Your ideal communist state

[Stakhanov1415]

Put yourself in the leader's seat. If you were setting up the government, how would you do it, what would it be like.

This is mine, from another forum, I apologize if it's a bit general, since you folks know way more about the topic than the people in the other forum.

My ideal communist society.

Well, I suppose i’ll start at its inception. A revolution in America would not happen solely through force. A revolution of minds must happen first. People need to realize how the government, and capitalism fail to serve the majority. So, pressure could be exerted on the government. Obviously, the rich would resist, and so would the government, since they are very meshed. Some violent action would inevitably occur, but it would not be the main method of change, like it was in Cuba, for example.

Once the people are convinced, and the government becomes largely communist, change would occur. Economic laws would be established, and enforced (involving redistribution of wealth). Universal health care would be set up and steadily improved to fit the needs of the people. Other political parties would be abolished. I believe a one party system with internal differences in opinion (internal opposition if you will), since people would not see themselves a serving a party, but rather the people as a whole. Inevitably, internal factions will form. Measures should be taken to break up these factions (no matter their opinion), and isolate all members in power. Instead of making decisions based on the faction’s opinion, they’d make decisions based on their best judgement. All members would be elected for short terms by their region, a central committee of sorts used for decision making. The leader, president, general secretary, etc would also be elected by popular vote, not the electoral college.

An idea of communism is obviously equality. All would be equal. This requires nationwide gay marriage, equality for women, etc. Also, reproductive rights would be guaranteed. The government would be secular, completely. Religion would still be openly allowed, just to clarify. My party and I completely wish to preserve all existing freedoms. Including, free speech, free press, unlike existing ‘communist’ states.

Military funding would be cut in half (it is currents over 1 trillion), although I emphasize the need of a nation to defend itself. Military service would be voluntary, no extremely active recruits as we see today in schools, for example (disgusting practice).

People would be entitled to free college, schooling, healthcare, etc. Jobs would be provided to all in government industry, workers can choose jobs depending on availability and qualifications. They would get a small stipend. Prices on goods would be much lower. (In the USSR, for example a modest apartment cost only 5 dollars per month). Food and other necessities would be dirt cheap, and of a good quality. With several variations according to consumer taste. People could request production of new products, if popular demand exists. Public transportation would be provided that is cheap and efficient in all areas (suburbs, cities, outskirts, countryside).

We would strive to provide sufficient time off and shorter workdays. (In fact the Soviet Union almost achieve a 4 hour work day). Recreation and arts would be encouraged. Public recreation facilities would be plentiful at a low cost. Libraries, etc would be expanded. Natural Wonders would be preserved.

Lastly, people need to have pride in their nation. They need to be proud of the nation’s deed. America would continue to strive to help other nations. It citizens should be patriotic. Open immigration would be regulated. Incoming immigrants would need to know english, the countries laws, customs, and constitution (Assistance can be provided). Them must meet these qualifications in order to take part in social programs (Education, healthcare, etc.)

Thats my ideal society. Of course, it would have its problems that would need to be worked out, and it would take some time. Forgive my run-on sentances and errors. I hope I didn’t leave anything out or overly bore you.

[Armand Iskra]

I agree.

In fact, a communist society ought to be mobilizing, liberating, and equal not the stereotypical one being seen in the movies and the exaggerated feature being said in the books or any printed material. Communism, in fact requires not just intensification of technology, but also the mobilization of the people since the people themselves are ought to be the creators of the society, initiators of construction and of modernization as it lead forward towards the society being promised.

As for military power, aside from the regular armed forces, it should also includes an armed populace, a peoples militia defending rural areas and at the same time developers of the society a la kibbutz or like in China during the great leap forward, an armed worker.

Confessed to say, better to see a fusion of Chinese and Russian models, modernity through popular participation, a great leap forward towards the development of communism.

[Veg_Athei_Socialist]

My state would:

-Have Gay Marriage legal
-Have Abortion legal
-Have Prostitution legal
-Have Gambling legal
-Have Drugs/Hemp legal,
-Universalize Health-Care
-Nationalize the Banks
-Make Minimum-Wage Living-Wage
-Make Foreclosure Illegal, everyone has the right to housing no matter how much money you have
-Make college just as free as other education
-Increase public transportation
-Have no draft or military registration, joining should be optional
- Have Government completely secular
-Turn prisons into rehabilitation centers, not punishment centers/get rid of death penalty
-Have borders open/There should be no such thing as an illegal person
-Require all trade fair trade
-Distribute riches wealth to those not making a lot(sports players and other entertainers along with many others make way too much money than they deserve)
-Those wanting jobs should choose based on their abilities
-Increase public services such as libraries, radio, news, parks, etc.
-Free speech, free press, freedom of religion, etc.
- Have Humanitarian aid to other countries

[MarxSchmarx]

Put yourself in the leader's seat. If you were setting up the government, how would you do it, what would it be like.

This is mine, from another forum, I apologize if it's a bit general, since you folks know way more about the topic than the people in the other forum.

My ideal communist society.

Well, I suppose i’ll start at its inception. A revolution in America would not happen solely through force. A revolution of minds must happen first. People need to realize how the government, and capitalism fail to serve the majority. So, pressure could be exerted on the government. Obviously, the rich would resist, and so would the government, since they are very meshed. Some violent action would inevitably occur, but it would not be the main method of change, like it was in Cuba, for example.

Once the people are convinced, and the government becomes largely communist, change would occur. Economic laws would be established, and enforced (involving redistribution of wealth). Universal health care would be set up and steadily improved to fit the needs of the people. Other political parties would be abolished. I believe a one party system with internal differences in opinion (internal opposition if you will), since people would not see themselves a serving a party, but rather the people as a whole. Inevitably, internal factions will form. Measures should be taken to break up these factions (no matter their opinion), and isolate all members in power. Instead of making decisions based on the faction’s opinion, they’d make decisions based on their best judgement. All members would be elected for short terms by their region, a central committee of sorts used for decision making. The leader, president, general secretary, etc would also be elected by popular vote, not the electoral college.

An idea of communism is obviously equality. All would be equal. This requires nationwide gay marriage, equality for women, etc. Also, reproductive rights would be guaranteed. The government would be secular, completely. Religion would still be openly allowed, just to clarify. My party and I completely wish to preserve all existing freedoms. Including, free speech, free press, unlike existing ‘communist’ states.

Military funding would be cut in half (it is currents over 1 trillion), although I emphasize the need of a nation to defend itself. Military service would be voluntary, no extremely active recruits as we see today in schools, for example (disgusting practice).

