We should beware definitions of "socialism" which come from those who hate it, as well as those seeking power by claiming to champion it.
(Much like "democracy", which actually isn't about voting in your managers every few years then going home.)
A main part of historical socialism is control over production by the producers themselves. Not by "bosses", whose commands producers must obey.
Collectivism vs individualism is a false dichotomy. We can easily imagine that a healthier society cooperates to increase the freedom of its individuals.
Simply talk with mainstream anarchists (anarcho-syndicalists and so on). They typically call themselves socialists, organize collective action like strikes and radical unions, etc. Certainly, anarchists aren't known for supporting the state. :) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism)
(Much like "democracy", which actually isn't about voting in your managers every few years then going home.)
A main part of historical socialism is control over production by the producers themselves. Not by "bosses", whose commands producers must obey.
Collectivism vs individualism is a false dichotomy. We can easily imagine that a healthier society cooperates to increase the freedom of its individuals.
Simply talk with mainstream anarchists (anarcho-syndicalists and so on). They typically call themselves socialists, organize collective action like strikes and radical unions, etc. Certainly, anarchists aren't known for supporting the state. :) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism)