Jump to content

Talk:History of socialism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 13:12, 12 May 2024 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:History of socialism/Archive 1) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Ferdinand Lassalle

Shouldn't there be some discussion of Ferdinand Lassalle on this page? I'm not sure where to fit him in, but he deserves at least some mention. john 06:54, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Done. --Christofurio 18:33, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

Moved to History of socialism. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization). -- Rbellin|Talk 02:01, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Easier to Detect?

I'm afraid I'm not at all clear what this means. "Third world socialism is certainly easier to detect than that of the first world by events such as the triumph of the Uruguayan left in 2004 that consolidated the so called South American Leftist Front which includes the democratically elected governments ...."

Are we talking about 3d world and 1st world socialism as different possible interpretations of that election? And is the editor who added this sentence saying that the former interpretation is much more plausible than the latter? Does that make this original research? --Christofurio

Socialism in smaller countries such as Holland?

I think it could be interesting to have a section on socialism in smaller western european countries such as Holland.

agree - the way the article reads, it seems the northern and western European government styles after 1985 simply aren't in the chosen scope of this article, in spite of the fact that they are the predominant "socialist" style governments of the West to this day. 47.185.39.179 (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology?!

Terminology problems??

According to Marxist-Leninist terminology (which I don't accept as valid B.T.W.) socialism refers to a state of society, and communism as the next state. The chapter Socialism and Communism (1917-39) is about the Social Democrat versus the Communist movements.

According to Marxist anachronistic terminology (as opposed to the Marxist-Leninist one), social democrats and communists are two mutually cooperating kinds of socialists.

I think the title Socialism and Communism (1917-39)' should be some such as Social Democrats versus Communists (1917-39).

[said rursus: tomas.kindahl@comhem.se]

Proposal for article to be trimmed and split current sections each to become an article

Basically what the subject says. After looking over the article, looking at the top boxes as well, I think that it should be trimmed overall, and that each history section be made into an article that can link back to this main article. One way of doing that for example may be "origins to pre-1789", "French revolution to 1850s and the development", "Marxism and the movement 1850s to 1910s", "Interwar era", 'WW2 and Cold War", and "1991 to present". MarvelAge91 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]