People would be entitled to free college, schooling, healthcare, etc. Jobs would be provided to all in government industry, workers can choose jobs depending on availability and qualifications. They would get a small stipend. Prices on goods would be much lower. (In the USSR, for example a modest apartment cost only 5 dollars per month). Food and other necessities would be dirt cheap, and of a good quality. With several variations according to consumer taste. People could request production of new products, if popular demand exists. Public transportation would be provided that is cheap and efficient in all areas (suburbs, cities, outskirts, countryside).

We would strive to provide sufficient time off and shorter workdays. (In fact the Soviet Union almost achieve a 4 hour work day). Recreation and arts would be encouraged. Public recreation facilities would be plentiful at a low cost. Libraries, etc would be expanded. Natural Wonders would be preserved.

Lastly, people need to have pride in their nation. They need to be proud of the nation’s deed. America would continue to strive to help other nations. It citizens should be patriotic. Open immigration would be regulated. Incoming immigrants would need to know english, the countries laws, customs, and constitution (Assistance can be provided). Them must meet these qualifications in order to take part in social programs (Education, healthcare, etc.)

Thats my ideal society. Of course, it would have its problems that would need to be worked out, and it would take some time. Forgive my run-on sentances and errors. I hope I didn’t leave anything out or overly bore you.
http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee248/CBFN/FP5O1UQFSSIUG2PMEDIUM.jpg

Look, I know you mean well, but seriously, your xenophobia and authoritarianism are disgusting. What you are proposing will only entrench the capitalist state, rather than work to dismantle it.

And while it is idle speculation and therefore relatively benign, as best I can gather is what you are offering is a slightly more socialistic Sweden with one party state.

I am often loathe to recommend that comrades waste their time learning and studying the history of the serious left, but in your case, this is precisely the prescription.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Yeah, my ideal communist society would have left any notion of states or borders or patriotism in the dustbin of long ago history.

But to fantasize about what I would wish to see in a stateless, classless society:

- All necessary collective tasks (like services and the production of goods and essential chores like garbage collection) have been reduced to a minimum so that people only have to spend a few hours a week doing things they don't personally want to do.

- Communities are arranged and designed to allow privacy and socialization when each are desired. Personally I'd want to live in a campus-like community with outlying homes surrounding a common area with several different co-op restaurants/cafeterias a communal entertainment center, and communal services like laundry, childcare, and so on. But that's just me and I would hope that people would experiment with all sorts of different ways of organizing communities post-capitalism.

- Without the demands of daily work, being tied to your children when not working, and the daily upkeep that happens in capitalism (individually going out shopping, individually doing laundry and so on) I'd hope that all education (past maybe a couple of mandatory years for small children in order for them to learn basic math and how to read and write) was voluntary and ongoing. I'd hope that people would have access to expensive equipment for doing research on things that interest them (imagine having all the equipment and skills of the top medical or science schools at your diposal if you wanted) or perusing art and other interest. So anyone could sign up on a waiting list to use the top computer graphics equipment, or sound recording studios, or professional film equipment and so on.

Since Patrick Stewart has already been envoked, I'll just end by saying that this is an example of what I'd like to see for the future, (the speech at about 1:30) but without the stupid costumes or the (apparently voluntary, but still non-democratic) hierarchy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzqW0YaN2ho&feature=related:laugh::laugh:

[ChrisK]

No boarders or state
Libraries that give away books as far as the eye can see
Education that is voluntary and free
Health care that is their for all
Food for all
Homes for all
Communities created as the people living in them saw fit (my ideal one is the same as Higgins)
No substances for personal use will be banned
Machines to do mundane repetitive tasks in production
The freedom to do what thou will to grow as an individual
And while we're posting awesome videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q95kX_EP2Nk&feature=related

Starting around 1:36

[thomasludd]

I agree.


You agree? have you read the last part?

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

While this isn't complete, I have some ideas.

1. Before starting any Communist changes, reduce the government to a barebones level and take care of any national debt.

2. Begin by rebuilding the local governments first and by making them more democratic.

3. Create a new constitution that Promises Free Speech, Freedom of Press, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Assembly Freedom to Healthcare, Freedom to a Job.

4. Abolish Marriage from the state and instead leave Marriage to religious groups and other organizations. The only thing from the marriage that should be recognized by the gov. is a personalize contract between those in the marriage as long as it is fair and doesn't do anything to rob a person of their rights.

5. Begin constructing the Department of Welfare by organizing and cleaning out the subsidized industries and by selecting people who sympathize with Communism who have experience in their field to contribute to their field by helping to set it up and to align it.

6. Finish Aligning the Industry and begin hiring people who are not already working. And with the help of people in the insurance industry who have records showing that they actually cared for and fought for the people, form a new health care system that will be structured to avoid any form of rationing.

7. This is more of an exception, and it could be controversial, but create funding that can be used by the Farms and by the media: both groups that I would prefer to keep outside of the government for the simple fact that the Media should remain independent so that they can give authentic critique and view points. Farms should be left alone so that quarks within the gov don't hinder production, and farming should be encouraged heavily so that the large mega farms which produce subpar meat can be abolished.

8. Use the admin and teachers from the well performing schools to help rebuild the crap schools in the bigger cities and else where and make Parent Teacher Organizations stronger than what they are. Also, begin rebuilding ghetto areas and working to do reduce gang violence.

9. Legalize all drugs, prostitution and gambling to help reduce the gang violence and any other violence related and to ultimately reduce drug use especially among the youth.

10. Legalize abortion but at the same time, invest money into theoretical embryonic and fetal transplanting for the purpose of adoption and repair the adoption system that is in total shambles to help reduce the amount of abortions. Also, make birth control available to 10 year old and older since most of my friends, especially my gay friends had their first experience around 11.

11. Turn the federal government into more of a union similar to the European Union but still allow it to have more power so that the failure of the Articles of Confederation age aren't repeated.

12. Reduce the military to a 1/3 of what it is and within the constitution, make the military an option with there being no draft ever, and make it so that the military can only be used in self defense of the nation and of close allies less the allies warranted the attack. Immediate action which can only last for 90 days should be voted on by an elected panel of 100 people and long term war should be voted on by the people.

13. There should be 2 major voting periods a year and 4 minor to major voting periods besides and individual states should have the right to not agree to a war if their people feel that the war is unjustified.

14. Proclaim all forms of discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual orientation, race, religion, age and things of that sort within the government and the outer areas of Farming and the Media to being completely illegal.

15. Establish per year a national income based upon what the nation can afford and what the people want.

16. Establish the right to unlimited education and require each individual to start independently of their parents reputation but at the same time promising and keeping the promise that as long as they are willing to work, the government will provide the resources needed for them to accomplish their educational goals.

17. Ban all indoctrination within any government entity and encourage free thought, ideas and individualism within the schools.

Lol, I know it's a bit long, and there are many flaws, but it's a start :)

[Q]

My ideal communist state would be no state.

