democratic communism

[nick_hassard]

is this something you guys see as possible, or does communism always have to be a dictatorship? And if its possible, then why haven't we seen it anywhere?

[Glorious Union]

Communism is about dictatorship of the proletariat, and, idealy, there would be no leaders because in a sense everyone is the leader of themselves. Therefor there would be no need for democracy as there would be nobody to vote for. Sure there would still be managment positions, as you always need somebody to hold things together, but those would be filled based on merit, and not popularity, and those managment positions would not have controll or dominating power over those below them.

[CHEtheLIBERATOR]

Wow this an ignorant thread but something I expect from a junior of sort's.The communism that you think is communism is state capitalism and as for communism being democratic....Communism will always be a dictatorship,a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.This is the new age of democracy.I also believe that this proleterian democracy has been ever completely formed,Lenn's russia was probably closest but still pretty far.To some it up I'll put it like this...

Communism must have at least close to a dictaorship of the proleteriat.

Communism can only be a PROLETERIAN DEMOCRACY and will never be or be formed through a BOURGEOISE DEMOCRACY that dictates the world to day.My end statement COMMUNISM MUST BE A DEMOCRACY OR IT ISN'T COMMUNISM

[Black Sheep]

Communism will always be a dictatorship,a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.This is the new age of democracy.Socialism, in the Marxist sense, is the dictatorship of the proletariat.Not communism.
Communism = stateless & classless society, in which a dictatorship is an oxymoron.

Dictatorships require a ruling class.

[Diagoras]

is this something you guys see as possible, or does communism always have to be a dictatorship? And if its possible, then why haven't we seen it anywhere?

The vast majority of the members on this site, and "communists" in general support some manner of a democratic society. The primary ideas behind communism are that of people having an equal say in the aspects of society that affect them. The workers in a workplace would decide on the details of operation democratically, rather than having a single boss, who often does little real work at all (yet is paid more than anyone else simply because he "owns" the place) dictating from above. The "employees" that actually do the labor know best concerning how to 'get things done' in their job. When administration is needed, administrators should be elected, and subject to the authority of the rest of the workers.

How society's major resources are allocated should also be determined in a democratic manner, rather than simply by the whims of a few people seeking profit. This leads to capitalists one day putting up a factory that may or may not wreak havoc on the environment, the next day putting hundreds of people out of work to hire near-slave labor in the Third World. This is irrational waste and negligence of peoples' needs.

Communism isn't about authoritarianism. Real communism (whether it is Marxist, anarchist, or otherwise) can ONLY be about the extension of democracy into a meaningful term, developing popular determination/control and equality into the social AND economic aspects of our lives, giving more people the resources and personal freedom they need to more fully enjoy their lives.

There are many reasons, depending upon who you ask, why we do not see wide scale democratic communism today. First, most of the dictatorships that call themselves "Communist" are just as bad as the violent governments that don't. They may or may not have actually supported democratic communist efforts in the past, but invariably, the ones we see today have been dictatorships for a long time, and only serve to confuse the ideas long developed and associated with democratic communism. There are, however, a number of examples of past periods where democratic communist (or anarchist communist) societies existed. I am an anarchist communist, so my favorite examples of such societies would include much of Spain during the Spanish civil war in the 1930s (before the fascists succeeded in militarily crushing the country and ruling over it until the 1970s), and in Ukraine after the Russian Revolution for a few years (before the Bolsheviks betrayed them). There is no singular reason why past democratic communist revolutions failed, and were either crushed by the capitalist governments militarily, or betrayed by authoritarians who masqueraded as communists. Some revolutions lacked firepower and were simply outgunned, others never had enough support from the start, and others simply occurred in a period with other circumstances that were not conducive to their success.That does not mean that we should not continue trying to stop exploitation of people by the rich and powerful, or the murder of people around the world by imperialist governments. In the not-so-distant past, plenty of people believed that monarchism was forever, and that the notion of people collectively determining their societies in ANY way was ridiculous/impossible, against human nature, and bound to fail. Some attempts have, and others have succeeded, and helped push human progress forward through the (imperfect) struggles. It is a process of fighting for equality and freedom, and one that we need to continue fighting, even if we can't expect to see it come about perfectly in our lifetimes.

[Diagoras]

Wow this an ignorant thread but something I expect from a junior of sort's.The communism that you think is communism is state capitalism and as for communism being democratic....Communism will always be a dictatorship,a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.This is the new age of democracy.I also believe that this proleterian democracy has been ever completely formed,Lenn's russia was probably closest but still pretty far.To some it up I'll put it like this...

Communism must have at least close to a dictaorship of the proleteriat.

Communism can only be a PROLETERIAN DEMOCRACY and will never be or be formed through a BOURGEOISE DEMOCRACY that dictates the world to day.My end statement COMMUNISM MUST BE A DEMOCRACY OR IT ISN'T COMMUNISM

This is the learning section. The OP is asking a question. Please do not call them ignorant. Also, using terms like "state capitalism", "proletarian democracy", "dictatorship of the proletariat", etc. with no supporting definitions around someone who is still trying to sort out the basics of what communism is/isn't probably muddles the issue more than anything. Shouting hurts my ears, and contrary to popular opinion, does not add further clarification :p.

[F9]

Wow this an ignorant thread but something I expect from a junior of sort's.The communism that you think is communism is state capitalism and as for communism being democratic....Communism will always be a dictatorship,a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.This is the new age of democracy.I also believe that this proleterian democracy has been ever completely formed,Lenn's russia was probably closest but still pretty far.To some it up I'll put it like this...

