If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?

[learningaboutheleft123]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?

[Frosty Weasel]

I dunno. How many millions have been murdered by Capitalist colonialism, slavery, and Fascist genocides?

Also, you spell like a red neck.

[hatzel]

If people are so good, how come we inflict so much suffering on each other? Get rid of people, I'd say...oh, hello Mr Pentti Linkola, worst reactionary ever, if I remember correctly :sleep:

[Rooster]

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

[bricolage]

if communism is so communistic, how comes many communists have been communisted by the communists?

[hatzel]

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

I beg to differ (http://blog.fatfreevegan.com/2007/09/vegan-omelette-for-one.html)

:laugh:

[Ele'ill]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?

Perhaps those scenarios never actually reached communism and didn't for a variety of unrelated reasons. Our current system has reached its peak performance and has killed far more.

I don't believe the goal of the left is to recreate historical examples but to move forward and implement new goals and new ideas that are more relevant to our times.

[Rooster]

If leaders is so communism, how comes many goods have been murdered by the people?

[Ele'ill]

How about we use this time to answer the question in the original post and not fuck up the thread?

[Rooster]

How about we use this time to answer the question in the original post and not fuck up the thread?

How can one answer a question like that?

"If eating buttered toast is so good, how comes many people died from eating it?"

[Diello]

Because someone calls themself a communist doesn't mean they embody communist ideals. One might as well say, "The United States calls itself democratic. The United States spreads oppression and death. Ergo, democracy is bad."


How can one answer a question like that?

"If eating buttered toast is so good, how comes many people died from eating it?"

Honestly, I think it's a fair question, presumably coming from a naive perspective. If someone's been raised on the diet of pro-capitalist slop that the U.S. educational system produces, this is the sort of objection they're going to raise, no matter how intelligent and sincere they themselves may be.

[Pierre.Laporte]

I don't mean to defend the USSR, China, or the DPRK. To be honest, I don't like any of those.

However the point I'm going to make is that in almost any branch of philosophy, you're going to have monsters, and you're going to have philanthropists. You're going to have genocidal masterminds, and you're going to have human rights advocates. There are definitely good hearted capitalists just like there are good hearted communists.

Except fascists. No one likes them.

[Rooster]

Honestly, I think it's a fair question, presumably coming from a naive perspective. If someone's been raised on the diet of pro-capitalist slop that the U.S. educational system produces, this is the sort of objection they're going to raise, no matter how intelligent and sincere they themselves may be.

It would be a fair question if it came from someone who wasn't in the CPGB.

He's going to get four answers:

1. Joke answers
2. There was no communism, people died for false dreams.
3. There was communism, people died to make it.
4. No one died under communism, it is imperialist lies.

[Ele'ill]

"If eating buttered toast is so good, how comes many people died from eating it?"

This would be a valid concern, no?

[hatzel]

1. Joke answers
2. There was no communism, people died for false dreams.
3. There was communism, people died to make it.
4. No one died under communism, it is imperialist lies.

That's my vote, of those four...

[DDR]

If capitalism is so goog, how come 30.000 people day of starvation every day?

So, extrapolating:

In 200 days (6 months and 17 days aprox.) you get as many victims as the Holocaust (6 millions)
In 2000 days (5 years and 6 months aprox.) you get as many victims as all dead people in WWII (60 million)
In 3333 days (9 years aprox.) you get as many victims as the black book of communism says communism has killed (100 million, we all know that is BS, anyways)

And that's starvation alone, not counting the imperialist wars and so forth.

[ComradeMan]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?

A fair question which should be answered without pointing to the "crimes" of capitalism.

Quite frankly people are people and communism was attempted by people- they failed in many respects, but just like many other things- we don't give up.

Communism is an abstract concept- don't reify things.

[Fabrizio]

Not dissin' the thread but...


You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.
LOL

[Crimson Commissar]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?
In most cases those "murdered" were reactionaries against the socialist systems in power in those countries. You just get a few overly paranoid people like Stalin who kill those who were actually real revolutionaries.

