Am I one of you?

[Desperado]

I am often called a communist (albeit by those who clearly know little on the subject), and would consider myself to be quite radically "left". I'm however uncertain as to whether I do indeed measure up to the grouping or would be considered more of a social-liberal, so I was hoping that some of the clearly knowledgeable members of this forum might tell me where they'd place me and why.

I am a strong adherent of direct democracy. The little I know of Marx's words on a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie seem true to me about the current representative system we have in the UK. I do not wish to abolish the representative system completely however. I support STV and major caps on party funding, as I feel the party system is strongly infiltrated by vested interests rather than those of the people.

I hold myself to be an internationalist. I generally disagree with separatism and the nation-state model and wish for a world under a single government. I also wish for this government to be devolved and decentralised however, so far as it is not in the area of taxation. I am completely opposed to the restriction of immigration and despise how they are used as a scapegoat for the failures of neo-liberalist policies. I oppose protectionism and see it as a feature of state-capitalism.

I oppose intellectual property, though am undecided on other forms. I do recognise and despise the monopoly that is held over resources but certain individuals, and strongly support forms of decentralising this power, for example the progressive taxation of them. I consider many of the basic requirements of life to be rights to which all humans should be entitled, and that this should be enforced by government and not left at the whim of the market and caprices of charity.

I despise religion, though believe that it should be tolerated by the state so far as it is not clearly brainwashing (I am totally opposed to religion in schools save education about religion in an observer context).

I'm opposed the idea of inheritance and see it as feudal. I support a progressive form of taxation, though am again uncertain as to whether it should be abolished completely.

I am uncertain as to whether complete equality of wealth should be pursued or is justified, but believe that there is most certainly an amount of inequality that should never be justified and avoided through taxation, a maximum wage and the like. I support redistribution of wealth, but am again undecided as to how far.

I see capitalism as raping our world resources in the name of growth and in the creed of consumerism, and despise the economic obsession with GDP growth rather than measurements of the populations' happiness.

I do not believe in the punishment of criminals for the sake of punishment: rehabilitation should be the purpose, although restrictions become necessary for the protection of the rest of society. I do not believe these restrictions should include disenfranchisement.

I see violence as a means of achieving a goal as sometimes necessary, though only if all peaceful methods have already been exhausted or are impossible. I do not yet believe this to be the case with the UKs social-economic system however.

[Zanthorus]

The key test of wether or not you are a communist is wether or not you support the replacement of the capitalist mode of production by the associated mode of production and wether or not you believe in class struggle as a means to this goal.

To expand on the whole "modes of production" thing in case you aren't familiar with our commie jargon:

Under the capitalist mode of production a socio-economic class known as capitalists owns large amounts of wealth and uses this wealth to buy production goods and labour-power. The labourer uses his labour-power to turn the production goods into a new product which has value added above the original value of it's constituent parts thanks to the added labour that went into it's production. The labourer then recieves a wage which is generally equal to the culturally accepted subsistence level for whatever particular job they were doing which the labourer uses to purchase goods to keep themselves alive and living comfortably. The capitalist sells the end product on for a profit thanks to the discrepancy between the wage payed to the worker and the actual value added to the product by the workers labour. This profit is then re-invested to allow the capitalist to accumulate even more wealth.

This differs from the slave mode of production which was based on the ownership of the labourers themselves (I'm a little fuzzy on what exactly feudalism was).

Under the associated mode of production the production goods are owned and allocated according to a plan decided upon by society. The surplus product of the workers labour is appropriated by themselves and society instead of going to a parasitic class of capitalists which uses the surplus to further it's own private ends.

[Durruti's Ghost]

What are your views on workers' control of the means of production?

You certainly sound far to the left of the current mainstream political consensus. However, because you are undecided on property rights, your views would probably just barely right of socialism and on the very left fringe of social-democracy (i.e., reformist capitalism with some socialistic qualities). Socialists believe that control of all productive property should be placed in the hands of those who use it, the workers, and furthermore that ownership of all productive property should be vested in either the individual groups of workers who use it or humanity as a whole (though those who think it should be vested in humanity as a whole, or "communists", sometimes regard those who support "sectional ownership" as supporters of a variant of capitalism). Unless you can get behind one of these ideas, you're not technically a socialist. Stick around, though, and hear the various arguments against the system of property rights that exists in capitalist society. Who knows? Given time, your "undecided" status might change.

[Desperado]

Thanks. You've given me a lot to think about. Other than Das Kapital (which I hope to start on this summer), are there any particular works you'd recommend I read?

[Durruti's Ghost]

Thanks. You've given me a lot to think about. Other than Das Kapital (which I hope to start on this summer), are there any particular works you'd recommend I read?

Well, if you have any questions about the basics of communist theory (i.e., the past and present modes of production, class divisions, etc.), you'll probably find the answers in Engels' The Principles of Communism. For an interesting take on how the modern class system was evolving near the turn of the 20th century, you might want to take a look at The New Middle Class by Anton Pannekoek (though the views in this work are not necessarily those of all communists, since they were developed after Marx and Engels' time). The Civil War in France is a good source on how Marx thought the political apparatus of a socialist society ought to be structured. Finally, you should study the various attempts to implement socialism (most importantly during the Russian Revolution and the Spanish Civil War) and come to your own conclusions about what went wrong.

[#FF0000]

Thanks. You've given me a lot to think about. Other than Das Kapital (which I hope to start on this summer), are there any particular works you'd recommend I read?

Not really a suggestion for something to read, but brendanmcooney on Youtube has some excellent videos that break down Das Kapital.