Also, this should be in Learning.

[robbo203]

Put yourself in the leader's seat. If you were setting up the government, how would you do it, what would it be like.

This is mine, from another forum, I apologize if it's a bit general, since you folks know way more about the topic than the people in the other forum.

My ideal communist society.

Well, I suppose i’ll start at its inception. A revolution in America would not happen solely through force. A revolution of minds must happen first. People need to realize how the government, and capitalism fail to serve the majority. So, pressure could be exerted on the government. Obviously, the rich would resist, and so would the government, since they are very meshed. Some violent action would inevitably occur, but it would not be the main method of change, like it was in Cuba, for example.

Once the people are convinced, and the government becomes largely communist, change would occur. Economic laws would be established, and enforced (involving redistribution of wealth). Universal health care would be set up and steadily improved to fit the needs of the people. Other political parties would be abolished. I believe a one party system with internal differences in opinion (internal opposition if you will), since people would not see themselves a serving a party, but rather the people as a whole. Inevitably, internal factions will form. Measures should be taken to break up these factions (no matter their opinion), and isolate all members in power. Instead of making decisions based on the faction’s opinion, they’d make decisions based on their best judgement. All members would be elected for short terms by their region, a central committee of sorts used for decision making. The leader, president, general secretary, etc would also be elected by popular vote, not the electoral college.

An idea of communism is obviously equality. All would be equal. This requires nationwide gay marriage, equality for women, etc. Also, reproductive rights would be guaranteed. The government would be secular, completely. Religion would still be openly allowed, just to clarify. My party and I completely wish to preserve all existing freedoms. Including, free speech, free press, unlike existing ‘communist’ states.

Military funding would be cut in half (it is currents over 1 trillion), although I emphasize the need of a nation to defend itself. Military service would be voluntary, no extremely active recruits as we see today in schools, for example (disgusting practice).

People would be entitled to free college, schooling, healthcare, etc. Jobs would be provided to all in government industry, workers can choose jobs depending on availability and qualifications. They would get a small stipend. Prices on goods would be much lower. (In the USSR, for example a modest apartment cost only 5 dollars per month). Food and other necessities would be dirt cheap, and of a good quality. With several variations according to consumer taste. People could request production of new products, if popular demand exists. Public transportation would be provided that is cheap and efficient in all areas (suburbs, cities, outskirts, countryside).

We would strive to provide sufficient time off and shorter workdays. (In fact the Soviet Union almost achieve a 4 hour work day). Recreation and arts would be encouraged. Public recreation facilities would be plentiful at a low cost. Libraries, etc would be expanded. Natural Wonders would be preserved.

Lastly, people need to have pride in their nation. They need to be proud of the nation’s deed. America would continue to strive to help other nations. It citizens should be patriotic. Open immigration would be regulated. Incoming immigrants would need to know english, the countries laws, customs, and constitution (Assistance can be provided). Them must meet these qualifications in order to take part in social programs (Education, healthcare, etc.)

Thats my ideal society. Of course, it would have its problems that would need to be worked out, and it would take some time. Forgive my run-on sentances and errors. I hope I didn’t leave anything out or overly bore you.


Sigh. There is no such thing as a "communist state". Its a contradiction in terms. The state is an instrumnent of class rule. Communism is a classless society. Therefore communism is a stateless society.

Its pretty simple when you think about it....

What you are talking about is simply state capitalism. Your vision of "communism" retains money and generalised wage labour (which is the hallmark of capitalist production). Not for nothing did Marx say wage labour presupposes capital and capital presupposes wage labour.

There is nothing ideal about your vision at all. Its a sloppy mish mash of incoherent thoughts, with one or two useful insights thrown in. You need to fundamentally rethink this whole vision

[Proletarian Ultra]

Arm the workers, disarm the bourgeoisie. Set the three-way alliance of workers, party cadres and the people's army loose on social problems and political education..

It's not very complicated; just difficult.

(And this by the way is proletarian dictatorship, not communism)

[AK]

Put yourself in the leader's seat. If you were setting up the government, how would you do it, what would it be like.
You mean a ruler's seat. So in that case, no. Your Marx even said that "The emancipation of the working class must be an act of the working class itself".


This is mine, from another forum, I apologize if it's a bit general, since you folks know way more about the topic than the people in the other forum.
The people in the other forum probably have a pretty warped definition of communism now...


My ideal communist society.
State, society? Make up your mind.


Well, I suppose i’ll start at its inception. A revolution in America would not happen solely through force. A revolution of minds must happen first. People need to realize how the government, and capitalism fail to serve the majority. So, pressure could be exerted on the government. Obviously, the rich would resist, and so would the government, since they are very meshed. Some violent action would inevitably occur, but it would not be the main method of change, like it was in Cuba, for example.
I agree here.


Once the people are convinced, and the government becomes largely communist, change would occur. Economic laws would be established, and enforced (involving redistribution of wealth). Universal health care would be set up and steadily improved to fit the needs of the people. Other political parties would be abolished. I believe a one party system with internal differences in opinion (internal opposition if you will), since people would not see themselves a serving a party, but rather the people as a whole. Inevitably, internal factions will form. Measures should be taken to break up these factions (no matter their opinion), and isolate all members in power. Instead of making decisions based on the faction’s opinion, they’d make decisions based on their best judgement. All members would be elected for short terms by their region, a central committee of sorts used for decision making. The leader, president, general secretary, etc would also be elected by popular vote, not the electoral college.
Ditch one oppressor and gain another?

Funny thing: the workers - when left to their own devices - are quick to form their own managerial and governmental institutions - workers' councils. They don't just make these as a temporary solution; they intend to govern society and manage workplaces through these councils (which incorporate direct democracy).


An idea of communism is obviously equality. All would be equal.
Saying it won't make it so... especially not with a state and ruling class.


This requires nationwide gay marriage, equality for women, etc. Also, reproductive rights would be guaranteed. The government would be secular, completely. Religion would still be openly allowed, just to clarify. My party and I completely wish to preserve all existing freedoms. Including, free speech, free press, unlike existing ‘communist’ states.
Nationwide? You haven't quite got the hang of this global, stateless, classless, moneyless society thing, have you?


Military funding would be cut in half (it is currents over 1 trillion), although I emphasize the need of a nation to defend itself. Military service would be voluntary, no extremely active recruits as we see today in schools, for example (disgusting practice).
Again with the statism and militarism. Again with the "nation".


