Just another dream?

[Luisrah]

Lately I have been questioning myself. By the time of the liberal revolutions, the liberals thought liberalism would solve all the problems in the world.
In my country, the liberal revolutions turned an absolute monarchy into a constitutional monarchy, and later in the republican revolt, the republicans also thought the republic would solve all the problems in the world.

As we know, it either wasn't a good theory, or it degenerated.

A communist society seems so perfect. It promises democracy, equal opportunities, a hunger-free world, and other things. What assures us that it won't degenerate? What assures us that it will accomplish all these goals? Is it completely possible, or is a Soviet Union-like thing the best we wil get, that eventhough may or may not have had free education and healthcare etc, had all it's flaws that people here at revleft point?

Is it possible? Or will it be good anyway since eventhough the chance might not be as big as we expected, it's still a good step forward for humanity?

[Queercommie Girl]

A socialist revolution is not an one-off event.

As Mao said, revolution is a continuous process.

Essentially, revolution never really ends. Communism in the perfect sense, according to Maoism, will never arrive, it is an "asymptote" one can aspire to and strive towards. Perfection is itself a process, it cannot exist in any "static" sense.

A mainland Chinese Maoist once suggested that every 10,000 years we should organise a Cultural Revolution to purge all of the capitalist-roaders and reactionaries.

In any kind of system there is always the potential possibility for corruption and degeneration. Communism is no exception. The capitalist philosophers say "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty". I say eternal revolution is the price of communism. The workers must always be prepared to fight against bureaucratism and capitalist restoration, even a trillion years from now.

[Kayser_Soso]

Nothing can assure you. You have to realize that we are taking a risk. You don't get something as good as a new, more just society without sacrifice.

[Luisrah]

Nothing can assure you. You have to realize that we are taking a risk. You don't get something as good as a new, more just society without sacrifice.

I'm not asking if there will or not be sacrifices, I'm asking how do you know it won't degenerate? I'm not saying it will go back to capitalism, since we haven't gone back to feudalism. But liberalism was a great ideal back then, and it would save the world, but it didn't.

[Kayser_Soso]

I'm not asking if there will or not be sacrifices, I'm asking how do you know it won't degenerate? I'm not saying it will go back to capitalism, since we haven't gone back to feudalism. But liberalism was a great ideal back then, and it would save the world, but it didn't.


We don't know. If you have to get 100% assurance just to participate your usefulness to the movement is compromised.

[bricolage]

I'm not asking if there will or not be sacrifices, I'm asking how do you know it won't degenerate? I'm not saying it will go back to capitalism, since we haven't gone back to feudalism. But liberalism was a great ideal back then, and it would save the world, but it didn't.
I think the key difference is that in terms of the liberal/bourgeois revolutions the revolutionary class was not the exploited class, meaning exploitation would continue afterwards, creating new contradictions and new sources of social conflict. What makes capitalism different is that the exploited class is now the revolutionary class meaning the totality of exploitation can be abolished via revolution. That is unless a new exploited class develops under communism but in that case I'd guess it wouldn't really be communism.

[Queercommie Girl]

I'm not asking if there will or not be sacrifices, I'm asking how do you know it won't degenerate? I'm not saying it will go back to capitalism, since we haven't gone back to feudalism. But liberalism was a great ideal back then, and it would save the world, but it didn't.

No-one can guarantee that it won't degenerate. That's an impossibility.

But if it does begin to degenerate, we just continue with the revolution to purge the degeneration. That's why Mao initiated the Cultural Revolution, and that's why the Maoists in China now are calling for a second socialist revolution.

You can't predict what destiny is like, but you can put destiny into your own hands.

[HEAD ICE]

events don't happen seperate and independent from reality but happen in grounded material consequence. communism is not "the end" but an evolutionary stage in human development.

[Adil3tr]

I think Engels talked about this in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. The Enlightenment not only ended before the industrial revolutional, when socialism was possible, but they were high society types, they had many wealthy benefactors and attended parties and the like. They failed because they left out a huge segment of the population. We will succeed because we fill in the gaps they left and put the power in the hands of all the people to navigate into the future.