Communism: Needs a new name in America

[Glorious Union]

Due to the Red Scare and extreme anti-communist feelings in the United States I beleive that any form of Communism that attempts to form in that country should take on a different name from Communism or socialism. Many Americans are discomforted by the words communism, socialism, soviet, and proletariat (although few even know what 'proletariat' means). Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American, and communism is (acording to our leaders) anti-American in nature. But, because most Americans are ignorant to what Communism really is (a tactic to keep people from realising its benefits) then simply changing the name and a few of the more obvious policies should work for getting communists into political offices. Unless of course we try to overthrow them by force and, lets face it, the American military machine should not be challenged unless you want countless millions dead.

So, my final conclusion is this:
1) Change the name and symbol of Communism in the USA to something more pro-American.
2) Hide away or ignore the most obvious communistic ideas and do not make alegiances with communist nations.
3) Try not to entice a military uprising.

Any thoughts?

[Brother No. 1]

We cant take away our Symbols comrade.
Now why would we ignor what we stand by.
If we Do that they why are we saying. " For the Revolution" then.

Seems that all of your conclusions take away what makes us. Sadly I have no thoughts the only way for the idotic People of America to see us truely as we are is to see that their goverment has lied and failed them and that Communism can promise them a better life.

[FreeFocus]

This is a sure way to introduce to the world National Socialism for the 21st century. This would be a rather disgusting way to "rise to power," and suggests that you want power just for the sake of power, not based on any real concern for freedom and justice. Real concern for freedom and justice necessitates a rejection of American exceptionalism and imperialism.

What's more, the realization of the hostile predisposition of American culture and society to socialism/communism/anarchism should lead you to examining the sociological realities and historical origins of this predisposition, not willingness to sign a deal with imperialism, jingoism, and racism.

[Brother No. 1]

America has been anti-Socialist for many years. Their Society is the Worst in the World. It is very pathetic that they think their the best at ever thing when they cant even understand they can never win the war in Afganistan and Iraq. PS: Thank you for your statement Comrade Freefocus.

[Vahanian]

We cant take away our Symbols comrade.
Now why would we ignor what we stand by.
If we Do that they why are we saying. " For the Revolution" then.

Seems that all of your conclusions take away what makes us. Sadly I have no thoughts the only way for the idotic People of America to see us truely as we are is to see that their goverment has lied and failed them and that Communism can promise them a better life.


i agree with my comrade on this one. eventually the American people will wake up and realize how badly there getting fucked over buy the system.

[StalinFanboy]

Due to the Red Scare and extreme anti-communist feelings in the United States I beleive that any form of Communism that attempts to form in that country should take on a different name from Communism or socialism. Many Americans are discomforted by the words communism, socialism, soviet, and proletariat (although few even know what 'proletariat' means). Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American, and communism is (acording to our leaders) anti-American in nature. But, because most Americans are ignorant to what Communism really is (a tactic to keep people from realising its benefits) then simply changing the name and a few of the more obvious policies should work for getting communists into political offices. Unless of course we try to overthrow them by force and, lets face it, the American military machine should not be challenged unless you want countless millions dead.

So, my final conclusion is this:
1) Change the name and symbol of Communism in the USA to something more pro-American.
2) Hide away or ignore the most obvious communistic ideas and do not make alegiances with communist nations.
3) Try not to entice a military uprising.

Any thoughts?

Communism is anti-American. Just as it is anti-Iraqi, anti-Palestinian, anti-Chinese, anti-British, etc. All nations are just bourgeois manifestations. As communists, anarchists, whatever, we need to remember that our allegiances are to the international working class.

[Glorious Union]

This would be a rather disgusting way to "rise to power," and suggests that you want power just for the sake of power, not based on any real concern for freedom and justice.

I want no power whatsoever, and I do not know what brought you to this conclusion.

All I am saying is that by changing the way Communism looks we can educate Americans about it. Most Americans do not have an open mind to communism. They think it is evil and that is that, no exceptions. They refuse to study it or learn of it. I thought that if communism were to have a different face then Americans may spark some curiosity in it instead of simply waving it off as an oppressive government.

I never said to change the actual principles of communism, just to change how it is taught. Would an American rather learn from a red-flag waving communist promising a workers republic or would they rather follow a man holding a red white and blue flag promising peace, equality, and emoloyment for all? Most americans would rather listen to the latter, and those same people would not realise that both men have the same philosophy, just by different names. I am not thinking of tricking people into communism, just get them to learn about it without ever knowing that they are really learning communism.

Its just the fact that most Americans refuse to learn about communism. They might be open to learn about some new philosophy, especially if they beleive it is better than the current system. A lot of American know about the basics of communism, which is why I suggested hiding the more obvious communistic ideas. Or, at least tell them in a different way.

I don't see many other logical ways of toppling American capitalism other than simply waiting it out until a) the last remnants of the Red Scare dissolve and people eventually learn about communism on their own, b) somehow a foreign communist country becomes more powerful than the USA and overtakes them somehow, or c) a great depression hits the American market and a communist party rises to power promising change. I am not content with waiting around for one of these things to happen, as they could possibly take ages to come or the possiblity of their occurance could be wiped out entirely over time.

[FreeFocus]

Well, Third Worldism doesn't wait for imperialist countries to become socialist and decide they'll cease raping and killing abroad.

I refuse to accommodate jingoistic arrogance and ignorance. I would not support any leftist effort to do so and would distance myself immediately from groups that would do so.

[Brother No. 1]

Well Some Americans are smart and non Arrogrent and Irgnorant and can understand and follow Communism. I would only B and C would work for Americans think all of communists are the "Red Scare." Why do we hid what we belive in if the america people finally grow a good working brain that thinks out side the box then they will understand.

[Vahanian]

Polish a turd its still a turd. just because you change the name of the belief dosent mean that people are gonna be more open to it

[Brother No. 1]

I know that. They have to think out side the box and see the Communism is not what their goverment ahs told them for the past 70 or 60 years.

[Vahanian]

that was directed toward glorious union not you.

c would be the most likely.

[kiki75]

I think the solution is education and exposure, not pandering to fear. I feel that changing the name and symbol in the USA would take away from the solidarity we need (and enjoy).

It would be soooooo American to change something in this way. Predictably American. I don't think the ends justify the means. I see your point, I just vehemently disagree with you.

I'm not sure what to say about enticing a military uprising.

[Niccolò Rossi]

Due to the Red Scare and extreme anti-communist feelings in the United States I beleive that any form of Communism that attempts to form in that country should take on a different name from Communism or socialism.

Changing the name of a political current does not change it's content. Of course whilst the name "communist" does carry certain negative connotations the solution to this is not to "take on a different name".


Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

This is opportunism at it's worst however, I don't believe you are necessarily sinister about it, it merely reflects your own nativity. Communists are steadfast internationalists, we oppose all nationalism and all nation states. "Accepting and respecting" the government means betraying the working class. Communists do not sink to the level of the masses in order to gain support, we defend unswervingly, the interests of the international working class at all times. It is thus our task to point the way forward and provide political leadership.


I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American,

It's not and can not be.


But, because most Americans are ignorant to what Communism really is (a tactic to keep people from realising its benefits) then simply changing the name and a few of the more obvious policies should work for getting communists into political offices.

Why would we want this?


Unless of course we try to overthrow them by force and, lets face it, the American military machine should not be challenged unless you want countless millions dead.

Communists are not guerrillas or insurrectionists or a commanding and organising military force. We are the most politically advanced and intransigent defenders of the interests of the working class.

[Glorious Union]

Polish a turd its still a turd. just because you change the name of the belief dosent mean that people are gonna be more open to itThe people are afraid of the name, and they obviously do not know what communism is really about otherwise there would be a lot more communists in America. Would it really hurt that much to change the name of communism and what it looks like? A communist waving a blue flag is just the same as one waving a red flag.

[Brother No. 1]

I think C is going to happen soon with the Ecnonomic crisis but i dont think we can rely on the CPUSA to build a True Socialist Goverment. PS: Education helps only if someone interested in learning and most Americans arent. As soon as we Say communism is good we will barely have a handful of people.

[BIG BROTHER]

Under the right conditions, and with a revolutionary leadership the proletariat of the u.s. will overthrow the capitalists no matter what propaganda they have been exposed too.

And about the name changing, don't you think that they'll notice what you're talking to them about when you tell them about class struggle, and overthrowing the ruling class, etc.

[Vahanian]

The people are afraid of the name, and they obviously do not know what communism is really about otherwise there would be a lot more communists in America. Would it really hurt that much to change the name of communism and what it looks like? A communist waving a blue flag is just the same as one waving a red flag.


no it isn't. why should we change the look of communism if people want to be stupid and scared it's called goddamn learn. if people want to be willfully ignorant how the system only helps the rich and the powerful it there loss. try to educate them but you shouldn't have to change the look just to satisfy there stupidity

[Brother No. 1]

Dont forget about the Revolution and the past Revolutionaries. We are hated here in America. PS: Its hard to teach Americas the true way of something if they have been taught the exact oppiste for over 60 years. It will be like teaching a pile of Rocks.

[Glorious Union]

Under the right conditions, and with a revolutionary leadership the proletariat of the u.s. will overthrow the capitalists no matter what propaganda they have been exposed too.

And about the name changing, don't you think that they'll notice what you're talking to them about when you tell them about class struggle, and overthrowing the ruling class, etc.
Just say it differently than what people are used to hearing. The same message and the same purpose, but different words. I have convinced a freind who was a capitalist supporter that communism was a good thing, just by defining it differently. I told him I had a great new idea, practically defined communism for him, and he agreed that it was a good idea. He even said that if I wrote a book about it I might be able to change the world for the better. I tried that same thing with three people and got about the same reaction from each. Thats why I posted that idea here.

[Glorious Union]

no it isn't. why should we change the look of communism if people want to be stupid and scared it's called goddamn learn. if people want to be willfully ignorant how the system only helps the rich and the powerful it there loss. try to educate them but you shouldn't have to change the look just to satisfy there stupidity
Actually, people where I am have been complaining about the current system and the unfairness of the economy a lot, they just lack any alternatives because whenever they hear the words communism or socialism they stop listening.

[Brother No. 1]

Did that friend Join Communism and I dont what part of Texas you are in but that must be a nicer place then where I am.

[StalinFanboy]

Actually, people where I am have been complaining about the current system and the unfairness of the economy a lot, they just lack any alternatives because whenever they hear the words communism or socialism they stop listening.
Then tell them to stop being a fucking baby and listen to what you have to say.


Where's the political integrity in opportunism?

[Vahanian]

Actually, people where I am have been complaining about the current system and the unfairness of the economy a lot, they just lack any alternatives because whenever they hear the words communism or socialism they stop listening.

well at first you could explain them communism by defining it differently . then if they agree with it you tell them you what you just explained to them was communism. that would be alright i guess

[Brother No. 1]

Not in america theres only the Red headed Republicans and the Idotic Demmcrates.

[Glorious Union]

Dont forget about the Revolution and the past Revolutionaries. We are hated here in America. PS: Its hard to teach Americas the true way of something if they have been taught the exact oppiste for over 60 years. It will be like teaching a pile of Rocks.
They aren't taught anything except that the American way is better, they don't know much of the specifics about their own government or economy and how it opresses people. They think that the American way is bad, but it is better than any other system available. If we were to get the people to learn about that then they would make their own decisions for once.

[Glorious Union]

Did that friend Join Communism and I dont what part of Texas you are in but that must be a nicer place then where I am.
No, he still hates communism (his parents fled from Vietnam) but, ironically, he wishes me the best of luck with my "new" philosophy.

[BlackCapital]

Like kiki said, the key to changing U.S. citizens negative perception of socialism and communism is simply exposure and education. Most people simply don't understand what it is.

The first step to this I believe is exposing capitalism for what it is, then from this they can draw the conclusion that socialism/communism is in fact not a freedom-crushing dictatorship. The point being, we don't need to mislead people or shy away from our goals, but simply explain them. The most important part is to put it in terms that they can relate with, and situations that effect them.

[Glorious Union]

well at first you could explain them communism by defining it differently . then if they agree with it you tell them you what you just explained to them was communism. that would be alright i guess
That is exactly what I have been trying to say. But I havent told anybody that what I was describing was communism yet. They don't know enough about it yet, and telling them now would be suicide to my little experiment.

[Brother No. 1]

Well then we will have to teach them that communism is better then the "American way" though it will take long to actually see them get used to it after 300 of Capitalism.PS: whos kiki?

[Glorious Union]

Like kiki said, the key to changing U.S. citizens negative perception of socialism and communism is simply exposure and education. Most people simply don't understand what it is.

The first step to this I believe is exposing capitalism for what it is, then from this they can draw the conclusion that socialism/communism is in fact not a freedom-crushing dictatorship. The point being, we don't need to mislead people or shy away from our goals, but simply explain them. The most important part is to put it in terms that they can relate with, and situations that effect them.
I guess I worded the OP wrong, because what you just said is exactly what I meant.

[Brother No. 1]

You cant mess up the Order of how you teach People or else you may teach them something else or they could mis understand it and take it in a bad direction.

[Vahanian]

yeah the opening was worded wrong

[BlackCapital]

I knew what you meant:)

It's a good idea, and although most people are ignorant about it, some things they or you might say could be a dead give away at what your hinting at. In which case they would point and say "COMMUNIST! AAAAAAGHHH" or "THATS SOCIALISM" and sprint the other direction.

If your using this approach I would suggest being careful with the terminology/lingo. But it is a method, one which I have sort of used before, into making people accept something they would not if they knew the label that went along with it.

[Glorious Union]

You cant mess up the Order of how you teach People or else you may teach them something else or they could mis understand it and take it in a bad direction.
I am teaching them communism, minus the name. Everything else is in the right order. Am I missing something? :confused:

[Brother No. 1]

No if you miss word the speech or the Teaching the Students may not get what you are talking about.

[Glorious Union]

I knew what you meant:)

It's a good idea, and although most people are ignorant about it, some things they or you might say could be a dead give away at what your hinting at. In which case they would point and say "COMMUNIST! AAAAAAGHHH" or "THATS SOCIALISM" and sprint the other direction.

Yeah, I've had people do that before.


If your using this approach I would suggest being careful with the terminology/lingo. But it is a method, one which I have sort of used before, into making people accept something they would not if they knew the label that went along with it.

Yes, that is what I am trying to do. Once they know enough about "my new idea" and completely agree with me then I will tell them that the whole thing was communism. :D

The only downside for me right now is that I feel horrible about claiming communism as my own idea and then being praised for it. I don't like plagerising. :(

[Glorious Union]

No if you miss word the speech or the Teaching the Students may not get what you are talking about.
We will see. Maybe I will make a new thread once I reveal that I was really teaching communism and tell of their reactions toward that. So far I am certain that they genuinely understand what I am talking about.

[Brother No. 1]

Why are you claiming communism as your own idea. Thuogh this Plan is good and will make me happier to live in a better more Socialist accepting society. But you must tell them not to praise you, no matter if you get the girls by this, and to tell them that Communism in not just one idea but a worldly idea Comrade.

[Glorious Union]

Why are you claiming communism as your own idea. Thuogh this Plan is good and will make me happier to live in a better more Socialist accepting society. But you must tell them not to praise you, no matter if you get the girls by this, and to tell them that Communism in not just one idea but a worldly idea Comrade.I claim it as my own idea because then it is a new idea to them, they beleive that it has never been made before and has never failed. That way, they don't reject it immediately. Its not for an ego boost or anything claiming it as my own idea, but think about it: what if I were to tell them that Marx came up with it? Or Lenin? They know the names of all the prominent communists in history.

[Plagueround]

Dont forget about the Revolution and the past Revolutionaries. We are hated here in America. PS: Its hard to teach Americas the true way of something if they have been taught the exact oppiste for over 60 years. It will be like teaching a pile of Rocks.

Teach them the ideas and then let them concern themselves with what to name it. I talk regularly with co-workers about internationalism, solidarity, the working class taking things into their own hands, ending the wage system, etc. and they all respond positively and are interested...and then when I tell them where they can find more, they usually aren't as afraid to look it up.

[Yazman]

I appreciate the sentiment of your post, Glorious Union, although I believe you have made a significant error in your ways.

A "repackaging" of sorts can be a good way to separate from the problems of the past and move forward with the ideas that we have always promoted. In some situations this can be useful.

However I think what you have proposed, when you claim we should promote a "pro-american" nationalistic element is not something that will help in any way.

[DancingLarry]

THis is a rather timely discussion. After all, isn't this question of terminology one of the matters the French New Anti_Capitalist Party is putting on its own plate right now?

I think it would be a mistake to focus too narrowly on simply the terms themselves, but it is extremely timely to reexamine our assumption about who and what the classes are in contemporary late capitalism, how they relate to each other and to production. Far too much I see the sincere leftists, communists, anarchists, etc still trapped in a 1917 or 1937 view of the relations, conditions, formations and expressions of classes. The result is an ideology that increasingly is only relevant in places like Nepal, which are few enough to begin with, and clearly represent class and industrial conditions that have long since been left behind by the overwhelming majority of the world.

It's in this context that I think the left has both the opportunity, and the duty, to reexamine its own assumptions, our own dogmas and preconceptions. If we can come forward with principles, facts and arguments that address the real social condisions, the actual lives of working people in this period of capital in crisis, we may be able to reboot the revolutionary left vision as a viable and substantial force for the 21st century. If we cling to hackneyed phrase-mongering, and more dangerously, to points that were once accurate analysis but no longer are, we'll soon find ourselves back on the outside looking in just at a world-historic moment when we should be playing a major role.

[Glorious Union]

I appreciate the sentiment of your post, Glorious Union, although I believe you have made a significant error in your ways.

A "repackaging" of sorts can be a good way to separate from the problems of the past and move forward with the ideas that we have always promoted. In some situations this can be useful.

