Socialism

The landowners give the sharecroppers enough money to live on.

Adolf Hitler was an advocate of capitalism. On his route to power, he courted rich industrialists, who saw the theat of a militant communist movement in post 1st world war Germany as a threat to their position, and so backed the fascist and and anti trade union movement created by Hitler.

Hitler openly admitted his use of the word 'socialist' (in the name of his national socialist movement) and the use of red in propaganda, was an attempt to tap into the support that left wing ideas had gained since the economic downfall prior to the Treaty of Versailles. Although an advocate of state intervention in the economy, Hitler was a friend of big business, and his suppression of communists, socialists and trade unionists in seeking to break the organised labour movement, was proof of this.

In conclusion, fascism was merely an extension of the capitalist system. Rather than see Germany move towards socialism, big business supported Hitler as the lesser of two evils. Under fascism, they could maintain their position. Communists were the first to suffer from this opportunism, and many were killed in the concentration camps, alongside the Jews, gypsies and other minorities.

Market Socialism cannot exist, so the question here is meaningless. Socialism means a classless stateless society based on production for use, with no wages or prices or money.

Capitalism. Any system in which the means of production are privatley owned and controlled by a few and the fundamental goal is the accumulation of more and more wealth for the sake of further accumulation, is capitalist despite anything else.

how does marginalization affect the family

The countries that still have socialism is Sweden and Canada.

Edit:

While both Sweden and Canada have socialist aspects within their forms of government, so many other countries have more obvious aspects or socialism as part of their governmental structure.

All Scandinavian countries work withing a social democratic frame, much like Sweden, which means that despite capitalist opportunities, they have a strong welfare system, providing a safety net for people who are out of a job. As the third pillar of said social structure, these countries have policies to ensure that no one can exploit the system, and people are required to actively seek employment if they're healthy and otherwise able to work.

Actual socialist states, with very scarce (if any) capitalist aspects include North Korea and Cuba. These countries are normally considered Communist, and while this is the common assumption, no actual communist country (as described by Karl Marx) has yet existed, and the countries which have claimed to be communist are in fact socialist countries with emphasis on government control.

Given that no modern national government is a "pure" anything, all nations have some set of laws which are Socialist in nature. For example: the United State's Social Security system is extremely socialist. The U.K.'s National Health is also socialist. France's worker rights laws are socialist. Germany's national conscription laws are socialist.

Everything is in degrees - it's not a black or white issue.

The holocaust was a systematic genocide of Jews and other social, political and religious groups at the hands of Nazi Germany before and during the WW II. An estimated six million Jews and five million non-Jews were exterminated during the holocaust. The German socialists/communists were the first ones to be sent to concentration camps for their proximity to Soviet Union and opposition to Nazi beliefs. However, they numbered much less than other targeted group. If the number of Soviet POWs (2 million) and Soviet civilians killed during the Operation Barbarossa (5.5 million) are included, the number swells to close to 8 million.

Neither, as Communism means a classless stateless society based on production for use, with no rulers or money or prices. So no economy and no politics either.

Capitalist: production for sale, wages system, minority ownership of the means of production, class division. Socialism has none of these, and there cannot be a mix of capitalism and Socialism.

Quite a wonderful question, most of us tend to read novels but fail to get any stylistica features from the same. To list just but a few, this are some of the stylistic features that artists use in trying to pass a message to us: Use of symbolism: This is where the writer/artist uses a symbol to describe, represent or characterise a person, thing or place. For instance, the use of a broken egg to describe or represent a lost society e.t.c Suspense: Is another stylistic feature used which in actual sense leaves the audience who is the reader with so many questions about what happened next. For instance "....and he was no more. Irony: This one, the writer uses to contradicting explanations. For instance, the use of phrases like "sweet sorrow". Rhyming words: This are words that have the same feel maybe due to the sound of utterance or to the way they are written. For instance "The Garden of Eden" Where garden and Eden sound the same. Sarcasm: This is where the writer gives another character the words of another and makes them sound impolite to the other party. It might involve the other party saying the same words in a way that may offend the other. For example, a person dressed clumsly might be complemented for dressing well. Satire: Is more like sarcasm however, it mostly deals with actions unlike sarcasm which deals with words. However, both are geared towards offending the other party. Other stylistic features or stylistic devices as they are called , will be discussed with time because in reality, they are so many and can consume much time to exhaust at one go.