Also why do you list your organisation as the CPGB-ML, which supports Stalin, and yet are against killing those against socialism, which Stalin was a strong supporter of?

[ComradeMan]

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

I agree... but we have to ask ourselves sincerely.... where the fuck is the omelette?

[Ocean Seal]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?
Ok first you say you're a member of an ML party so you should know a few things.

First communism has never existed, and I think that everyone on this forum agrees with me.
Second, those numbers are greatly exaggerated, pretty much everyone killed by Hitler in Russia, and everyone who died of non-natural causes is on Joseph "Baby Eaters" Stalin's hit list.
Third, that the capitalist world produces 10X the amount of food necessary to feed everyone. Yet 15,000,000 children die each year from starvation. That's on capitalism being that capitalism has achieved global supremacy. So effectively, 16 months of capitalism equates to 20,000,000 which I'm pretty sure are capitalism's highest estimates for how many people he killed. And of course Stalin was in power for a little bit more than 16 months.
Fourth, you'll find that many of the people here aren't supportive of Stalin or Mao who account for the majority of the capitalist fairytale numbers so this doesn't even apply to them.
Fifth, every violent revolution has had casualties.
Sixth, I'm really too lazy to make a list of everyone who has been killed by the genocides of capitalism.

[hatzel]

In most cases those "murdered" were reactionaries against the socialist systems in power in those countries.

News just in: it's not murder if your so-called 'victim' doesn't agree with you politically! That's good news...

[Crimson Commissar]

News just in: it's not murder if your so-called 'victim' doesn't agree with you politically! That's good news...
Well if the victim is some capitalist or nazi twat who openly advocates rebellion against a socialist nation, then IMO it isn't too bad. You think all the nationalists, capitalists and fascists are just going to give up when you implement your so-called "free" ultra-libertarian system? :rolleyes:

[ComradeMan]

Well if the victim is some capitalist or nazi twat who openly advocates rebellion against a socialist nation, then IMO it isn't too bad. You think all the nationalists, capitalists and fascists are just going to give up when you implement your so-called "free" ultra-libertarian system? :rolleyes:

Kronstadt? Were they Nazis or capitalists?

Were the union reps murdered by the Sendero Luminoso Nazis or capitalists?

Watch out- sooner or later someone might declare you reactionary......

;)

[Rooster]

I agree... but we have to ask ourselves sincerely.... where the fuck is the omelette?

That's actually a deep question.

[Crimson Commissar]

Kronstadt? Were they Nazis or capitalists?

Were the union reps murdered by the Sendero Luminoso Nazis or capitalists?

Watch out- sooner or later someone might declare you reactionary......

;)
Possibly. In some cases it was extreme to actually kill rebels against the regime, but if there's a bunch of nationalist fucks like in the Baltic SSRs who want nothing less than to absolutely destroy socialism and everything associated with it, I don't see why we shouldn't just shoot them and get it over with.

[Che a chara]

To try and answer the question I think he/she's trying to ask .....Excuses/reasons i've heard for the deaths under communism include the 'Godless' society in which personal responsibility was said to be eradicated and also poor rations and lower standard goods because everything was domestically produced and not of a higher quality. The former is very debatable but the latter holds some water.

Then we have the policies implemented in 'socialist' countries. WWII didn't help things in the USSR and the paranoia created and also in the Cold War too was very detrimental to the thinking and actions of the governing state.

Embargoes, threats, alienating tactics and sabotage from world powers/other counties would have had an adverse effect on the 'socialist' countries.

Of course it has to be admitted that there was also stupid and impractical policies put in place, which just wrecked economies.

[Crimson Commissar]

These so-called libertarian socialists need to understand that socialism was constantly under threat throughout the entirity of it's existance, they couldn't give capitalists and fascists the right to express their opinion, it would have endangered the very existance of socialism. If we tolerate opposition to socialism we'll just end up getting overthrown and murdered by some fascist twats.