However I think what you have proposed, when you claim we should promote a "pro-american" nationalistic element is not something that will help in any way.
Yes, I agree. Originally this thread was simple, but I typed too much and I was just rambling off ideas as they came to me without thinking about them. I also made the mistake of not reading the OP before posting it. It's completely worded wrong.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I've suggested various neologisms that might help, especially when emphasizing the replacement of circulable money with labour credits (http://www.revleft.com/vb/social-proletocracy-marx-t80882/index.html), the abolition of divisions of labour that are purely social and not functional/technical (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071012041748AABhnPz), and the end of the economic family as we've known it for thousands of years:

Social-abolitionism (best contrasted with social-statism in its various incarnations, from bourgeois "social democracy" to even revolutionary social-statism of the "anti-revisionists")

Social proletocracy/ergatocracy (merges social-abolitionism with proletocracy/ergatocracy, the neologism for the DOTP)

"Commonwealth-ism" (though this is limited to collective worker ownership and control, this harkening back to Marx's Gemeinwesen is leaps and miles better than "socialism" and the overly localized etymology behind the word "communism")

[Brother No. 1]

True but then again I talk to the younger masses and they dont have a same take on the idea.

[JohnnyC]

Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

This is completely against the principles of communism.

First of all, communism is an internationalist ideology that promotes solidarity of working class across bourgeois boundaries and if you change that, than you also change communism.You can try to make communism look more acceptable, but promoting "extreme patriotism" has nothing to do with communism, and is something communists should fight against

And second, by respecting and accepting current government and the bill of rights we respect and accept capitalism itself too.

You are practically saying that we should promote patriotic capitalism so people could become more acceptable to communism. :laugh:



I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American, and communism is (acording to our leaders) anti-American in nature.
And they are completely right.Workers have no country.

Here is what Engels has to say about the relation between "nations" and communism.

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and thereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.



1) Change the name and symbol of Communism in the USA to something more pro-American.

Personally, I quite like communist symbols, but as long as the theory stays the same, I would mind changing it a little.



2) Hide away or ignore the most obvious communistic ideas and do not make alegiances with communist nations.

If we ignore and hide "the most obvious communistic ideas" why should we even call ourselves communists?



3) Try not to entice a military uprising.

Yes, why should we do that when there are so many other ways to have a successful revolution.

I believe you have good intentions, Glorious Union, but the things you wrote are really irreconcilable with communism.

[Glorious Union]

This is completely against the principles of communism.

First of all, communism is an internationalist ideology that promotes solidarity of working class across bourgeois boundaries and if you change that, than you also change communism.You can try to make communism look more acceptable, but promoting "extreme patriotism" has nothing to do with communism, and is something communists should fight against

And second, by respecting and accepting current government and the bill of rights we respect and accept capitalism itself too.

You are practically saying that we should promote patriotic capitalism so people could become more acceptable to communism. :laugh:

----------------------------------------------------------
And they are completely right.Workers have no country.

Here is what Engels has to say about the relation between "nations" and communism.

The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and thereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.

---------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I quite like communist symbols, but as long as the theory stays the same, I would mind changing it a little.

--------------------------------------------------------------
If we ignore and hide "the most obvious communistic ideas" why should we even call ourselves communists?

-------------------------------------------------------
Yes, why should we do that when there are so many other ways to have a successful revolution.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I believe you have good intentions, Glorious Union, but the things you wrote are really irreconcilable with communism.
Forgive me, I only have had about four hours of sleep in the last 24 hours of time. Typing out the OP and it didn't go as planned, and the sleepyness makes me not think straight. So, on to clearing things up.

By "patriotism to America" I meant that we should adhere to the system so that we do not seem like rebels. Americans do not like rebels. Once there is enough support for communistic ideas then we can change the system legally, from the inside. I am not saying to promote capitalism, just don't bash it horribly, being that most people identify themselves with it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
By "anti-American" I meant that the leaders of the US make communism out to be a freedom killing opressive empire of evil, which it is not. Yes I know that workers have no country, and political borders are a bad thing, but you cannot change a nationalist people into an internationalist people overnight. The Americans are very proud of their nation, and that is one of the last things they would be willing to give up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I like the current communist symbols too. Perhaps they can be brought in slowly over time into American culture to identify with the rest of communism, but I think the people would be a bit distrought with the changing of their "good ol' stars and stripes" flag after having it and being proud of it for so long.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
We have to ignore most communistic principles at first, then as the people accept the ones we present we could show more and more of it untill the whole of the nation is embracing communism openly and without fear. It is a slow process to change the thoughts of an entire nation of people.
------------------------------------------------------------
I really hope that wasn't sarcasm, because there really are ways to have peaceful revolutions. I don't want it to come to bloodshed, people associate war and violence with evil intentions, so if the US army openly assaults this infant communsit party then the people will lose all trust in it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I hope this clears things up. If not, then I will repost in the mornig after a full 8 hours of sleep.

[kiki75]

What you're talking about is manipulation. I don't want to employ the tactics of "the enemy" to gain ground. That is an empty sort of victory, imo. And, it makes us no better than the ones we oppose.

Are we assuming that the American public is so stupid that it won't figure out it's being fed Communism?

[Yazman]

I don't oppose the idea of a "repackaging" as long as the ideas stay intact, or a new promotion of ideas.. but this all hinges on the fact that the ideas themselves stay intact and are not diminished or warped by the promotion or repackaging. This is a difficult thing to do, but can be quite useful if successful. I'm not convinced we need it though. Economic and political apathy seems to be the biggest problem with the people today rather than lingering Cold War mentality. Many youths of today simply lack any political ideas let alone Cold War mentality. Let it be said that the baby boomers harbouring this mentality still at least have some political ideas, even if they are ridiculous much of the time. I would argue that it is this that is the major problem rather than something more superficial like our image.

I do agree with the idea that we need to be culturally relevant. Internationalism means destroying bourgeois political constructs, and not the culture of the people. It means uniting the people politically and economically. We do need to remain culturally relevant if we are to do this and foster this mentality however.

However, GU, you are treading down a dubious path that often leads to reformism and not a repackaging. The path that states our current course is unsuitable and unworkable entirely, a path that eventually leads to the conclusion that core ideas are worthless and should be replaced. You really need to examine what you are thinking of. I am not here to destroy your ideas but here to guide where I can.. and I think that you really need to be careful because the path you are heading is one destructive to our cause rather than helpful to it.