People would be entitled to free college, schooling, healthcare, etc. Jobs would be provided to all in government industry, workers can choose jobs depending on availability and qualifications. They would get a small stipend. Prices on goods would be much lower. (In the USSR, for example a modest apartment cost only 5 dollars per month). [This bit's quite interesting... source?] Food and other necessities would be dirt cheap, and of a good quality. With several variations according to consumer taste. People could request production of new products, if popular demand exists. Public transportation would be provided that is cheap and efficient in all areas (suburbs, cities, outskirts, countryside).
State ownership? Nah, common ownership sounds much better... especially in a stateless society. And what's with this monetary system you keep speaking of?


We would strive to provide sufficient time off and shorter workdays. (In fact the Soviet Union almost achieve a 4 hour work day). Recreation and arts would be encouraged. Public recreation facilities would be plentiful at a low cost. Libraries, etc would be expanded. Natural Wonders would be preserved.
I've got nothing against you here.


Lastly, people need to have pride in their nation. They need to be proud of the nation’s deed. America would continue to strive to help other nations. It citizens should be patriotic. Open immigration would be regulated. Incoming immigrants would need to know english, the countries laws, customs, and constitution (Assistance can be provided). Them must meet these qualifications in order to take part in social programs (Education, healthcare, etc.)
Incoming immigrants would need to know English? This is meant to be a free society, you know that right? And nationalism is disgusting, foolish and reactionary.


Thats my ideal society. Of course, it would have its problems that would need to be worked out, and it would take some time.
Big problems. Such as the state. What's it doing in a communist society, anyway?


Forgive my run-on sentances and errors. I hope I didn’t leave anything out or overly bore you.
I'm pretty damned sure you mixed up the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (the Leninist version, anyway) with communism (the global stateless, classless, moneyless society).

[Zanthorus]

Sigh. There is no such thing as a "communist state". Its a contradiction in terms. The state is an instrumnent of class rule. Communism is a classless society. Therefore communism is a stateless society.

Its pretty simple when you think about it....

This is an oversimplification. The theory of the state that Marx developed in the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and On the Jewish Question was specifically a theory of the modern liberal state. In antiquity and feudalism the state and society where one and the same. Class distinctions where also political distinctions. Now the liberal crap about the rights of man and equality before the law did away with all that and class distinctions within "civil" society are primarily socio-economic and not political. The liberal state is an abstraction from real conditions (Which is why Hegel gets so utterly confused writing about it and sees it as an emanation of the Idea). It assumes a general interest when real society is torn apart by class distinctions and since it ignores these distinctions it's "general interest" turns about to really be the particular interests of the ruling class. When the proletariat asserts it's particular interest as the general interest in the form of the proletarian state and abolishes all classes a real general interest is established and the state dissolves itself back into the social body. The administration of society then becomes merely another aspect of social production and not the heavenly abstraction which it is in liberal capitalism.

[Blake's Baby]

If I was the 'leader' then my ideal 'communist state' would have the working class bursting into my office to put me on trial, expropriating me and my corrupt clique, and implementing socialism.

Ya-hay!

[Die Rote Fahne]

There will be "a little" violence?

Look at the violence against just protesters anywhere. Let alone a whole socio-economic movement. The rich aren't going to just sit there. Militias, the military, the police, reactionaries. They are all going to resist violently.

[Stakhanov1415]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. Unfortunately, I don't think human nature allows people to be completely free of government. It would be chaos without state control.

Also, I think communism within a nation must be achieved first. Then, that nation can encourage and assist struggles in other nations.

On immigration, I think people should respect the nation they are entering.

[ChrisK]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. Unfortunately, I don't think human nature allows people to be completely free of government. It would be chaos without state control.


Why would you believe human nature to be static?

[Stakhanov1415]

Why would you believe human nature to be static?

That really is a complicated question. I think to a certain extent it is static. I mean, it's extremely hard to remove greed. At least with a government in power, it's possible to reduce/limit it. If it was possible to create a new man, or truly re-educate him then I may bite at a stateless society. But even if you could change human nature, there would be a few bad seed that may be able to trick the population into believing them.

[Zanthorus]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. Unfortunately, I don't think human nature allows people to be completely free of government. It would be chaos without state control.

You seem to be confused about the meaning of the abolition of the state in communism. Let me try and explain as best I can. The best starting point is probably the following passage from Marx's Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right:


In democracy the state as particular is only particular, and as universal it is the real universal, i.e., it is nothing definite in distinction from the other content. The modem French have conceived it thus: In true democracy the political state disappears. This is correct inasmuch as qua political state, qua constitution it is no longer equivalent to the whole.

Marx had studied the french revolution and the political thought of Montesquieu and most importantly Jean-Jacques Rosseau. In Rosseau "democracy" is not, as it is today, the representative democracy of liberal capitalism. Rosseau calls this kind of government "elective aristocracy". "Democracy" is concieved in the same way as the ancient greeks as active participation in the administration of society by all citizens. In democracy as concieved by Marx and Rosseau the people as a whole are really sovereign and not merely sovereign in name only as in the representative capitalist state where the sovereignity of the masses is only respected at election times and disregarded at all other points. In this kind of democracy there is no longer any seperation between "political" and "civil" society as in the modern liberal state but rather society is an organic community which administrates itself. Since the distinction between "political" and "civil" society however is especially the presupposition of the modern liberal state then a democratic communist society is a society without the state.


Also, I think communism within a nation must be achieved first. Then, that nation can encourage and assist struggles in other nations.

Impossible. One of the key aspects of communism is the negation of the law of value and the law of value is specifically a characteristic of the world market. Any single state in the modern world must be part of the world market and subject to the law of value. Communism must be international or not at all.

[Bonobo1917]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. .[/QUOTE]

As long as that point - no state - is not reached, there is not yet communism.


Unfortunately, I don't think human nature allows people to be completely free of government. It would be chaos without state control..

ESPECIALLY because we should have no illusions about human nation, any government above us cannot be trusted. Give a gevernment power above us, and that power is destined to be abused against us


Also, I think communism within a nation must be achieved first. Then, that nation can encourage and assist struggles in other nations. .

Communism is a world-widew free association of free and equal people. Within one 'nation', it simply cannot be reached. We can go part of the way to liberation in one or several 'nations', but pressure from still capitalist nations will distort and block the road. So, before the whole world is not yet liberated, there is not yet communism.


On immigration, I think people should respect the nation they are entering.

What is this 'nation' thing that should be 'respected'? Nations are constructs in which bosses unite workers to build a unity that can compete with other national units, other nations. 'Nation' is, in essence, a capitalist thing that should not be 'respected'. Also, the rights of people to move wherever they want and speak any language they want are part of the essence of communism - the abolishing of classes, state, exploitation and oppression. Limitations on freedmom to move etcetera are, in essence, anti-communist, reactinary, just as are efforts to force people to speak any language as a precondition to live anywhere.

[Stakhanov1415]

Well, a direct democracy would be great but it also seems very inefficient and difficult to do.

