Why are socialism and communism equated with one-another in the US?

[The Imp]

The two ideologies are used interchangeably in the US by the majority of the US population, and I am wondering, how did this happen?

 

[schlaufuchs]

If I had to wager a guess, it'd be through the cold war propaganda. Especially in the McCarthy era of the 50s, Americans tried to distance themselves from the Russians as much as humanly possible, and tended to vilify anything seen as remotely Russian.

Just a guess though, I'm no expert in US History.

 

[RedRalph]

Look, to many Americans being a Democrat is the same as being a communist, so them equating socialism with it isn't that surprising. I would agree with Owen, it's mainly down to cold war propaganda, and some pre-cold war stuff too.

The political classes in the US are all pro-capitalist, so demonising socialism/communism is a given for them.

 

[Camikaze]

I would've guessed the conflation originated in early 20th century political campaigns, perhaps particularly around the time of the Great Depression, when socialism was bandied around a bit as a pejorative, IIRC. Just a wild guess, though. Does anyone know anything more about this possibility?

 

[ParkCungHee]

The reason is we had socialism in this country for a long time, and we didn't call it socialism. Reformist Republicans and Liberal Democrats were not so far apart from socialism in practice that we needed socialists in name. You can't tell me that a man like say, Dennis Kucinich would be that at odds with a member of the labor party...actually now that I think about it, the labor party would consider him too far to the left. The result was that the only people who actually identified as socialists were really on the fringe.

 

[Agent327]

I would have to say first that the history of both socialism and communism in the US isn't a particularly well-known subject; thatnotwithstanding there were both socialist and communist movements from the late 19th century onwards. Besides the already mentioned post WW II Cold War propaganda and legal measures, a combination of the features of a bipartite political system, the FDR years, mafia influence on trade unions and opposition in general these movements never gained the kind of influence they did outside the US.

 

[Cutlass]

It's not all internal. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was run by the Communist party, after all. So the waters were muddied from both directions.

 

[say1988]

Not to mention that in the current political climate, vilifying the opponents is as (if not more) important that promoting yourself and usually easier, so equating Socialism with Communism is beneficial for conservative groups.

 

[Ruggerbunny]

The two ideologies are used interchangeably in the US by the majority of the US population, and I am wondering, how did this happen?

Because they are both pipe dreams that have little chance or succeeding in reality. Also because they involve several common elements, taking from the rich and giving to the poor, and the belief that capitalism is the worst thing on the planet.

 

[Plotinus]

Because they are both pipe dreams that have little chance or succeeding in reality. Also because they involve several common elements, taking from the rich and giving to the poor, and the belief that capitalism is the worst thing on the planet.

Are you answering the question or illustrating the phenomenon it describes?

 

[RedRalph]

Are you answering the question or illustrating the phenomenon it describes?

 

[Traitorfish]

It's not all internal. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was run by the Communist party, after all. So the waters were muddied from both directions.

Actually, that particular example is entirely consistent with the two terms as defined in Marxist thought. The USSR held itself to be "socialist" in the sense that it operated a socialist economic system, and "communist" in the sense that it subscribed to a communist ideology. Political -isms, remember, can refer to both systems and ideologies.

 

[Ruggerbunny]

Are you answering the question or illustrating the phenomenon it describes?

A little of both.

 

[Cutlass]

Actually, that particular example is entirely consistent with the two terms as defined in Marxist thought. The USSR held itself to be "socialist" in the sense that it operated a socialist economic system, and "communist" in the sense that it subscribed to a communist ideology. Political -isms, remember, can refer to both systems and ideologies.

Which only further muddies the water for those people who aren't interested in studying it enough to master the subject.

 

[citedon]

The two ideologies are used interchangeably in the US by the majority of the US population, and I am wondering, how did this happen?

I believe that your statement is a broad generalization. I don’t think that the majority of Americans use the terms interchangeably. Though, I can understand how one could come to that conclusion by reading many of the US columnists. Many conservative columnists simply use the word socialism to describe any type of central control of the economy. Students in the United States are taught the difference between the two very early in their education. We are taught that socialism is an economic system where the government controls most or all aspects of the economy. Theoretically, all businesses are owned by all citizens. We are also taught that communism is a system of government where either a dictator or an oligarchy uses the power of government to enforce a socialist system, often through tyrannical measures. Unlike a socialist system in a free society the dictator or the oligarchy are the only ones to enjoy any financial benefits from the system. This is what is taught in American schools and I can only imagine that it would be the understanding of the majority of the people in the United States.

 

[Ajidica]

Slightly off topic, but what are the differences between communism and socialism?

 

[Ruggerbunny]

We are taught that socialism is an economic system where the government controls most or all aspects of the economy. Theoretically, all businesses are owned by all citizens. We are also taught that communism is a system of government where either a dictator or an oligarchy uses the power of government to enforce a socialist system, often through tyrannical measures.

This is where the confusion comes from. To get a socialist economic system from a free society you need a communist governement. How else will all those privatly owned businesses become property of the citizens? As far as our system is concerned you can't have a socialist system without a communist government, so why make a huge deal on the finer points?

 

[Karalysia]

Communism is free of any government.

 

[citedon]

This is where the confusion comes from. To get a socialist economic system from a free society you need a communist governement. How else will all those privatly owned businesses become property of the citizens? As far as our system is concerned you can't have a socialist system without a communist government, so why make a huge deal on the finer points?

I doubt that people in France, the UK, Italy, Norway, and Sweden would agree that you can't have a socialist system without a communist govt.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Slightly off topic, but what are the differences between communism and socialism?

Socialism is a social-economic system where private ownership of companies is abolished and controlled by the workers of those companies. Communism is a stateless society which has passed through the socialist "stage" and embodies socialist principles. It is essentially Anarchism (not to be confused with "anarchy," which is riotous, chaotic, lawless madness).