[JohnnyC]

By "patriotism to America" I meant that we should adhere to the system so that we do not seem like rebels. Americans do not like rebels. Once there is enough support for communistic ideas then we can change the system legally, from the inside. I am not saying to promote capitalism, just don't bash it horribly, being that most people identify themselves with it.

Are you saying that by adhering to the capitalist system and not bashing capitalism we will gain support for communist ideas?


but you cannot change a nationalist people into an internationalist people overnight.

No we cant.But the only way is through consistent education and propaganda, not by accepting and supporting nationalism.



I really hope that wasn't sarcasm, because there really are ways to have peaceful revolutions. I don't want it to come to bloodshed, people associate war and violence with evil intentions, so if the US army openly assaults this infant communsit party then the people will lose all trust in it.

Please, tell me about some of them.I'm sure that the capitalist class wont give up on power peacefully...


Forgive me, I only have had about four hours of sleep in the last 24 hours of time. Typing out the OP and it didn't go as planned, and the sleepyness makes me not think straight. So, on to clearing things up.
No problem, comrade, we are all tired and sleepy sometimes... :)

[Glorious Union]

However, GU, you are treading down a dubious path that often leads to reformism and not a repackaging. The path that states our current course is unsuitable and unworkable entirely, a path that eventually leads to the conclusion that core ideas are worthless and should be replaced. You really need to examine what you are thinking of. I am not here to destroy your ideas but here to guide where I can.. and I think that you really need to be careful because the path you are heading is one destructive to our cause rather than helpful to it.
I understand what you are saying here. I don't want to destroy or change the ideas or aplication of theory involved in it, just to expose others to the ideas slowly, rather than just throwing it out there. I am not trying to change it at all, others might. I don't beleive that exposing others to communism through the repackaging of ideas will not hurt out cause, especially if they are already devoted nationalists.

[Glorious Union]

Are you saying that by adhering to the capitalist system and not bashing capitalism we will gain support for communist ideas?I have no idea what I was thinking when I wrote that, and I disagree with it too.


No we cant.But the only way is through consistent education and propaganda, not by accepting and supporting nationalism.Nationalism is one of the biggest obstacles we must overcome in converting America to communism. Let me give you a metaphor that will hopefully explain all that I am trying to say here.

Capitalism is a pyramid, its components such as nationalism and class distinctions are the bricks that made the pyramid. The current communist party is made up of one person. If he wanted to topple this pyramid, why would he start on the largest brick? Rather, he could start with the smaller ones and as people see his success they would join until there is enough help and support to remove the largest brick in the pyramid.

Do you get it now? I am saying that in order to topple capitalism in America you need to start on the small stuff and work your way up.



Please, tell me about some of them.I'm sure that the capitalist class wont give up on power peacefully...

I did not say any had happened before, I just said it was possible.



No problem, comrade, we are all tired and sleepy sometimes... :)
Speaking of which, I will leave for bed now. Good night comrades.

[ashaman1324]

ive wondered that before, if communism under another name would be more popular in america. i think it would be, because ive met people who agree with my politics and then are surprised to learn im socialist.
on a larger scale i think any major organization or party would be shot down as communist for being much farther to the left/ center than the democrats...

[Brother No. 1]

They like us yet hate us. America people like the idea of communsim , well some of them do, but when hearing the Word Communism or Communist they think that we are evil. Because they were told the CCCP and REDs were evil. all of which is a lie.

[Crux]

If you can't openly defend your ideas, maybe you're not defending the right ideas.
However the problem of the readyness of the masses has been adressed pretty exprtedly int the Transistionary program by Leo Trotsky.

[Yazman]

I understand the point that you are making. A recent example of this that I have seen was with the huge success that was the documentary Zeitgeist Addendum, which advocates a lot of the same ideas that we have been doing for ages. But it never once used communist, marxist, or anarchist labels.

It has attracted many, many people who would normally not even consider signing up to revleft, to its movement and forum. Something to think about.

**edit**
Note that I do not advocate abandoning our symbolism or labels but I do actually think we need to distance ourselves from some of the "old shit" from the Cold War that seems to cling to us still.

[punisa]

Due to the Red Scare and extreme anti-communist feelings in the United States I beleive that any form of Communism that attempts to form in that country should take on a different name from Communism or socialism. Many Americans are discomforted by the words communism, socialism, soviet, and proletariat (although few even know what 'proletariat' means). Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American, and communism is (acording to our leaders) anti-American in nature. But, because most Americans are ignorant to what Communism really is (a tactic to keep people from realising its benefits) then simply changing the name and a few of the more obvious policies should work for getting communists into political offices. Unless of course we try to overthrow them by force and, lets face it, the American military machine should not be challenged unless you want countless millions dead.

So, my final conclusion is this:
1) Change the name and symbol of Communism in the USA to something more pro-American.
2) Hide away or ignore the most obvious communistic ideas and do not make alegiances with communist nations.
3) Try not to entice a military uprising.

Any thoughts?

Something like that has already been tried by a guy who made two movies - Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist II

He uses many marxist ideas and overall leftist approach, but never calls himself/his movements socialist or communist, he even describes communism as just another failed -ism.

His approach is exactly what you suggested there and I believe his ideas were very welcomed by the public. But I'd never wanna be part of "such" a revolution. Betraying the red flag is not worthed. What's the worth in having a revolution by "tricking" people into it? Soon such system would collapse. You need to spread socialism by teaching and educating workers and masses, not by hiding it under the rug.

So people were brainwashed? SO what? Germans were heavily brainwashed by Hitler too, which doesn't mean they are all nazis today ! Don't underestimate the brains of your nation, I strongly believe that the american people could bring about the best socialist system in the world, I believe they have it in them, but they need someone to show them what is true and what is false.

[Brother No. 1]

So far they believe what ever the crap comes out of their Goverments mouth. But sooner or later they will join us I am sure of it.