Italian socialists who differed with the main-line Socialist Party's anti-war (WWI) stance as well as hard-line nationalists. Also, many Fascists were war veterans. Fascism was a strange, convoluted mixture of right-wing symbolism (nationalism, respect for figure of authority) with a left-wing execution (totalitarian rule, view that elites have an enlightened dedication to the common good).

The countries that follow a capitalist ideaology are already key players in the cause of capitalism themselves. Everyone in a certain nation like that, plays each and every small role of capitalism. Just by being greedy or successful in high finance is a key role in capitalism. Businessmen, economists, and certain positions in government legislation all control the cause of full-fledged capitalism.

During the Russian Revolution in the early 1900's, the Mensheviks (which translated in Russian means the smaller ones or the tinier group). The Mensheviks were the rich elite of Russia and they fought against the Bolsheviks or the larger ones. The Bolsheviks were the serfs and peasants which rose up against the rich elite, similar to the earlier French Revolution. The Bolsheviks made up most of the Russian population and eventually won the civil war raging on in Russia based on their large numbers.

Both yes and no. Norway have a mixed economy, taking advantage of the best sides of capitalism and socialism. There is no problem starting your own private company, and there is a lot of private companies in Norway. But the government owns several key companies, like the postal service, railroads, Telenor (a large telecommunications company) and Statoil, one of the worlds largest oil company. The government also run most schools and hospitals.

it is just progressive

i like what the person here wrote.. when i first saw this question i though it was stupid. i think before one ask this question, they must understand the definition of "progressives"

progressive:change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are,especially in political matters

Louis Blanc was a French socialist in the 19th century. He believed that every man has a right to a job and that a country should provide work for the jobless in government financed industries.

Blanc organized a workers' party and played a major role in the French revolution of 1848. As long as it lasted, and it did not last long, the provisional government had jobless people work on public improvement projects. Historians credit Blanc as a one of the more practical Utopian socialists in that he worked for reform in workers rights and government action, rather than try to overthrow capitalism.

It is 1) Nationalism, 2) Public welfare, 3)Taxation and 4) Centrally planned economy

the leaders are chosen by the type of things you believ in and the power that you can give to the country.

It depends on what one sees as a socialist country. Australia is to some extent a socialist country in that it has a mixed economy where the government is involved in the infrastructure and the welfare of its citizens. This is paid for by its Citizen through taxes and various levies. Australians live in states and Territory's, each of these has a separate government that makes decisions on laws and infrastructure that affect the people. the people vote for these governments. then the various representatives that the people voted for make decisions among each other in the same way. If the people are not satisfied with the performance of their representatives they are welcome to vote for a different one at the next election. Australia is a federation of states and on a Federal level the same thing happens. The federal leader is called the Prime minster and The state leader id called the premier.

Whether a country is socialist or not need not make any difference to the democratic leadership of the country.

Decreased in all sectors

No; the Socialist Revolutionary Party pre-dates the Bolsheviks and was the largest party in Russia at the time of the 1917 October revolution.

The Mensheviks were an orthodox Marxist organization that existed alongside the Bolsheviks (which were Leninist). The Naradoniks and Popular Socialists were other socialist organizations that existed since the mid-19th century.

Vladimir Lenin and his Bolsheviks established the first socialist state in Russia, but did not establish a socialist economy. Vladimir Lenin described the economy of Soviet Russia as a "state-monopoly capitalist" economy that was not yet advanced enough for socialism, which could only exist on a worldwide scale beginning in the most advanced capitalist nations.

No. Socialism didn't exist when Plato was alive. This is a modern concept on a plan for government. From Plato we get the theory of Forms that states we know the world we know through the senses is only an imitation of the pure, eternal, and unchanging world of the Forms. Plato saw love as motivated by a longing for the highest form of beauty and as a motivational power through which the highest of achievements are possible.