Communism must have at least close to a dictaorship of the proleteriat.

Communism can only be a PROLETERIAN DEMOCRACY and will never be or be formed through a BOURGEOISE DEMOCRACY that dictates the world to day.My end statement COMMUNISM MUST BE A DEMOCRACY OR IT ISN'T COMMUNISM

WTF is wrong with you?Beside the uter crap you write as a "respond" you attack and someone who came here with questions.This isnt acceptable here, and if you dont like it... you know what to do...Either be helpful, either fuck off from Learning!
Issued you with a Warning Point!:mad:

To the OP question, Communism is basically democracy, direct one.Democracy as per the freedom of all people, democracy as per that anyone has the right of his choice, democracy as per leaving a standard life with no discrimination etc etc things democracy means.
Communism never is Dictaroship, anyone says different dont knows shit about Communism, "Dictaroship" of the Proletariat a term invented by marx, wasnt intend to be used as the clear meaning of the word, but as a metamorph, just to point out that the proletarians will get in "power" but with violent means-revolution.Note though that the revolution will be violent not because Marxists want them, but because the state will defend their things with violence, which will end in counter violence from the communist part.As you can see dictaroship isnt meant to be as in the real word, but anw, dictatoship of the proletariat is attend to be for the Marxists only during the socialist stage, when Communism achivied there wont be nothing simillar, and is acceptable from all(real:rolleyes:) Communists this.Communism=/= Dictaroship at ANY part or thing, they are two completely diferent and oposite things.
Why this didnt got planted anywhere?Due to some revolutions in the past that got the "wrong way" but basically because capitalist leaders, which are obvious in power all those years, will def not let this happen, and crush this in moments.Thats why there isnt such thing.
I hope i answered your questions, and really dont pay attention to those that are here only to spread their shit, and attack you for nothing...

Fuserg9:star:

[Delirium]

Communism would be the most democratic system ever implemented. A goal of communism is to take ownership of capital from the elites and put it under control of workers. Democracy applied to economics.

All of the attempts to create a communist civilization so far have obviously failed. The reasons why are varied and complex. The most simple explanation that i have is that it is extremely difficult not to reproduce systems of hierarchy and exploitation while your fledgling socialist country is being assaulted militarily and economically by the most powerful capitalist states in the world.

[ZeroNowhere]

Communism will always be a dictatorship,a Dictatorship of the Proletariat.
Socialism is not the dictatorship of the proletariat. Unless you're referring to the socialist movement, in which case, that's pretty much the equivalent of saying, "Socialism will always be about revolution," which is fine. The dictatorship of the proletariat only takes place during revolution (aka. The 'expropriation of the expropriators'), as said expropriation necessarily involves the subjugation of the interests of one class to another. As the proletariat abolishes its status as salariat, it also abolishes its own class, and, of course, its own class rule.


Issued you with a Warning Point!
Eh, kinda harsh, unless this has been repeated after a verbal warning for the last time. But this is probably not the place to bring it up, so anyways.


"Dictaroship" of the Proletariat a term invented by marx, wasnt intend to be used as the clear meaning of the word, but as a metamorph, just to point out that the proletarians will get in "power" but with violent means-revolution.
Not quite. Also, you seem to be implying that revolution is necessarily (that is, by definition) violent; it's not, and Marx and Engels were quite clear that they knew this. Though yeah, Marx did use the term specifically for one purpose, that is, against the Blanquists and their concept of minority 'educational dictatorship'. In fact, he only generally used the term for this purpose. Though he did use the similar 'proletariat as ruling class', 'rule of the proletariat', etc, elsewhere.


As you can see dictaroship isnt meant to be as in the real word, but anw, dictatoship of the proletariat is attend to be for the Marxists only during the socialist stage, when Communism achivied there wont be nothing simillar, and is acceptable from all(real) Communists this.
Marx n'est pas une Marxiste?

[el_chavista]

"Communism is about dictatorship of the proletariat .."
"Communism must have at least close to a dictaorship of the proleteriat .. "

Wrong! Communism is a new democratic society to replace capitalism = the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Don´t be confused with a previous transitional government called the "dictatorship of the proletariat" which enable the workers to cope with the capitalist Mafia's reaction against the proletariat.

[CHEtheLIBERATOR]

Sorry to nick hazzard not trying to insult forgot this is learning section.Bad thing on part I was stupid

[Decolonize The Left]

is this something you guys see as possible, or does communism always have to be a dictatorship? And if its possible, then why haven't we seen it anywhere?

"Communism" is an economic theory which centers around the idea of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (DOP). The DOP is basically the idea that the proletariat (that is, the working class) controls the means of production (also known as "capital"). Should this be the case, the primary mechanism of exploitation under capitalism (profit) would be abolished as there would be no capitalist class to possess the means of production and exploit the working class.

Now, how would this funciton politically? That is, how would such an economic system be organized within a socio-political framework? Think about it - if the workers control the means of production, and therefore control the economy, and the workers are the majority, how would they make decisions? The only political framework capable of maintaining such a diverse, and de-centralized, economic system would be a democracy.

In short, communism can only exist as a democracy.

- August

[nick_hassard]

thank you all very much, this clarifies things alot. Yes, i just started learning about communism, so I dont understand it completely yet. Again thanks everyone, and to Chetheliberator, no hard feelings, I appreciate all the comments