Implementation

[Nulono]

Do you think true Communism has ever actually been in practice?

[Dejavu]

If by true you mean : stateless , classless, no money, gift economy in place of markets on an industrial level, then no.

[Dejavu]

Some Native American tribes have practiced what some might consider very close to communism. But they were primitive by industrial and complex economic standards.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Ah, another one of these threads.


Do you think true Communism has ever actually been in practice?
Define "true communism".

[STJ]

No i dont.

[Black Dagger]

Do you think true Communism has ever actually been in practice?

Your custom title says you are an anarchist communist.

If that is true, then you must already know the answer to this question? No... and it's also not a matter of opinion.

[RGacky3]

Yeah, its been practiced, it was practiced in Anarchist spain, its pretty much being practiced in Chiapas, there are various native american tribes that practised it.

Communism is'nt some magical utopia, its simply a classless, stateless free and equal society, thats been around (in basic form) various times.

[Black Dagger]

Yeah, its been practiced, it was practiced in Anarchist spain, its pretty much being practiced in Chiapas, there are various native american tribes that practised it.

Not it wasn't, and no it isn't (there's no such thing as 'pretty much' a stateless classless society - the Zapatistas are not even communists!). The CNT-FAI never claimed to have praticed communism but that they were making steps towards this goal.

[RGacky3]

Not it wasn't, and no it isn't (there's no such thing as 'pretty much' a stateless classless society - the Zapatistas are not even communists!).

I say pretty much because maybe I missed something. The Zapatistas arn't communists, but their society is run on those principles. You don't have to claim to be communist to practice it.


The CNT-FAI never claimed to have praticed communism but that they were making steps towards this goal.

Yeah, well, were the CNT-FAI areas classless? I'd say so, were they under a state? nope. Was their society run on Communist principles? Yeah

If I'm missing something, like there WAS state power and class rule, then point it out and I'll gladly concede.

If they wern't communist what would you call their societies?

[Black Dagger]

I say pretty much because maybe I missed something. The Zapatistas arn't communists, but their society is run on those principles. You don't have to claim to be communist to practice it.Running a society on 'communist principals' is not the same as actually having a communist society. Yes the Zapatistas embrace some anarchistic approaches to social organisation... and then there is their hierarchal military authority.


If I'm missing something, like there WAS state power and class rule, then point it out and I'll gladly concede.There was a government, of which the CNT took ministries. There was also a wage system.

Doesn't sound like 'communism' to me, but they didn't pretend that it was.


If they wern't communist what would you call their societies?What they called it... collectivisation of industry, farms etc. As they also said libertarian communism was their goal, and they were striving towards this goal with an admirable spirit and dedication. A lot was achieved in that time but they never finished what they started, the mistakes of the CNT and ultimately the efforts of Franco and 'The Moscow Gang' saw to that.

I'm just not sure why you would make claims about their achievements which defy the claims made by the Spanish Anarchists themselves? Like i said, they never claimed to have established a communist society...

[RGacky3]

Ok, point taken. My point with those was that for something to be communist it does'nt need to be perfect, the same way you can call a society democratic even though its not purely democratic.


There was a government, of which the CNT took ministries. There was also a wage system.

Because the CNT involved itself in the formal govenrment does'nt mean the formal governmetn had control over CNT controlled areas. Also there was a wage system, in a way, but its nothing like Capitalist wage systems, industry was collectively managed, so were farms, sometimes money was even done away with.

Is it perfect communism? No, but its close enough for me, to where I can look at it as a model for communism, its definately not state socialism, or Capitalism.


and then there is their hierarchal military authority.

The military is purely voluntary, and not in the American sense. Also like I said, it does'tn have to be perfect in my opinion. The same way with Capitalist and Democratic societies, they don't have to be perfectly 100% Capitalstic or Perfectly Democratic. To be called such, or used as a model.

The point I'm trying to make is the idealization of the word communist, almost to a point of making it heavenly.

[Comrade Kaile]

Some Native American tribes have practiced what some might consider very close to communism. But they were primitive by industrial and complex economic standards.