[ComradeMan]

When you have to kill people because they don't agree with you and likewise when people are trying to kill you for the same reason- well perhaps it's time for everyone to go home and think about things for a while...;)

[Crimson Commissar]

When you have to kill people because they don't agree with you and likewise when people are trying to kill you for the same reason- well perhaps it's time for everyone to go home and think about things for a while...;)
There will always be a significant number of people who disagree with our ideas. Even if they were the majority it wouldn't make them right. Besides, capitalists/fascists don't necessarily need popular support to seize power. I doubt people wanted the Soviet Union gone until Gorbachev came in and screwed everything up with his capitalist reforms. If a capitalist could seize power in the Soviet Union, where capitalism simply wasn't tolerated whatsoever, then libertarian socialism wouldn't stand a fucking chance.

[ComradeMan]

There will always be a significant number of people who disagree with our ideas. Even if they were the majority it wouldn't make them right. Besides, capitalists/fascists don't necessarily need popular support to seize power.

And?

If the fascists had not had a lot of popular support they would not have taken power... don't fall for that one.;)

Revolutions start in the mind my friend- the real revolutionary victory is convincing the reactionaries to our ideas but not through violence of coercion because that is a hollow victory.

[hatzel]

Not to say anything, but...

http://www.archive.org/stream/originsoftotalit00aren

:)

[Red Future]

You can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs.

Im sure that is Trotsky who said that ...am i right ?

[Dimentio]

If communism is so good, how comes many people have been murdered by the leaders ?

Where there is power, people tend to be killed.

"If you are laying on the railway of history, be prepared to have your legs chopped off"

As for Stalin and Mao, they were rather philosopher kings than socialists. Socialism is about giving the people the power over the means of production, instead of the banks, the corporations or the state.

As for killing political opponents. It is deplorable, with three exceptions. One of them is our own ComradeMan.

[Ele'ill]

As for killing political opponents. It is deplorable, with three exceptions. One of them is our own ComradeMan.

Our?

[hatzel]

Our?

Do we own him? How authoritarian of us...

[Ele'ill]

I just thought it implied some sort of collective appreciation or recognition of.

[Thirsty Crow]

These so-called libertarian socialists need to understand that socialism was constantly under threat throughout the entirity of it's existance, they couldn't give capitalists and fascists the right to express their opinion, it would have endangered the very existance of socialism. If we tolerate opposition to socialism we'll just end up getting overthrown and murdered by some fascist twats.
Yes, those Bolsheviks murdered in the Great Purge must have been pro-capitalists in disguise. All along.
Including the red sailors of Kronstadt.

Ask yourself this: how rotten must be the foundation of so called "achieved socialism" that personal expression of a man/woman who thinks capitalism should be restored may seriously undermine it?


There will always be a significant number of people who disagree with our ideas. Even if they were the majority it wouldn't make them right. Besides, capitalists/fascists don't necessarily need popular support to seize power. I doubt people wanted the Soviet Union gone until Gorbachev came in and screwed everything up with his capitalist reforms. If a capitalist could seize power in the Soviet Union, where capitalism simply wasn't tolerated whatsoever, then libertarian socialism wouldn't stand a fucking chance.

They don't need popular support? Well, I guess the materialist conception of history - and centrality of class struggle - is out the window then.

Great Gorbachev the capitalist. Ridiculous.

[trivas7]

if communism is so communistic, how comes many communists have been communisted by the communists?
Wow, the language! With whom in the Communist's world have you been communicating?

[Robert]

http://www.revleft.com/vb/revleft/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1996509#post1996509)
These so-called libertarian socialists need to understand that socialism was constantly under threat throughout the entirity of it's existance, they couldn't give capitalists and fascists the right to express their opinion, it would have endangered the very existance of socialism. If we tolerate opposition to socialism we'll just end up getting overthrown and murdered by some fascist twats. What we got here is your basic ...

communist.