How do you plan to establish world-wide communism? Again, it would be great but nearly impossible. I mean, there are so many different populations in a world, different cultures, languages, customs, etc. It would be quite an undertaking to get them all to agree let alone in the right time frame. Even then, there would be disagreements over religion, cultures, etc. I'm speak practicality. It's easier to build a house brick by brick rather than on large brick [where can I get a house-sized brick xD]. Each brick would be supporting the next brick.

[Stakhanov1415]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. .

As long as that point - no state - is not reached, there is not yet communism.



ESPECIALLY because we should have no illusions about human nation, any government above us cannot be trusted. Give a gevernment power above us, and that power is destined to be abused against us



Communism is a world-widew free association of free and equal people. Within one 'nation', it simply cannot be reached. We can go part of the way to liberation in one or several 'nations', but pressure from still capitalist nations will distort and block the road. So, before the whole world is not yet liberated, there is not yet communism.



What is this 'nation' thing that should be 'respected'? Nations are constructs in which bosses unite workers to build a unity that can compete with other national units, other nations. 'Nation' is, in essence, a capitalist thing that should not be 'respected'. Also, the rights of people to move wherever they want and speak any language they want are part of the essence of communism - the abolishing of classes, state, exploitation and oppression. Limitations on freedmom to move etcetera are, in essence, anti-communist, reactinary, just as are efforts to force people to speak any language as a precondition to live anywhere.[/QUOTE]

I realize I have been misusing the word 'communism' in the traditional sense. I suppose I'm referring more to socialism. On the immigration aspect, again. I put the measures (speaking the language, knowing laws, etc.) forward to discourage freeloading. People need to work towards the good of the people, not themselves. It works to expand the group mentality, teamwork, etc.

[Zanthorus]

Well, a direct democracy would be great but it also seems very inefficient and difficult to do.

Where did I necessarily say anything about direct democracy? I guess it could depend on your definition of "direct democracy", but the key part about the abolition of the state is the abolition of the division between political and civil society. In the Critique Marx specifically identifies the contradiction of representative government as follows:


There is a... formal contradiction. The deputies of civil society are a society which is not connected to its electors by any 'instruction' or commission. They have a formal authorization but as soon as this becomes real they cease to be authorized. They should be deputies but they are not.

Marx's proposal is to make representatives into "deputies" who act on the instruction of their electors. We could in some sense say that this is a form of "direct" democracy and in another sense not.

Also keep in mind that in communism there would be as short as possible a work week. This would lead to more free time and much greater opportunities for people to actively participate in political life.


How do you plan to establish world-wide communism? Again, it would be great but nearly impossible. I mean, there are so many different populations in a world, different cultures, languages, customs, etc. It would be quite an undertaking to get them all to agree let alone in the right time frame. Even then, there would be disagreements over religion, cultures, etc. I'm speak practicality. It's easier to build a house brick by brick rather than on large brick. Each brick would be supporting the next brick.

Capitalism is a world system as is the class distinction between capitalists and workers and the struggle between the two that forms the basis of the demand for communism. In previous revolutionary epochs such as 1917-1923 the revolutionary mood was not confined to one country but occured to a greater or lesser degree in large parts of the world.

As I said before, if world-wide communism is impossible then communism as such is impossible. Since the law of value operates within the world market and since no state can exist on it's own in the current international division of labour then any single state in the modern world will be a capitalist one. What is possible is to have single workers states existing. States which are based on proletarian democracy. These states would not be communist but they would serve as a mode of transition.

[robbo203]

This is an oversimplification. The theory of the state that Marx developed in the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right and On the Jewish Question was specifically a theory of the modern liberal state. In antiquity and feudalism the state and society where one and the same. Class distinctions where also political distinctions. Now the liberal crap about the rights of man and equality before the law did away with all that and class distinctions within "civil" society are primarily socio-economic and not political. The liberal state is an abstraction from real conditions (Which is why Hegel gets so utterly confused writing about it and sees it as an emanation of the Idea). It assumes a general interest when real society is torn apart by class distinctions and since it ignores these distinctions it's "general interest" turns about to really be the particular interests of the ruling class. When the proletariat asserts it's particular interest as the general interest in the form of the proletarian state and abolishes all classes a real general interest is established and the state dissolves itself back into the social body. The administration of society then becomes merely another aspect of social production and not the heavenly abstraction which it is in liberal capitalism.

Yes, fine, and ta for the nuanced infilling but whats your point exactly in saying what I said is an "oversimplification". All theoretical constructions without exception oversimplify and of necessity. The basic point I was trying to get across is that communism is a classless and stateless society. Your surely would not want to disagree with that, would you?

[Zanthorus]

Yes, fine, and ta for the nuanced infilling but whats your point exactly in saying what I said is an "oversimplification". All theoretical constructions without exception oversimplify and of necessity. The basic point I was trying to get across is that communism is a classless and stateless society. Your surely would not want to disagree with that, would you?

I don't take issue with the description of communism as stateless and classless. I take issue with the description of the state as merely "an instrument of class rule". If that is all the state is then to say that communism as a classless society is also stateless is a tautology almost not worth mentioning. If you want a short sharp definition of the state then I'd personally go for Engels from his discussion of the Iroquois Gens:


The state presupposes a special public power separated from the body of the people.

[robbo203]

I don't take issue with the description of communism as stateless and classless. I take issue with the description of the state as merely "an instrument of class rule". If that is all the state is then to say that communism as a classless society is also stateless is a tautology almost not worth mentioning. If you want a short sharp definition of the state then I'd personally go for Engels from his discussion of the Iroquois Gens:


Except, of course, that i didnt say the state is "merely" an instrument of class rule. I said the state is an instrument of class rule and I find it curious that you should want to conjure up some reason to criticise this

[Zanthorus]

Except, of course, that i didnt say the state is "merely" an instrument of class rule. I said the state is an instrument of class rule and I find it curious that you should want to conjure up some reason to criticise this

Here's what you originally said:


There is no such thing as a "communist state". Its a contradiction in terms. The state is an instrumnent of class rule. Communism is a classless society. Therefore communism is a stateless society.

Now I took issue with this because it brings the whole thing down to some empty tautology whereby stateless=classless. This is something that bothers me about a lot of Marxist discussion in the state. We talk about the class rule aspect of it without noting how Marx came to that conclusion.

[Stakhanov1415]

I guess I was laying out my ideal "proletarian democracy". Dammit, you guys are so particular with your terminology. I need a communist dictionary.

