socialism

(redirected from Socialists)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia.

Socialism

An economic system in which the state or the people generally own most or all of the means of production. That is, under socialism, industries, agriculture and corporations are nationalized. The government may also manage the nationalized companies, or they may delegate this to a private company. Most socialist systems, however, allow some degree of private enterprise. Because it favors a strong role for the state, socialism should not be confused with Marxism, which holds that the state will eventually disappear.

socialism

a political doctrine that emphasizes the collective ownership of the means of production, ascribing a large role to the state in the running of the economy, with widespread public ownership (NATIONALIZATION) of key industries, although it allows limited scope to market forces. MARX regarded socialism as a transitional stage between the end of a PRIVATE-ENTERPRISE system and the beginnings of COMMUNISM. In practice, the revolutionary, communist form of socialism, which involves abolition of all private property, is limited to only a few countries, such as Cuba. Elsewhere, the main form of economic system is that of the MIXED ECONOMY, which combines elements of democratic socialism and the private-enterprise tradition. See CENTRALLY PLANNED ECONOMY.
References in periodicals archive ?
He said: "Bertie pronouncing himself as a socialist wasn't a surprise to me because I believe he's one of the few socialists in the Dail."
The Liberals viewed this with concern, but here too they decided not to oppose the socialists but to increase their collaboration with them, to intensify their social activities among the lower strata of society and show them that the local liberals could look after their interests better than the socialists.
His comments come at a time when the Spanish bishops are embroiled in a battle with the policies of the Spanish Socialist government which has introduced legislation allowing same-sex "marriage" and has plans to relax abortion laws.
Almost all major policy aims and legislative proposals put forward by Republicans these days are unabashedly socialist. In fact, the socialist nature of Republican efforts can be detected in nearly any Bush administration proposal.
What's more, the Soviet Union "totally distorted the intellectual and political development of socialists in the West." He's right about this, of course, as was Oscar Wilde, whom Weinstein quotes: "If Socialism is Authoritarian; if there are Governments armed with economic power as they are now with political power; if, in a word, we have Industrial Tyrannies, then the last state of man will be worse than the first."
He said that he could not understand how those who claimed to be socialists and were members of the Labour Party could pursue policies in the Assembly that were against what generations of socialists had fought for.
While not wishing to reignite an old debate, Spin Doctor would like to muse on the variety of socialists that exist today:
Activists' sophisticated understanding of the economics of commercial agriculture in Oklahoma and their ability to translate radical demands for economic justice into the languages of Jeffersonian democracy and evangelical Christianity were additional key elements in the achievements of Oklahoma socialists. A final factor in the Party's success in Oklahoma was that local activists were deeply devoted to defending their democratic principles; as they often rejected national Party strategy and doctrine, they opened lines of communication between local leadership and the socialist rank-and-file, thereby fostering a sense of empowerment among the Party faithful.
Indeed, the dead socialists, radicals, and labor leaders who inhabit this book--Big Bill Haywood and Eugene Debs, Norman Thomas and Upton Sinclair, William Z.
The "national question" has, of course, always been a thorny subject for socialists and a major bone of contention among leading Marxist theorists.
With the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the socialists took control of a city that was no longer the capital of an empire but simply the largest concentration of population in a small and generally impoverished country with a predominantly rural economy.
This should be an eye-opening work for contemporary socialists who view a Marxist/pragmatist synthesis as the philosophical basis for renewing democratic socialism, since most adherents of a pragmatic socialism are completely unaware of their historical continuity with this tradition.