Seriously, I wonder what a poll, of all non-restricted members of revleft, would show in terms of support for this guy?

[ ] Strongly agree

[ ] Agree somewhat

[ ] Disagree

[ ] Strongly disagree

[ ] Unsure

[ ] No opinion

[ ] Pass me another barbecued reactionary rib and let me think about it.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

I am not a Maoist, or even a Leninist, but six years ago I was a history student, and, ergo, had occasion to pour over declassified CIA documents concerning Sendero Luminoso. Most of the "WTF?!" murders attributed to them (ie - not of police, military, or douchebags) were carried out by CIA and state-sponsored right-wing paramilitaries and/or directly by the Peruvian military.

Of course, that doesn't speak to the murders committed by other so-called Communist states, parties, armed forces, etc. - no doubt, the Soviet Union, Peoples Republic of China, Democratic Kampuchea, were (or are) totally fucking fucked. No more, of course, than states in general, though. This should draw attention to the more pertinent question: what's so great about technocratic killing machines (states) if they consistently act exactly like technocratic killing machines (states)?

Mind you, the criteria of body counts seems futile vis- asking any interesting questions: How about asking where the greatest advance of autonomous and egalitarian practices have happened?

PUNK HOUSES.

(that last bit is a joke)

[Revolution starts with U]

Strongly disagree

[Revolution starts with U]

Rule by iron rod lasts only as long as the rod. Take away the rod, and you take away the rule. The genius of democracy is that it is the rule of law, not the rule of the mightiest.

[Dimentio]

Rule by iron rod lasts only as long as the rod. Take away the rod, and you take away the rule. The genius of democracy is that it is the rule of law, not the rule of the mightiest.

Not if you are following the philosophy of the Wise Woman.

TgOvio3WRdE

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Rule by iron rod lasts only as long as the rod. Take away the rod, and you take away the rule. The genius of democracy is that it is the rule of law, not the rule of the mightiest.

I've been smacked by the rods of "democratic" police officers.
I guess they're wooden, or plastic, but, in any case, if you buy that shit about democracy . . .

Seriously though, take a moment to think critically about the rule of law and how it functions. Those who make and enforce the law are necessarily outside of it, even at the basic level of the state can murder/confine/etc., but also at the less obvious-on-paper level of, well, have you ever interacted with the apparatus of law? They'll fuck you up and get away with it.

[Revolution starts with U]

I've been smacked by the rods of "democratic" police officers.
I guess they're wooden, or plastic, but, in any case, if you buy that shit about democracy . . .

Seriously though, take a moment to think critically about the rule of law and how it functions. Those who make and enforce the law are necessarily outside of it, even at the basic level of the state can murder/confine/etc., but also at the less obvious-on-paper level of, well, have you ever interacted with the apparatus of law? They'll fuck you up and get away with it.

I never said there weren't better ways of doing it. Nor do I barely consider what we have democracy. But if you can't see that modern democratic law enforcement through the supposed rule of law is far more progressive than feudal law... that's your problem.

[Thirsty Crow]

I never said there weren't better ways of doing it. Nor do I barely consider what we have democracy. But if you can't see that modern democratic law enforcement through the supposed rule of law is far more progressive than feudal law... that's your problem.
And what the hell has this ahistorical comparison got to do with existing strucutres of power - hegemony and domination - and its definite effect upon us, workers?
I mean, it is alright to engage in futile scholasticism. This is precisely that, scholasticism. But it would be okay to expose the perspective from which we oppose the existing mode of production (which includes the political-managerial aspect of the whole thing). This perspective has nothing to do with measuring, quentifying or speculating on which mode of production (more specific - which mode of social control) is more "progressive".

[Dimentio]

And what the hell has this ahistorical comparison got to do with existing strucutres of power - hegemony and domination - and its definite effect upon us, workers?
I mean, it is alright to engage in futile scholasticism. This is precisely that, scholasticism. But it would be okay to expose the perspective from which we oppose the existing mode of production (which includes the political-managerial aspect of the whole thing). This perspective has nothing to do with measuring, quentifying or speculating on which mode of production (more specific - which mode of social control) is more "progressive".