[punisa]

I understand the point that you are making. A recent example of this that I have seen was with the huge success that was the documentary Zeitgeist Addendum, which advocates a lot of the same ideas that we have been doing for ages. But it never once used communist, marxist, or anarchist labels.

It has attracted many, many people who would normally not even consider signing up to revleft, to its movement and forum. Something to think about.

**edit**
Note that I do not advocate abandoning our symbolism or labels but I do actually think we need to distance ourselves from some of the "old shit" from the Cold War that seems to cling to us still.

Haha, I just wrote the same thing about Zeitgeist and then saw your post :lol:

As for the "old shit", how old is bible? People cling to it still, they cling rather firmly comrade :drool:
I don't think we should consider abandoning our symbols, they are the part of the overall left movement, like the red flag.

Yes Zeitgeist attracted many, but how? Making it cheesy n slick looking with cool "wow" effects. You think these followers will make fine revolutionaries? Well, if they take the movie as a door towards some real socialist knowledge, then yes, I encourage the Zeitgeist very much.
On the other hand no.

Let the symbolism live on: :star3::star::reda::hammersickle::blackA::castro:: che::marx::cubaflag::trotski:

[Josef Balin]

Something like that has already been tried by a guy who made two movies - Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist II

He uses many marxist ideas and overall leftist approach, but never calls himself/his movements socialist or communist, he even describes communism as just another failed -ism.

His approach is exactly what you suggested there and I believe his ideas were very welcomed by the public. But I'd never wanna be part of "such" a revolution. Betraying the red flag is not worthed. What's the worth in having a revolution by "tricking" people into it? Soon such system would collapse. You need to spread socialism by teaching and educating workers and masses, not by hiding it under the rug.

So people were brainwashed? SO what? Germans were heavily brainwashed by Hitler too, which doesn't mean they are all nazis today ! Don't underestimate the brains of your nation, I strongly believe that the american people could bring about the best socialist system in the world, I believe they have it in them, but they need someone to show them what is true and what is false.
Zeitgeist is libertarian capitalist propaganda. The guy who made it supports Ron Paul.

[Yazman]

Zeitgeist is libertarian capitalist propaganda. The guy who made it supports Ron Paul.

We are discussing Zeitgeist Addendum which is a scathing attack of capitalism in all forms. I do believe its intended target audience consists of capitalists and it is meant as an attempt at bringing them to our side without ringing their Cold Warrior alarm bells. In this I believe it does a fairly good job.

I can see how you would interpret Zeitgeist as that, but we are not discussing that. We are discussing the Addendum film.


Haha, I just wrote the same thing about Zeitgeist and then saw your post :lol:

As for the "old shit", how old is bible? People cling to it still, they cling rather firmly comrade :drool:
I don't think we should consider abandoning our symbols, they are the part of the overall left movement, like the red flag.

Yes Zeitgeist attracted many, but how? Making it cheesy n slick looking with cool "wow" effects. You think these followers will make fine revolutionaries? Well, if they take the movie as a door towards some real socialist knowledge, then yes, I encourage the Zeitgeist very much.
On the other hand no.

Let the symbolism live on: :star3::star::reda::hammersickle::blackA::castro:: che::marx::cubaflag::trotski:

:lol: that was awesome, we just posted the same things next to each other.

You're right about the bible, but I believe redstar had it spot on when he used to post about "Marxism without the crap."

While we discuss Zeitgeist I feel it is relevant to point out that I have my own criticism of it, namely its incorporation of the concept of spirituality and the sort of "gaian" aspect of it.

However I think one of the reasons it has been successful is that it did three things that I feel we as a movement would be greatly advised and benefit from doing:

-It distances itself from authoritarianism and statism. It advocates more of a decentralised society without a huge bureaucratic apparatus.
-It distances itself from monetary/financial economics, explicitly stating that they are negative in impact and to be avoided at all cost.
-For lack of a better term it advocates "Techno-Marxism" or a system built on technological progress and the usage of technology in order to augment and allow the sort of economic and political system it advocates.

Its difficult to say what I'm about to say without pissing a lot of people here off and without being labeled "sectarian" but when I mention "old shit" in particular I am referring to Leninism and its derivatives that have not only served to damage our credibility but also to distract and divide us. I think these statist and authoritarian ideas, especially Leninism, are things we need to distance ourselves from and move past.

Being an advocate of "human progress" or "technocracy" myself it particularly pisses me off when people, even communists and anarchists are unable to envision a society that operates without the usage of a monetary system. This is another aspect of the "old shit" that I describe that we need to move past and distance ourselves from. Monetary systems clearly lead to capitalism and oppression and this is something we need to avoid.

[punisa]

We are discussing Zeitgeist Addendum which is a scathing attack of capitalism in all forms. I do believe its intended target audience consists of capitalists and it is meant as an attempt at bringing them to our side without ringing their Cold Warrior alarm bells. In this I believe it does a fairly good job.

I can see how you would interpret Zeitgeist as that, but we are not discussing that. We are discussing the Addendum film.



:lol: that was awesome, we just posted the same things next to each other.

You're right about the bible, but I believe redstar had it spot on when he used to post about "Marxism without the crap."

While we discuss Zeitgeist I feel it is relevant to point out that I have my own criticism of it, namely its incorporation of the concept of spirituality and the sort of "gaian" aspect of it.

However I think one of the reasons it has been successful is that it did three things that I feel we as a movement would be greatly advised and benefit from doing:

-It distances itself from authoritarianism and statism. It advocates more of a decentralised society without a huge bureaucratic apparatus.
-It distances itself from monetary/financial economics, explicitly stating that they are negative in impact and to be avoided at all cost.
-For lack of a better term it advocates "Techno-Marxism" or a system built on technological progress and the usage of technology in order to augment and allow the sort of economic and political system it advocates.

Its difficult to say what I'm about to say without pissing a lot of people here off and without being labeled "sectarian" but when I mention "old shit" in particular I am referring to Leninism and its derivatives that have not only served to damage our credibility but also to distract and divide us. I think these statist and authoritarian ideas, especially Leninism, are things we need to distance ourselves from and move past.

