Originally posted by: astronelson
OK... this is how I understand the matter. Feel free to correct me if I seem to go wrong anywhere.
Anarchism: The state (nation/government) either does not exist or is ineffective enough for it to be considered non-existent. Free enterprise only. Examples: many third-world countries undergoing civil war. Capitalism: The state exists, and provides services such as the police and fire departments, as well as defence. Minor regulation on free enterprise. Example: The USA. I can't think of any more off the top of my head. Maybe Japan, I don't know. Socialism: State involvement in many areas but not to the exclusion of anything else. Education and helathcare generally have state systems as well as private systems. Free enterprise is more regulated. Examples: Most of Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand. Communism: Everything is under the control of the state. No free enterprise. All businesses are state-owned. Example: Almost anything that has the words "People's Republic" in it, as well as the old USSR.
Capitalism and Socialism are usually democracies, Anarchism and Communism aren't as they have zero and one party respectively. Even if they have the word "Democratic" in the name.
Capitalistic and Socialist countries are generally more stable. Socialist countries usually have higher tax to pay for the increased services. Australia (the only country I have ready figures for) has a maximum tax rate of 45% on incomes of $180,001 and above (really $55,850 plus 45 cents for every dollar over $180,000, but let's not complicate issues too much).
On the topic of Cuba, the entire country is one huge anachronism. Most, if not all, cars date from before the US embargo, but they have computers and CD players. It's a rather strange place. Not many people want to live there, although it is doing rather a lot better than some of its neighbours. And I can speak from experience, I have visited the country.
quote>
Well, I personally do not share your own definitions.
You are clearly not making a difference between theory and practical experience (has been explained before in this thread...)
Furthermore, your understanding of a "socialist" society is rather strange: calling "most of europe" a socialist country is as wrong as saying so called "People's Republics" are communist.
You may want to use the word social democratic for our european countries - that would be indeed the right word. We've got a free market and, what is another indicator of a capitalist society: we've got unemployment - which does practically not exist in a socialist society.
And then again socialism and capitalism, those are both types of economy. How would economy be organized in a anarchistic society?
Never heard of anarcho-capitalism for example?
Your definitions are rather superficial..capitalism for example... this does not mean that the state has to exist.. the same goes for socialism