[Zanthorus]

I guess I was laying out my ideal "proletarian democracy". Dammit, you guys are so particular with your terminology. I need a communist dictionary.

lol, there is actually a glossary of terms on the Marxists Internet Archive which you might find useful:

http://www.marxists.org/glossary/index.htm

:)

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

I just came upon a major flaw with my system and a fair question to ask: How do you completely destroy the state and how specifically could it be done with the plan that I listed? Overall, I don't think that it is impossible to abolish the state, but in order to do it, you need to get the full participation of the majority at least. In other words, the people who like to just sit back and watch the world go round and round will need to become the people that help to make it go round and round... Now ultimately, I do not think that most people are lazy, but without doubt, you are going to have a few "leechers." So how do you deal with them in a humane manner?

[Stakhanov1415]

I just came upon a major flaw with my system and a fair question to ask: How do you completely destroy the state and how specifically could it be done with the plan that I listed? Overall, I don't think that it is impossible to abolish the state, but in order to do it, you need to get the full participation of the majority at least. In other words, the people who like to just sit back and watch the world go round and round will need to become the people that help to make it go round and round... Now ultimately, I do not think that most people are lazy, but without doubt, you are going to have a few "leechers." So how do you deal with them in a humane manner?

Well. If they're physically and mentally able to work, then they should, or not be able to participate in services and such. Thats the best way I could think of...

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

Well. If they're physically and mentally able to work, then they should, or not be able to participate in services and such. Thats the best way I could think of...


That is what I was thinking, but there are a lot of people who would oppose just simply throwing the lazy on the streets and the idea of work camps don't sit well with people. It is amazing how many capitalists say that it is cruel to force able body people to work yet when you look at capitalism, the average person who quits working eventually finds themselves on the street, so what's the difference? Anyways, the only time that a person shouldn't have to work IMO, is when they're injured, or if they're older, say around 65 or if a person makes a contribution so large that it advances society greatly, then I think that that person who made that contribution should be allowed to not have to work if they choose to.

[Stakhanov1415]

That is what I was thinking, but there are a lot of people who would oppose just simply throwing the lazy on the streets and the idea of work camps don't sit well with people. It is amazing how many capitalists say that it is cruel to force able body people to work yet when you look at capitalism, the average person who quits working eventually finds themselves on the street, so what's the difference? Anyways, the only time that a person shouldn't have to work IMO, is when they're injured, or if they're older, say around 65 or if a person makes a contribution so large that it advances society greatly, then I think that that person who made that contribution should be allowed to not have to work if they choose to.
I agree. I think throwing them out is justified, they shouldn't leech off the people.

[AK]

I realize that traditional communism requires abolition of the state at a certain point. Unfortunately, I don't think human nature allows people to be completely free of government. It would be chaos without state control.
You confuse government with the state. It's one of the greatest lies that anyone could have ever said: government requires a state.


Also, I think communism within a nation must be achieved first. Then, that nation can encourage and assist struggles in other nations.
*facepalm*


On immigration, I think people should respect the nation they are entering.
A nation is a group of people. A country is a certain geographic area.

[ChrisK]

That really is a complicated question. I think to a certain extent it is static. I mean, it's extremely hard to remove greed. At least with a government in power, it's possible to reduce/limit it. If it was possible to create a new man, or truly re-educate him then I may bite at a stateless society. But even if you could change human nature, there would be a few bad seed that may be able to trick the population into believing them.

Why would their be bad seeds? In a communistic society their would be no power to gain?

Further, if greed is part of human nature how to you explain potlatch? In many tribal societies (especially in America's Pacific Northwest) they set of celebrations known as the potlatch. During this celebration, the hosting chief gives away everything in his possesion and is loved for it. Where is the greed there?

[Jimmie Higgins]

Communities created as the people living in them saw fit (my ideal one is the same as Higgins)Let's be neighbors in 2045.


No substances for personal use will be bannedDefinately neighbors after the revolution:lol:

[ChrisK]

Let's be neighbors in 2045.

Definately neighbors after the revolution:lol:

We could be more than neighbors....:wub:

[Jimmie Higgins]

We could be more than neighbors....:wub::lol:

2045 = post-revolution free love commune for middle aged revlefter's!

[ChrisK]

:lol:

2045 = post-revolution free love commune for middle aged revlefter's!

Hell yeah!

[thomasludd]

^^ Hey you guys are already planning details of your post-revolution abode! is there supposed to be some process there? :lol:

[Raúl Duke]

Ideally, at the minimum, I want the revolutionary society to have at least:
-Participatory Democracy via community assemblies
-Workplace Democracy (Micro-level Workers' control of the economy; workplaces "belong" to the communes/communities)

[redSHARP]

no borders would be a start, occupation of all factories and means of production would be a must. the police force would be reformed so it is directly attached to the people. the army would be reduced but not eliminated (zombies or UFO invasion might not be far behind!!!:laugh:). money would still be used and the workers would control all forms of business. all local decisions would be voted on, and each community would work together in order to trade resources or commodities...thats all i got for now.

[Wolf Larson]

Put yourself in the leader's seat. If you were setting up the government, how would you do it, what would it be like.



I don't want any leaders or 'vanguard' political party setting up a new ruling class :) So....I'd skip the whole centralized state period and skip straight to anarchism all dependent on a class conscious mass movement under direct democracy free of centralized/ consolidated authority.

After all, what is concentrated wealth if not consolidated authority? Why abolish one for the other?

[NGNM85]

N/A.

[People's War]

After seizing power by a proletarian revolution, the following steps would be implemented:

- Nationalize all manufacturing and begin massive reconstruction of British industry. Nationalise banks
- Massive protection for British industry.
- Collectivise all agriculture into either state farms or collectively owned farms.
- 96% top rate on income tax.
- State atheism
- Compulsory and free education up to 18, with optional free education up to 21. Abolition of private education.
- Abolition of prescription charges and nationalisation of all private services in the NHS. Abolition of private healthcare
- Decentralised assemblies for different regions
- Death penalty for murder, serial rape, treason etc.
- Capitalist roaders will be purged from the party.
- Marihuana will be legalised and taxed.
- Full equality for all gay/transgendered people.
- Doubling of state pension, raising retirement age to 75.

Will write more if i think of anything more.

[Paulappaul]

How you could derive fascism - a state-run economy - from Marxism, I have no idea People's War.

[soyonstout]

How you could derive fascism - a state-run economy - from Marxism, I have no idea People's War.

I think he gets it from his avatar :D


"Will it be possible for this revolution to take place in one country alone? No. By creating the world market, big industry has already brought all the peoples of the Earth, and especially the civilized peoples, into such close relation with one another that none is independent of what happens to the others."


What happens when a 'socialist' country has to trade, make treaties, import, export, and make production decisions based on export and interaction with the world capitalist market? It is not socialist because all its policies are determined by the exact same mechanism that determines the policies of the "capitalist" countries.