[28350]

aaghhh Das Kapital is not for beginners.

[ContrarianLemming]

Desperado, your views are indeed further left then most, but as my comrades have pointed out, the defining point of being a communist is whether or not you believe we should live in a stateless classless society and believe workers should control theres jobs etc.

If you believe in this, you are a communist, then you must decide what kind of communist you are exactly, there are two kinds (broadly) Marxism and Anarchism

I suggest you make a new thread asking what the differences are between Marxism and Anarchism. Be sure to give specific question too.

I also notice how my comrades are suggestioning you read books from the 19th centruy! I strongly suggest that instead of reading things like the communist manifesto and das kapital, that you, instead, read modern versions of these books. Das Kapital and "what is property" are shockingly dry and boring, you can get books that deal with the same subjects that were written in the last 20 years, they will be more relevant and easier to read :) Noam Chomsky is a good place to start, he's very clear, but most of his books dont deal wit communism, butrather, criticize the USA

[Rusty Shackleford]

Wage Labour and Capital.

[Chambered Word]

Wage Labour and Capital.

This, or Marx's Kapital for Beginners: http://www.revleft.com/vb/marx-39-s-t41211/index.html

I found the latter very informative while not very long. :thumbup1:

[Rusty Shackleford]

honestly, i really think wage labour and capital lays out the ground work for understanding captialism and is a great intro to Kaptial.

you should probably also read the Communist Manifesto because it has criticisms of other "socialist" movements of the time (feudal socialism) and all of that which arent really relevant but none the less good.

[Blake's Baby]

You sound something like a radical liberal. Some on Revleft would be using that as an insult, but I'm just using it as a description of your philosophy. You're not opposed to private property, though you want to limit social inequality, and seem to believe in the potential of a benign state.

The fundamental point about communism is property (and then the related questions of social classes, and the state). None of your positions on those make you a communist/socialist, or even particularly close to being a socialist. But if you're interested in learning...

I'd recommend 'The Manifesto' but not 'Capital'. Not as a starting point. If I was starting at the beginning I'd be looking at pamphlets and internet articles. But the Manifesto is pretty short and pithy. There's a lot of stuff packed into not many pages.

Good luck with your investigations.

[HEAD ICE]

Sorry to bump, but Paul Mattick has a lot of good stuff when it comes to Marxism and bourgeois economics:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/index.htm

This article is invaluable:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1983/bourgeois-economics/ch01.htm

[NGNM85]

I am often called a communist (albeit by those who clearly know little on the subject), and would consider myself to be quite radically "left". I'm however uncertain as to whether I do indeed measure up to the grouping or would be considered more of a social-liberal, so I was hoping that some of the clearly knowledgeable members of this forum might tell me where they'd place me and why.

I am a strong adherent of direct democracy. The little I know of Marx's words on a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie seem true to me about the current representative system we have in the UK. I do not wish to abolish the representative system completely however. I support STV and major caps on party funding, as I feel the party system is strongly infiltrated by vested interests rather than those of the people.

I hold myself to be an internationalist. I generally disagree with separatism and the nation-state model and wish for a world under a single government. I also wish for this government to be devolved and decentralised however, so far as it is not in the area of taxation. I am completely opposed to the restriction of immigration and despise how they are used as a scapegoat for the failures of neo-liberalist policies. I oppose protectionism and see it as a feature of state-capitalism.

I oppose intellectual property, though am undecided on other forms. I do recognise and despise the monopoly that is held over resources but certain individuals, and strongly support forms of decentralising this power, for example the progressive taxation of them. I consider many of the basic requirements of life to be rights to which all humans should be entitled, and that this should be enforced by government and not left at the whim of the market and caprices of charity.

I despise religion, though believe that it should be tolerated by the state so far as it is not clearly brainwashing (I am totally opposed to religion in schools save education about religion in an observer context).

I'm opposed the idea of inheritance and see it as feudal. I support a progressive form of taxation, though am again uncertain as to whether it should be abolished completely.

I am uncertain as to whether complete equality of wealth should be pursued or is justified, but believe that there is most certainly an amount of inequality that should never be justified and avoided through taxation, a maximum wage and the like. I support redistribution of wealth, but am again undecided as to how far.

I see capitalism as raping our world resources in the name of growth and in the creed of consumerism, and despise the economic obsession with GDP growth rather than measurements of the populations' happiness.

I do not believe in the punishment of criminals for the sake of punishment: rehabilitation should be the purpose, although restrictions become necessary for the protection of the rest of society. I do not believe these restrictions should include disenfranchisement.

I see violence as a means of achieving a goal as sometimes necessary, though only if all peaceful methods have already been exhausted or are impossible. I do not yet believe this to be the case with the UKs social-economic system however.

Perhaps you might find Anarchism to be a good fit for you. Here's a few good references for beginners;
An Anarchist FAQ
http://www.infoshop.org/page/AnAnarchistFAQ
Emma Goldman's; "Anarchism: What it Reallly Stands For"
http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/goldman/aando/anarchism.html
Noam Chomsky On Anarchism
http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/19961223.htm

Feel free to PM me if you have any questions, you could also check out the Anarchist RevLeft group.

[x359594]

Comrade Desperado, where do you stand on the class struggle?

This is what separates liberals from communists and socialists of whatever tendency in my view. The first sentence of the Preamble of the IWW reads, "The working class and the employing class have nothing in common." If you find yourself in agreement with that, then consider yourself a socialist.

[vampire squid]

it ALL depends on whether you answer this correctly: does one divide into two, or do two combine into one?