Ask me about Communism.

[lord of flies]

I figure that a lot of people around here apparently don't understand communism, so here, let me help you out. I will be completely unbiased in my explanations, so feel free to ask whatever you like!

 

Here's a brief introduction:

Socialism is an economic and political system wherein the class interests of the working class (i.e. the proletariat) are put above the class interests of the rich (i.e. the bourgeois).

 

To understand a bit better, it's important to realize that the primary beneficiaries of "democratic" revolutions were never the general populace. Rather, these revolutions and political upheavals were targeted at the advancement of the interests of the developing merchant class. This class is the cornerstone of modern capitalism, and had by that era begun to grow quite a bit.

 

Marx lived shortly after the main thrust of this upheaval. Parliamentarianism was entrenched in the political structures of the west, and was designed and run to serve primarily bourgeois interests. However, he saw the development of another class: the proletariat, the urban workers. At the time, the proletariat lived on subsistence wages and worked long days in dangerous factories. They were taken advantage of, and their desires and interests were almost completely ignored. If you read anything about late 19th century workers, it becomes vividly clear that their conditions were horrifying, and they (and their underage children) worked because they were forced to. Socialism (and by extension Marxism) was a political reaction to this.

 

Marx saw a developing class which seemed to be economically vital, for whom the current structure was destructive and bloody. Their conditions were worse than that of the bourgeois; their numbers were greater. It would seem natural then, that where the bourgeois had succeeded in destroying or subduing the aristocrats' government, they would do the same.

 

Lenin developed political theories on the basis of two facts which had become clear to him: firstly, that Russia was still escaping feudalism and entering the capitalist stage of development, and secondly, that the revolution had not come to Europe (an observation only reinforced by the turmoil of the Great War). He proposed that the proletariat was incapable of acting in its long-term class interests, since it was preoccupied with the day-to-day workings of society. As a response to this, he pushed the idea of the "vanguard party," intended to take the natural outcry of the proletariat at their conditions and push them towards a revolution. This was what lead to the split between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks.

 

Contemporary Marxists criticized this; Luxemburg (another revolutionary Marxist) called it "Blanquism," a reference to a French socialist who believed in a form of socialist putschism, where a small group of conspirators would take power and convert their country to legitimate socialism. However, Lenin's idea (christened "Leninism" or "Bolshevism") worked out, unlike the others. It successfully put together an organized military resistance which defeated the counter-revolutionary elements in its society and pushed forward a government which acted in (at least what it saw as) the interests of the proletariat. When his "war communism" didn't work, he accepted NEP. Lenin's principle difference to his contemporaries was his pragmatism.

 

Stalin later developed Russia into what is called a command economy; this was opposed by many Bolsheviks. The command economy came to be associated with socialism, though there are still variants which do not engage in such statist behavior, such as council communism.

[Lare Kikkeli]

Will intelligent machines make communism obsolete?

[Hurlshort]

I've always subscribed to the line that communism is a fantastic idea in theory, but is impossible to realistically implement. Kind of like the society from The Giver.

[lord of flies]

I've always subscribed to the line that communism is a fantastic idea in theory, but is impossible to realistically implement. Kind of like the society from The Giver.

This is more or less true: communism is pie-in-the-sky transhumanist crap for socialists. However, most people use the term "communism" to refer to the government of socialist countries, so I decided to title my thread that.

Will intelligent machines make communism obsolete?

If anything, intelligent machines would be a crucial stage in the transition from socialism to communism.

[Walsingham]

Here's a question you've ignored before: how do you suggest the communist society will achieve and maintain a parity in individual power?

[lord of flies]

Here's a question you've ignored before: how do you suggest the communist society will achieve and maintain a parity in individual power?

Please rephrase your question.

[Oerwinde]

Here's a question you've ignored before: how do you suggest the communist society will achieve and maintain a parity in individual power?

Please rephrase your question.

 

I think he means something like how would a communist society achieve and maintain absolute equality? With no individual or group establishing greater power over other individuals or groups.

[Purkake]

How do you prepare the babies you eat, fried or boiled?

[Gorgon]

Power corrupts, and you inevitably end up with an oligarchy.

[Lare Kikkeli]

Communism: great idea, wrong species.

[Purkake]

Chimps! We must teach them before it is too late. Maybe LoF can be the chimp Marx?

[Monte Carlo]

What will you call your secret police?

 

How long will it take you to incarcerate journalists and non-party political activists?

 

Where will you site your re-education camps?

 

How long will it take before you develop a Robespierre or Beria type character and start eliminating your political opponents?

 

Will senior members of the regime have special property rights, or their own freeway for their limousines?

 

How many walls protected by dogs, barbed wire and machinegun nests will you need to keep people in your socialist nirvana?

[HoonDing]

In before Russian reversal.

[Purkake]

In before Russian reversal.

In Soviet Russia reversal is in before you!

[213374U]

Sounds interesting.

 

Does it actually work?

[Kaftan Barlast]

I figure that a lot of people around here apparently don't understand communism, so here, let me help you out. I will be completely unbiased in my explanations, so feel free to ask whatever you like!

 

 

Whats your favorite kind of socialism and why? And above all, who made the final goal in the annual traditional Sweden-Finland hockey match of 1967?

[Gorgon]

Hypli Upsaleinigen.

[lord of flies]

I think he means something like how would a communist society achieve and maintain absolute equality? With no individual or group establishing greater power over other individuals or groups.