-soyons tout

[F9]

Moved



Lastly, people need to have pride in their nation. They need to be proud of the nation’s deed. America would continue to strive to help other nations. It citizens should be patriotic. Open immigration would be regulated. Incoming immigrants would need to know english, the countries laws, customs, and constitution (Assistance can be provided). Them must meet these qualifications in order to take part in social programs (Education, healthcare, etc.)

Oh God:rolleyes:

The ideal communist state, for everyone, not just me, its the one which refuses itself and has no state.

[Nikolay]

My ideal Communist state is no state.:thumbup1:

[Subcomandante Marcos.]

Can you say

OXYMORON

[People's War]

How you could derive fascism - a state-run economy - from Marxism, I have no idea People's War.

Nice misuse of the word fascism there.

[Paulappaul]

Nice misuse of the word fascism there.


Hmm? Did not Nazi Germany have a planned economy? Did it not have heavy state intervention in the factory? Did it not have huge public works projects like the one prophesied by your "Communist State"?

The fact of the matter is, your Communist state, has nothing to Marxism, let alone Socialism. Marx the person who said "the existence of the state is inseparable with the existence of Slavery" would not agree with your proposed Communist State, which places the means of production in an all powerful state, much like the Soviet Union, rather then in the hands of Communes, Workers' Councils, Industrial Unions or any other form of Workers' Selff Management.

Communism is freedom from exploitation. Your State is simply substituting one form of exploitation for another.

[AK]

- Massive protection for British industry.
What's so great about British industry that makes it superior to all others?

- 96% top rate on income tax.
Wait... what? Are you saying that some people would only get 4% of their income or am I missing something important here?

- State atheism
Or you could call it "imposition of thought crime". It's up to you, really.

- Capitalist roaders will be purged from the party.
Maybe you should ask yourself how they got in their in the first place :rolleyes:

- Marihuana will be legalised and taxed.
Legalised :thumbup1: Taxed :confused:

- Doubling of state pension, raising retirement age to 75.
You expect people to work until 75?

[People's War]

What's so great about British industry that makes it superior to all others?

Wait... what? Are you saying that some people would only get 4% of their income or am I missing something important here?

Or you could call it "imposition of thought crime". It's up to you, really.

Maybe you should ask yourself how they got in their in the first place :rolleyes:

Legalised :thumbup1: Taxed :confused:

You expect people to work until 75?

1. Nothing. It's to prevent places where workers are treated like slaves from putting British workers out of jobs.

2. Massive redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. If you don't agree with that, I don't know why you are here.

3. Thanks for that little cliche.

4. Because people within the party want to destroy communism. As happened in both the USSR and China.

5. Why not?

6. Yes, for a state pension. This would be gradually phased in as life expectancy increases.

[People's War]

Hmm? Did not Nazi Germany have a planned economy? Did it not have heavy state intervention in the factory? Did it not have huge public works projects like the one prophesied by your "Communist State"?

The fact of the matter is, your Communist state, has nothing to Marxism, let alone Socialism. Marx the person who said "the existence of the state is inseparable with the existence of Slavery" would not agree with your proposed Communist State, which places the means of production in an all powerful state, much like the Soviet Union, rather then in the hands of Communes, Workers' Councils, Industrial Unions or any other form of Workers' Selff Management.

Communism is freedom from exploitation. Your State is simply substituting one form of exploitation for another.

Public works are not fascist in of themselves and for you to claim otherwise is simply ignorant. And no, Nazi Germany was a classical example of monopoly capitalism with huge cartels being allowed to function as long as they aided Hitler's war economy.

Obviously I believe in the gradual withering away of the state, so I don't see why you are assuming otherwise.

[bricolage]

1. Nothing. It's to prevent places where workers are treated like slaves from putting British workers out of jobs.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/17/article-0-04FAF92D000005DC-125_468x286.jpg

[People's War]

I'm deeply sorry I care about the British working class. Obviously that makes me a fascist.

[F9]

I'm deeply sorry I care about the British working class. Obviously that makes me a fascist.


1. Nothing. It's to prevent places where workers are treated like slaves from putting British workers out of jobs.

It only puts british people out of jobs?What about the immigrants, foreigners etc?Should british people first get the jobs, and then the foreigners?Are the british people "better" or deserve it more than the immigrants?

[People's War]

Did I say that? No.

I don't know why you all think fair trade is fascist.

[Paulappaul]

Obviously I believe in the gradual withering away of the state, so I don't see why you are assuming otherwise.

I'm not talking about the Withering away of the State, I'm talking about Socialism. The only thing which requires a State run economy is State Capitalism, which is aspired by Fascists and practised by Stalin and the later Soviets.

[AK]

1. Nothing. It's to prevent places where workers are treated like slaves from putting British workers out of jobs.
"British jobs for British workers!"
You sound like a nationalist. Last I recalled, Marxists were supposed to be internationalists.


2. Massive redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor. If you don't agree with that, I don't know why you are here.
Why are there rich people in your "socialist" society? They should have been expropriated during revolution. And you are a communist, so why don't you support the abolition of the monetary system?


3. Thanks for that little cliche.
Maybe you should have a secular state, instead of an atheist one?


4. Because people within the party want to destroy communism. As happened in both the USSR and China.
And they can only infiltrate, sabotage and destroy the system if great power is given to them - as would be the case if the party were at the top of the social hierarchy.

That's the beauty of anarchism; it can only be replaced with a capitalist system by military invasion and occupation or if the vast majority of workers want a capitalist system, for some reason, and decide to destroy all their establishments and institutions in favour of class-based society - not very likely.

But a party dictatorship (like the one you're implying, as capitalists infiltrating the party would only be a concern if the party and it's members made up the government) would easily be able to be subjugated; it requires capitalist sentiment in the mind of the majority of just the top ranks of the party and then the whole country can go to shit.


5. Why not?
I think it is you that has to provide justification for why you are taxing something.


6. Yes, for a state pension. This would be gradually phased in as life expectancy increases.
75 years? People just can't work that long.

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

75 years of expected work is extreme. While 50-60 would be impossible to support at the moment, I think that 65-68 is idea. And also, state atheism without doubt will threaten religious freedom, because if the state is suppose to be atheistic, then you cannot help but to see kids be mocked and attacked in schools just because their teachers are suppose to be atheistic in thought. Ultimately, I don't think any government or nation should have a view on religion. I believe in the full right of religion up until a religious group begins murdering and physically attacking people. Now as to the line of mental attacking, that is really hard to say, because I don't support hate speech laws simply because one could argue for an eternity what the justifiable spot should be for a boundary.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I literally did a spit-take and spat coffee all over my computer screen when I read People's War's list of directives.