There was primitive communism, but as we all know humanity decided to evolve into bourgeois d-bags.

The closest thing i think that communism has been to, in its transitory form is Cuba, but I can't really see them giving up the state anytime soon.

[Jack]

RGacky3, even a stateless, classless society does not nessacarily mean it is Communist.

[Black Dagger]

The point I'm trying to make is the idealization of the word communist, almost to a point of making it heavenly.

Yes i understood your point, but it doesn't make me an 'idealist' to argue that the Spanish Anarchists did not create a liberatian communist society (their goal) - it's just a statement of fact, supported by their own words. Your whole argument is pretty redundant IMO. Communism is communism, communism is not 'kind of communism' or 'half-communism', again nothing to do with idealism but fact. A wage system, government (regardless of who is in power), inequality of access, all of these are the anti-thesis of communism.

Of course the achievements of the Spanish Anarchists were great, and do provide real examples of organisation in an anarchist society - but that's it.


The closest thing i think that communism has been to, in its transitory form is Cuba, but I can't really see them giving up the state anytime soon.

What do you mean by this? There have been many so-called 'socialist' states in history - none have come close to being a transistional form - all have consolidated their power and become permanent party dictatorships. The closest thing to communism that has ever existed on a significant scale is anarchist Spain.

[RGacky3]

Of course the achievements of the Spanish Anarchists were great, and do provide real examples of organisation in an anarchist society - but that's it.

So could I call it an Anarchist society?

I was'nt calling you an idealist, I was pointing out the idolization of the word communist.

[Comrade Kaile]

what i mean Black Dagger is that cuba was the closest to the idea of equality. but as i said they arent likely to give up power, and i can be discredited since castro was influenced by the ussr, and it wasnt a workers revolution. and i didnt feel the need to refer to spain since itd alrady been brought up

[Black Dagger]

So could I call it an Anarchist society?

I wouldn't call it that, no. It was an anarchistic society - a society organised on anarchist principals as much as possible - but not anarchy because it was all the while a conscious process to build libertarian communism. They were working towards this goal even when facing the bombs of Franco and backstabbing from their supposed 'allies' but they did not finish. The collectivisation of field and industry were steps in this process - they were means not the ends - it was not anarchism but a transistion to it crafted by the spanish people as best they could under the circumstances and with libertarian communism in their hearts.



I was'nt calling you an idealist, I was pointing out the idolization of the word communist.

Oh ok, my apologies.

[RGacky3]

I wouldn't call it that, no. It was an anarchistic society - a society organised on anarchist principals as much as possible

Ok, well thats a matter of definition. In my opinion (obviously thats all it is), if its a society organized on anarchist principles as much as possible, then its an anarchist society.

[Nulono]

Ah, another one of these threads.


Define "true communism".

That's the point. Use your own definition.

[Pogue]

Anarchist Spain wasn't pure communism, because it'd be a mircale if anyone could reach that stage so quickly. I'd say it was very communistic and I'd cite it as an example of our ideas being put into practice and what that can produce. I don't think they would have believed they had completed the transition to communism because they believed they were participating and succeeding in a revolution which had as its ultimate aim libertarian communism. But of course anarchist revolutionary practice is modelled very similartly to what the end result would look like, in that we abolish the state and classes but are still working towards pure communism, as was seen in Spain.

[mykittyhasaboner]

That's the point. Use your own definition.
There is no personal definition for "true communism", only a materialist one; which states that communism is a classless, stateless society. This has never been achieved.

[RGacky3]

There is no personal definition for "true communism", only a materialist one; which states that communism is a classless, stateless society. This has never been achieved.

EVERY definition, ESPECIALLY societal ones, is subjective. Also, materialism is just one factor of societal analysis.

[Black Dagger]

Ok, well thats a matter of definition. In my opinion (obviously thats all it is), if its a society organized on anarchist principles as much as possible, then its an anarchist society.

Yes, i think that is technically true. I'm just making a distinction here between an 'anarchist society' and anarchism.