Oh. Well obviously it wouldn't, because that's some sort of ridiculous right-wing fiction about what socialism is supposed to be. Rather, socialism is intended to put the needs of the working class above the needs of the rich, i.e. the dictatorship of the proletariat. Marx never advocated total equality, and the economic theory of socialism is totally based upon labor-skimming.

 

How do you keep a non-proletariat group from taking complete power? Simple: grass-roots democracy, broad-based education initiatives and a democratic system built on keeping non-workers out.

What will you call your secret police?

It is highly unlikely that I will be the one leading any revolutionary action, so I will never have any secret police. If I did, I would name them COINTELPRO.

How long will it take you to incarcerate journalists and non-party political activists?

Forever. Press rights and political rights are key to an open society.

Where will you site your re-education camps?

The same place the United States prison system is right now. As a firm believer in rehabilitative justice, I cannot dismiss the idea of re-educating criminals to be functional members of society.

How long will it take before you develop a Robespierre or Beria type character and start eliminating your political opponents?

Forever and a day.

Will senior members of the regime have special property rights, or their own freeway for their limousines?

No. However, like all members of my society, they would have the ability to purchase and own small-scale goods (i.e. not investments), though very expensive products might fall outside of their means.

How many walls protected by dogs, barbed wire and machinegun nests will you need to keep people in your socialist nirvana?

Zero.

Whats your favorite kind of socialism and why?

I have a strong preference for revolutionary socialism (social democracy has been an utter failure), though I don't view any of its successful forms as entirely ideal. If I was asked to select a currently existing form of socialism, I would go with Leninism.

 

Otherwise, I would go with a grass-roots from-below revolutionary socialism on the basis of nonviolent resistance and popular sovereignty.

[Oerwinde]

Socialism favors the workers to the point of crippling business, capitalism favors business to the point of crippling workers. Ideally there should be a balance.

[Walsingham]

OK. I was trying to maintain a neutrality of question, but I'll be more pointed:

 

1. Do you beileve people will give up their private property if you ask politely?

2. If as I suspect people will not willingly give up all their private property, how will you transfer it to collective ownership?

3. Even once property is pooled, some people will have managerial control over how that property is applied. Who gets roads/water/broadband first? How will you ensure this process is fair?

4. Even pooled property has a tendency to get caught in individual hands. How will you ensure redistribution of such material?

5. 'Each according to his needs'. Who decides those needs, and how will you distinguish between needs and wants?

6. What agency of administration will you set up, and how will be constituted?

 

I won't insult anyone by pretending I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'd dearly love to hear your thinly veiled lust for politically motivated violence given free rein, in your own inimitable phrasing.

[lord of flies]

OK. I was trying to maintain a neutrality of question, but I'll be more pointed:

 

1. Do you beileve people will give up their private property if you ask politely?

No.

2. If as I suspect people will not willingly give up all their private property, how will you transfer it to collective ownership?

Most likely, a combination of spontaneous revolutionary seizures followed by tacit or explicit governmental support, and massive governmental intervention once it is properly established. Of course, not all property will be seized, just that of the rich.

3. Even once property is pooled, some people will have managerial control over how that property is applied. Who gets roads/water/broadband first? How will you ensure this process is fair?

I live in an industrialized nation, and believe that socialism is most important for one. We already have roads/water/broadband over a broad spectrum.

4. Even pooled property has a tendency to get caught in individual hands. How will you ensure redistribution of such material?

Taxes.

5. 'Each according to his needs'. Who decides those needs, and how will you distinguish between needs and wants?

I believe I posted a topic on this subject a while back. Basically, that quote is taken out of context and irrelevant to actual socialism.

6. What agency of administration will you set up, and how will be constituted?

Democratic government elected via grass-roots organizations and nonviolent political action. Only workers will be allowed to be participants (though "worker" will have a broad definition).

[Monte Carlo]

How can somebody, seriously, actually use the phrase 'Dictatorship' (albeit of the proletariat, whoever they are) then go on to talk about non-coercion?

 

Because they have taken a potion of disingenuosness. That's how.

 

Listen, sonny. I grew up in a piss-poor neighbourhood and went to a school that was like something out of Mad Max 3. The vast majority of the 'proletariat' with or without 'class consciousness' think middle class leftists (among which I strongly suspect you number) are misguided halfwits.

 

I grew up in the 1970's and early 1980's. I remember living under a proper left-wing government, and I remember bodies un-buried, the three day week and bread shortages (that's right kids, freaking bread shortages. In England.).

 

So, please, take your totalitarian fantasies elsewhere, because as far as I'm concerned your post could just have easily been called 'Ask me about Fascism.'

[I want teh kotor 3]

Why are the rich evil?

 

Why do I want to be equal? If everybody is equal, nobody can shine. After all, Italian cars don't tend to mix well with Communist salaries.

 

Trotsky or Stalin?

 

Do you support Putin as the dictator of Russia?

[Lare Kikkeli]

you guys can only lose. LoF is a lot smarter than most of you, even if he's completely wrong. he's also an expert troll.

[Guard Dog]

Most likely, a combination of spontaneous revolutionary seizures followed by tacit or explicit governmental support, and massive governmental intervention once it is properly established. Of course, not all property will be seized, just that of the rich.

 

I'm curious (and I'm trying to take you seriously here) I own a house and 25 acres of land. Far more than most people do. Most American homes are on .15 - 1 acre lots, or are co-op. Now for all that I have a modest salary (for someone in my profession, Electronic Engineer) and I saved for a long time to buy this place. Now since I obviously have so much more than say a janitor can afford (since I have a college education that I paid for myself) would you consider me rich? Would someone like me exepct to have all they worked for seized by spontaneous revolutionary forces or governmnent?