specific ๐ version ๐ผ of socialism ๐ wherein money ๐ธ๐ฐ and the State ๐บ๐ธ are abolished โ โ and all ๐ฏ of society ๐ฅ is formed โกโฌ around ๐ the idea ๐ก of equality ๐ฏ. Not all ๐ฏ branches ๐ณ of socialism ๐๐ will embrace ๐ค this, and as time โฐ has gone ๐ on ๐ even ๐ communism ๐จ๐ณ has split ๐ป into various ๐จโ๐ฉโ๐งโ๐ฆ๐ branches ๐ณ.
If you ๐ buy ๐ธ into a more โmodernโ differentiation ๐งฒ ala ๐ Lenin ๐ฆ๐, then socialism ๐ซ is that stage ๐ that exists ๐ between ๐๐ capitalism ๐ฐ and communism ๐ท๐บ.
All ๐ฏ that to say ๐ฃ, there really ๐ฏ arenโt any hard ๐ค๐ and set ๐ definitions ๐. Likewise ๐, youโll never ๐ซ find ๐ a pure ๐ฉ system ๐บ to point ๐ to. And as you ๐ go ๐ back ๐ through history ๐โ๐บ terms ๐ will change ๐ผ, so a word ๐ used ๐ถ in the 1920s ๐ด๐ป may ๐ not mean ๐๐จ the same now as it did back โฌ then. Just some things ๐ด to keep ๐ in mind.Itโs almost ๐ธ better ๐ฐ๐ถ to describe ๐๐ socialism ๐ซ apophatically, as in the means ๐ of production ๐ญ are not to be privatized and are instead ๐ to be collectively ๐ญ๐ช owned ๐. This collectivization ๐ญ๐ช can be through direct ๐ worker ๐ผ ownership ๐ฏ, local ๐ฐ community ๐ฑ๐ปโโ๏ธ๐จ๐ป๐ฉ๐ผ, State ๐บ๐ธ, labor ๐จ๐ง union ๐บ๐ธ, trade ๐ธ๐ณ union ๐ โ, etc ๐ซ๐ฌ. Various ๐จโ๐ฉโ๐งโ๐ฆ๐ streams ๐ of thought ๐ค will interpret โ๐ who owns ๐ฏ the means ๐.
As for universal ๐๐๐ healthcare ๐๐โ, all ๐ฏ socialist ๐๐ economies ๐ถ๐ด๐ต will have universal ๐ฑ๐๐ healthcare ๐จโโ๏ธ, but ๐ not all ๐ฏ๐ค universal ๐ healthcare ๐จ๐ฆ is socialist ๐๐. In a hybrid ๐ฏ system โ, such as Germany ๐ฉ๐ช, itโs hard ๐ to say ๐ฃ itโs socialist ๐๐ but ๐ also ๐จ difficult ๐ to say ๐ฃ itโs capitalist ๐ฐ๐ธ. The reality โ ๐ฏ is itโs just a type ๐ป of a public ๐๐๐ฆ utility ๐ (to oversimplify it) which can occur ๐๐ฅ in a capitalist ๐ฐ๐บ๐ฒ or socialist ๐๐ economy.I'm posting ๐ฉ๐จ this to take ๐ the baggage ๐งณ๐ฆ๐ etc ๐ซ๐ฌ out of socialism ๐ and communism ๐จ๐ณ
Once they become ๐๐ฆ realistic ๐ ideas ๐ก, we can tackle ๐ก it