Why were there never contested elections in the Supreme Soviet, not even within the ruling party?

[Thirsty Crow]

Why were there never contested elections in the Supreme Soviet, not even within the ruling party?

Excuse me, but I cannot grasp the point of this question.
I was merely arguing that it is futile and pointless (more or less) to argue about the "degree of progressive-ness" when it comes to comparing feudalism and capitalist liberal democracy ("rule of law"). Yeah, sure, it's obvious under which life would be better. It is completely superfluous to argue about that, but it may cease to be so if one wishes to engage in a defense of the existing social order, pointing out what advances it has brought. My reaction is aimed at the very possibility of this kind of utilization of the notion of "progressivenes" and arguments which would measure it or speculate on its degree as embodied in different social, economic, and political formations.

[Crimson Commissar]

Why were there never contested elections in the Supreme Soviet, not even within the ruling party?
Why do there need to be? Elections don't make a country democratic.

[Rafiq]

Murders and atrocities exist in all super powers.

The United states, has murdered more people (innocent) in the 20th century, even more than Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Pol pot, and China combined.

We just don't hear about it.

And, those countries just called themselves Socialist, trying to achieve Communism.

[Tommy4ever]

If capitalism is so goog, how come 30.000 people day of starvation every day?

So, extrapolating:

In 200 days (6 months and 17 days aprox.) you get as many victims as the Holocaust (6 millions)
In 2000 days (5 years and 6 months aprox.) you get as many victims as all dead people in WWII (60 million)
In 3333 days (9 years aprox.) you get as many victims as the black book of communism says communism has killed (100 million, we all know that is BS, anyways)

And that's starvation alone, not counting the imperialist wars and so forth.

I'm not going to test your maths but put that way those stats are pretty terrifying. :crying:

[Thirsty Crow]

Why do there need to be? Elections don't make a country democratic.
And what then does make a country democratic? Appointment of officials by the executive body of the Party that holds the political monopoly?

[Ned Kelly]

if capitalism is so good, how come so many people have been murdered by their leaders?

[PhoenixAsh]

To answer the question:

In any system there is an inherrent issue between various groups with different ideas on authoritarianism. Some believe in the rigid implication of theory and force it over reality even when it doesn't fit.

The inherrent problem of communism is that it has not yet developed a philosophical answer that recognizes the need to protect the own ideology against self imposed authoritarian misuse.

Some argue this is all because of dirrerences of opinion about the function of the state.

Communism is not inherrently good or evil. Those are not its main concerns. Its main concern is a fair distribution of resources and common ownership of the means of production. As such communists are concerned with those issues...it does not mean that communists are all lovety-dovety induviduals and some may hold very radical and even radically dangerous opinions of how society should look.

[ComradeMan]

As for killing political opponents. It is deplorable, with three exceptions. One of them is our own ComradeMan.

...another one is you.... ;)

:lol:


if communism is so communistic, how comes many communists have been communisted by the communists?

What does that really mean?

[¿Que?]

There are various ways that communism is used by people. In the way the OP is using it, the word "communism" describes a political affiliation or philosophy associated with people and certain states that have existed or exist. This is a general usage among lay people and anti-communists.

Communists (not communism) will actually tell you that communism has never existed, or at best that only one of the earlier phases was achieved, but never that communism, as the final stage of the struggle ending in victory of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie, has ever existed. Therefore, in this sense, "communism" has never existed, and remains purely an abstract concept. As such, we see that there are various different approaches to communism, such that, because it is an abstract concept, which cannot or only in part be connected to the concrete, can be defined in certain ways, to suit one's ideological or philosophical affiliations. And in any case, theory without practice is a waste of time anyway...

So using the second, and in my opinion, correct definition, the question is devoid of any meaning. Particularly considering that leadership under communism is one of those problems that can never really be resolved until communism is achieved.