[davo]

gnome wrote:

alanjjohnstone wrote:

It seems it is not the content of the message which is 99% similar but the presentation of the message is where we suffer from.Or am i on the wrong track?

I don't think you are on the wrong track.  From my experience two things stand out as off-putting to many (most?) people. 1) Our use of the terms 'socialism' and 'communism' and the connotations they still have.2) Our recognition of the class-based nature of society.Should we cease to use these terms or abandon our analysis of capitalism?  I think not.  But therein lies the dilemma…..

 I agree. You may start off with a discussion on a moneyless society as a "novel idea" (to most people anyway),  but sooner rather than later you will need to put the case for socialism grounded in scientific analysis and defend the definition of socialism. This shouldn't be hard to do – simply point out that if there is money, then it is not socialism.

[Author]

Posts