Changes

In many respects, socialism is a modern concept, as no large-scale society that is agriculturally-based in the ancient or more recent past can be called socialist. However, examples of the Iroquois and collective farming communities indicates a form of consensus building and limitation of power and wealth accumulation is possible by pooling resources. In fact, in those case, where societies tend to best pool resources, it is evident that these societies also formed a type of democratic system in that consensus building had to be developed through agreement or voting. The main problem has likely been that it is hard to have a large-scale society that is socialist, in its true sense, because large-scale societies are often held together by power structures. In effect, society is large-scale because there are people who are dependent on others through economic or power relationships. If that was not the case, very likely small communities that could potentially disassociate from a central authority could emerge. <ref>For more on the concepts of socialism and its history, see: Jeremy Jennings (2003) <i>Socialism. Critical concepts in political science </i>. London ; New York, Routledge.</ref>

For modern states, what is intended by socialism is not so much a classes society, even if that is what is stated as the ideal by the state, but rather there is an extensive social welfare program that includes health care, transport, access to work, housing, and other aspects. Examples, including Denmark, Sweden, Canada, and New Zealand, are not fully socialist but they have wide ranging welfare systems that lower wealth disparities often evident. They are, in effect, capitalist societies but with a socialist structure that assists in key areas or if people fall on harder times.<ref>For more on the modern examples of large-scale societies that have some socialist features, see: Busky, D.F. (2000) <i>Democratic socialism: a global survey</i>. Westport, Conn, Praeger.</ref>