Being an advocate of "human progress" or "technocracy" myself it particularly pisses me off when people, even communists and anarchists are unable to envision a society that operates without the usage of a monetary system. This is another aspect of the "old shit" that I describe that we need to move past and distance ourselves from. Monetary systems clearly lead to capitalism and oppression and this is something we need to avoid.

Yes, Zeitgeist Addendum (second movie) actually moved alot towards the leftist ideology. The author is a rather young chap, I believe that his ambitions and research got him introduced to marxism somewhere between making the two movies.
OR the first one was just a conspiracy parade so he gets people excited about the sequel where he gets a chance to express his true ideas.

Who knows, he already plans the third instalment, maybe then the main theme will be "hey folks, we actually need communism, yeah.." :lol:

Still its only a well done childish movie, but I don't believe it can hurt. As long as there is some form of LEFT ideology in there, I'm content. And as far as I know he made both movies publicly available and for download?
That's a good socialist practice as far as I'm concerned :)
I like to do the same thing, not movies, but I do record songs and publicly share them (my sig).

As for your comments on Marxist presentation friend, I see that you are not very fond of comrade Lenin. That's ok, you as a socialist have the right to align yourself to an idea you believe is the most correct. I won't go into details about Lenin here, many will agree or disagree, but despite this we still do have the same cause and in the end fight for replacing the capitalist model.

Let's talk about presentation of socialism, that is more interesting and I believe the key point of the topic, correct?
I share your concerns and totally understand you - you want something to be done in this lifetime, and who could blame you? I want it too.

Many well educated marxists will choose to spend their entire lives in debating and analysing Lenin, Marx etc. What is the results of their efforts? Not much, no tangible results we can grab on.

Socialist propaganda must be adopted to the 21st, we must not forget the importance of propaganda.
Yes, US citizens were brainwashed with red menance etc, but I believe (correct me if I'm wrong, I dont live in the US) that younger generations are not, especially the interenet generations (mostly born in the mid 80's).

Does this mean that socialism needs to be "cool"? No, but it needs to be associated with simple and straighforward terms and ideas.
If a person without any knowledge of the subject asks "what is the benefits of having socialism instead of capitalism"?
Don't bore him right away with the Bolshevik revolution and the means of production, people faced with new ideas must see them right away, more simple terms - the better.

Take Obama's campaign for example - "yes we can".
People: We can? WTF we can?
Obama: Shut up and vote for me, as for what we can... we'll deal with that once you make me a president, for now just repeat "yes we can", ok??
People: Ok boss, we'll repeat it over n over again, we're going drone for ya and we'll spread the disease ! Yupiee, yes we CAN ! (frenzic stare)
Obama: Cool, keep it up, just a few more days to go. (smiles contently)

There you have it, mission accomplished. And now if Obama turns evil... well, fuck. We tried.

Same should be made with socialism. We just need a propaganda machinery for rise to power AND honest comrades who will steer the will of the people towards the true socialist society.
The later is probably the most important, what sucess would we have if we somehow managed to turn society towards socialism and then have corrupted leadership?

Ofcourse, my "plan" to overthrow capitalism is oversimplified, but you get the main point.
So, yes - socialism needs to adopt in the way it presents itself to the people.
As to how, that's a big debate actually.
I would spare new members from some theoretic ramblings, but for example - I'd never give up singing the Internationale :thumbup1:

[MMIKEYJ]

Due to the Red Scare and extreme anti-communist feelings in the United States I beleive that any form of Communism that attempts to form in that country should take on a different name from Communism or socialism. Many Americans are discomforted by the words communism, socialism, soviet, and proletariat (although few even know what 'proletariat' means). Any communistic movement in America should also show extreme patriotism towards America in itselfto prove that they only mean for the well being of the people and the state. The current government should be respected and accepted, without ever questioning the constitution or bill of rights.

I know that communism will have a better chance at working in America if the people see it as pro-American, and communism is (acording to our leaders) anti-American in nature. But, because most Americans are ignorant to what Communism really is (a tactic to keep people from realising its benefits) then simply changing the name and a few of the more obvious policies should work for getting communists into political offices. Unless of course we try to overthrow them by force and, lets face it, the American military machine should not be challenged unless you want countless millions dead.

So, my final conclusion is this:
1) Change the name and symbol of Communism in the USA to something more pro-American.
2) Hide away or ignore the most obvious communistic ideas and do not make alegiances with communist nations.
3) Try not to entice a military uprising.

Any thoughts?
I think it already has a new name - Globalism.

IMO, it seems the globalists advocate world socialism or world communism under a kinder gentler banner of global unity.

Personally, Im not so sure if its not just fascism but then again im libertarian so I dont like any of it,.

[Crux]

I think it already has a new name - Globalism.

IMO, it seems the globalists advocate world socialism or world communism under a kinder gentler banner of global unity.

Personally, Im not so sure if its not just fascism but then again im libertarian so I dont like any of it,.
"Globalists"? What the fuck are you on about?
Hey, moderator, ban (or rather put him in Opposing Views) the libertoon.

[Yazman]

Yes, Zeitgeist Addendum (second movie) actually moved alot towards the leftist ideology. The author is a rather young chap, I believe that his ambitions and research got him introduced to marxism somewhere between making the two movies.
OR the first one was just a conspiracy parade so he gets people excited about the sequel where he gets a chance to express his true ideas.

Who knows, he already plans the third instalment, maybe then the main theme will be "hey folks, we actually need communism, yeah.." :lol:

Still its only a well done childish movie, but I don't believe it can hurt. As long as there is some form of LEFT ideology in there, I'm content. And as far as I know he made both movies publicly available and for download?
That's a good socialist practice as far as I'm concerned :)
I like to do the same thing, not movies, but I do record songs and publicly share them (my sig).

As for your comments on Marxist presentation friend, I see that you are not very fond of comrade Lenin. That's ok, you as a socialist have the right to align yourself to an idea you believe is the most correct. I won't go into details about Lenin here, many will agree or disagree, but despite this we still do have the same cause and in the end fight for replacing the capitalist model.

Let's talk about presentation of socialism, that is more interesting and I believe the key point of the topic, correct?
I share your concerns and totally understand you - you want something to be done in this lifetime, and who could blame you? I want it too.