Where was that "Which RevLefter would make the most frightening dictator" thread again?:lol:

I disagree with the characterization of People's War's ideal society as fascism... it sounds more like social-democracy at the barrel of a gun.

[Dimentio]

http://www.thevenusproject.com

[Zanthorus]

I disagree with the characterization of People's War's ideal society as fascism... it sounds more like social-democracy at the barrel of a gun.

Funnily enough that is basically how I would characterise Stalinism generally.

[AK]

Funnily enough that is basically how I would characterise Stalinism generally.
Except without that whole "democracy" lark.

[thatwhichisnt]

How does the state (define as the legal monopoly of force over a given area) differ from a private land owner? The state, no matter if it is under the guise of capitalism or communism, is by very definition destructive to the individual.

My ideal "state" would be one that could consist of individual communes, or cities, etc. Each one would differ in the way they respected property rights, abortion, etc, like modern states (in America) do. Each individual is free to settle where they wish, and if they do not like it, leave at any time. If some towns wish to be pro-capitalist, then fine, as long as they do not interfere with others which may be more communistic.

I believe that would be a true anarchist state. The definition of anarchism is without a ruler, so let each individual chose which economic system to live under, rather then being forced to chose only one certain way.

[TheFutureOfThePublic]

I agree that people should not be labeled illegal but if you freely opened borders, countries would become over crowded and things would obviously get out of hand.There would need to be a cap on it eventually

[thatwhichisnt]

I agree that people should not be labeled illegal but if you freely opened borders, countries would become over crowded and things would obviously get out of hand.There would need to be a cap on it eventually
If one of the main tenets of socialism ( for the sake of length I will just use this word to mean anti-capitalist) is the belief that the means of production (land being one of them) belongs to the people, then what gives the state the power to control it and regulate it?

[TheFutureOfThePublic]

I would definetley try and make tradition a personal thing rather than something that people have to endure wether they like it or not.It would save alot of people getting offended by different traditions if they kept them within there own homes.If people want to celebrate certain things then they obviously can but there would be no nationwide celebration with decorations filling the streets.What is the need for traditions anyway ? It was tradition for blacks to sit at the back of the bus but thankfully people got over that.Why not get over the rest of the crap

[thatwhichisnt]

I would definetley get rid of traditions.If people want to celebrate certain things then they obviously can but there would be no nationwide celebration with decorations filling the streets.What is the need for traditions anyway ? It was tradition for blacks to sit at the back of the bus but thankfully people got over that.Why not get over the rest of the crap
What if the people want to celebrate it? Should the state say no you can't at the barrel of a gun? Isn't that what we are currently fighting? Is there no freedom of expression or speech in your ideal country? Sounding pretty authoritarian to me.

[The Fighting_Crusnik]

With Celebrations and what not, I think it should be up to the people what they want to celebrate and it should be they as individuals who decide. In other words, if a group of people want a Christmas tree near a government building or on a public park, they should have the right to put it up. Now the fair limit to this I think, is, is that if people put up a sign or use symbols that have no relation to their religion or beliefs for the purpose of offending a group, then they shouldn't be allowed to do that on public land.

[AK]

How does the state (define as the legal monopoly of force over a given area) differ from a private land owner? The state, no matter if it is under the guise of capitalism or communism, is by very definition destructive to the individual.
Because it's a bullshit definition. The state is, ultimately, the entity which serves to enforce to will of the upper class and ensure its wealth and protect its property and property rights.

If there were to be an "anarcho"-capitalist/right-"libertarian" "revolution", and large companies formed private security forces, would you not consider such entities to constitute a state? (keep in mind that law is not giving them the authority to police people and engage in armed conflict)

[thatwhichisnt]

Because it's a bullshit definition. The state is, ultimately, the entity which serves to enforce to will of the upper class and ensure its wealth and protect its property and property rights.

If there were to be an "anarcho"-capitalist/right-"libertarian" "revolution", and large companies formed private security forces, would you not consider such entities to constitute a state? (keep in mind that law is not giving them the authority to police people and engage in armed conflict)
I do not see a disagreement here.

[AK]

I do not see a disagreement here.
Think of it this way, does the supermarket employ police and a standing army?

[thatwhichisnt]

Think of it this way, does the supermarket employ police and a standing army?
What point are you trying to make?

[AK]

What point are you trying to make?
That a private property owner does not constitute the state.

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

I realize this is kind of getting outside the established framework of this topic, but I feel like I really have to because, the way I think of communism, communism itself should be our objective, and hence there should be no such thing in our minds as "an ideal [socialist] state". We should think of socialism as a transitional period, not as an ideal in and of itself. Our goals should be much more sweeping.

Okay, that said, here's a limited idea of what I think communism should/will look like:

-No division of labor. People freely engage in both manual and mental labor at will without having to be specialized in a particular field.

-No commodity production. All production and distribution occurs for the purpose of meeting human needs. Production for use, not for exchange, in other words. Hence there will be no need for or use of things like currency, for example.

-No government. The inception of communism (as contrasted with socialism) inevitably leads directly to the abolition of the state. Communism will involve all people freely sharing everything without state compulsion.

-Relatively even development. As in no remaining distinctions between, for example, city and countryside. Humanity under communism will live in sort of densely populated suburban settings with lots of space for the natural environment, rather than being isolated out in the wilderness or overcrowded into major metropolitan areas.

-No families. Though this might be construed as part of 'no division of labor', I wanted to single out the eventual abolition of marriage in particular because not as many people have firmly grasped that this is a crucial aspect of getting rid of all oppressive and exploitative relations. (i.e. The family institution is ultimately inherently patriarchal.)

-No religion. Yes we should aim to develop in humanity as a whole a scientific mindset oriented toward rational thinking.

-No animal ownership, hunting of animals, etc. I think part of doing away with all oppressive and exploitative relations means ingraining that as part of our morality as a whole, not just in relation to other human beings. Communist revolution, I think, should be one of total liberation, not just of human liberation.

-I think communist society will be of not just an international character, but of an interplanetary character. Realistically, by the time we achieve communism worldwide, ours will be an interplanetary species. Just as something to think about in terms of how we distribute resources, etc.

-In my opinion, a communist society should and will involve communist eugenics; i.e. the rational, societal planning of human evolution, not just of production and distribution, etc. Through such avenues, we will be able to, over the course of generations, systematically wipe out diseases (or at least our disposition thereto), and hence probably to establish human life expectancies in the hundreds of years, not just of 85 or 90 years.

-Machine labor as a substitute for most human labor? I think it's one possible way in which things may develop. It's possible that communist society will provide a near unlimited amount of leisure time by way of technological advancement.

These are some of the attributes of communism as I envision it. These are the sorts of things that should be aimed for or at least thought about more deeply. Socialism should be understood as simply the means by which to get to this kind of human existence.