Many well educated marxists will choose to spend their entire lives in debating and analysing Lenin, Marx etc. What is the results of their efforts? Not much, no tangible results we can grab on.

Socialist propaganda must be adopted to the 21st, we must not forget the importance of propaganda.
Yes, US citizens were brainwashed with red menance etc, but I believe (correct me if I'm wrong, I dont live in the US) that younger generations are not, especially the interenet generations (mostly born in the mid 80's).

Does this mean that socialism needs to be "cool"? No, but it needs to be associated with simple and straighforward terms and ideas.
If a person without any knowledge of the subject asks "what is the benefits of having socialism instead of capitalism"?
Don't bore him right away with the Bolshevik revolution and the means of production, people faced with new ideas must see them right away, more simple terms - the better.

Take Obama's campaign for example - "yes we can".
People: We can? WTF we can?
Obama: Shut up and vote for me, as for what we can... we'll deal with that once you make me a president, for now just repeat "yes we can", ok??
People: Ok boss, we'll repeat it over n over again, we're going drone for ya and we'll spread the disease ! Yupiee, yes we CAN ! (frenzic stare)
Obama: Cool, keep it up, just a few more days to go. (smiles contently)

There you have it, mission accomplished. And now if Obama turns evil... well, fuck. We tried.

Same should be made with socialism. We just need a propaganda machinery for rise to power AND honest comrades who will steer the will of the people towards the true socialist society.
The later is probably the most important, what sucess would we have if we somehow managed to turn society towards socialism and then have corrupted leadership?

Ofcourse, my "plan" to overthrow capitalism is oversimplified, but you get the main point.
So, yes - socialism needs to adopt in the way it presents itself to the people.
As to how, that's a big debate actually.
I would spare new members from some theoretic ramblings, but for example - I'd never give up singing the Internationale :thumbup1:

I agree with you that we need much better usage of propaganda and we need to make use of modern mediums. I also agree with you that we need to revise and update our message (a bit). But primarily we do not need to blast new learners with talk of the bolsheviks, etc but rather the basics of our ideas and relate them in a way that they can immediately begin to see.

We need to be concise. When they seek further knowledge, deliver it to them. I agree with you that we should keep our symbolism though - especially the red star.

I might also like to mention that I have a great deal of respect for those such as you who are able to see past and move beyond minor ideological differences in order to keep our movement going forward and maintain cohesiveness. Good job comrade, thanks for that!

[mikelepore]

because whenever they hear the words communism or socialism they stop listening.

There are far more serious problems than the name. The main problem is that leftists too often fail to address the question of what kind of system we should have, as contasted with the present system. More progress can be made if a discussion with fellow workers would go like this:

Socialist: Visualize what would happen if the workers elected the management in every industry, because there was no such thing as stockholders?

Friend: But without stockholders, where would the investment come from, to start the industry?

Socialist: The network of workers could allocate those resources out of the products of the society.

Friend: Who would get the dividends if there aren't any stockholders.

Socialist: Suppose the prices of goods were just their cost of production. No profit is extracted. As workers, and as consumers, we would enjoy a much larger share.

Friend: Then what would be the incentive to start a new industry?

Socialist: Since there would be no need to attract investors, no other incentive is needed except to realize that something is needed or wanted, as we now think of building new schools and libraries.

THAT, in my opinion, is what socialist communication should primarily consist of. It should be an introduction to the concepts of living in a new system.

But do we hear much of the left doing this today? Unfortunately, no. Instead the left is too preoccupied with making "demands" that bad effects go away, of the sort: "End the war, end imperialism, end racism, end poverty, eliminate the toxic waste dumps, stop the nuclear waste hazard."

No amount of demanding the end to bad things can ever impinge on the minds of the people the basic concepts about an old system versus a new system.

The principles of operation of the system have to spelled out explicitly, the same way an elementary school teacher explains gravity or how to multiply two numbers.

[Comrade Anarchist]

where i live communism is a curse word pretty much but i dont think we should have to change anything. I do think that we need to reach out and try to educate people (if they'll listen)

[dmcauliffe09]

I think some people lost sight of the original question (rather,discussion topic). Communism/Socialism/whatever should NOT go by a new name in the United States. Even if it did, Americans (who are, let's face it, not the most open-minded or socioeconomically aware people in the world...I'm American, by the way :D) would automatically associate the smallest socialist change with evil tyrannical communism. We need to spread the truth about what communism really is rather than soften the blow. It is not tyrannical, nor does it take away freedoms. But Americans think it does.

[Rangi]

Communism/Socialism would probably have negative connotations for the average person.

Some possible replacements:

1.) Share and share alike
2.)Xtreme Redistribution
3.) Candyflossism
4.) Girl Guides of America
5.) Spice Girls

Some may be taken I will double check and edit accordingly...

[SocialRealist]

What needs to be said is that America and the rest of the west are different than the world. Knowing this, we must act politically different.

Such as this, lately in America there was a bailout and there are bailouts going on... As we know it the peoples money was used, meaning that they should now have a bit of control in the many banks and companies that were bailed out.

As far as I knew, communism and socialism in general is not about a few little symbols or its name... It is about a commitment to create a society that is classless and stateless and the economy is controlled by the worker, this is communism of course. Where as socialism is about the period in general that shows a change in governments, from the Capitalist leadership onto the Proletarian leadership.

All of this though has nothing to deal with petty symbols or certain phrases... One we all get over that we will see a different and possibly better future than the one that faces us as we know it.

[MMIKEYJ]

"Globalists"? What the fuck are you on about?
Hey, moderator, ban (or rather put him in Opposing Views) the libertoon.
You never heard of globalism before?

[el_chavista]

Anyhow, the USA capitalists and their spokesmen accuse every enemy of them as being 'communist' .

[Brother No. 1]

Or a Terroist now.

[Glorious Union]

Yes, apparently the "communist threat" ended with the fall of the USSR, now all people care about is the Arab nations and Islamic people.

[Brother No. 1]

What about Che and Lenin. They suffered and died for their people. Lenin suffered of 4 strokes. Che suffered by dieing for what he belived in. Damn the CIA!