Countering the "Communism has already been tried before, and cannot work" argument...

[Reznov]

Ok, so Communism and the ideal have been around for many a year. But still, it seems it has never been truly achieved.

And many of the current riots/uprisings have yielded no strong favor side to the Communists.

It seems we are gradually becoming less and less of importance and impact on the political and social realm.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

This is because of our own lack of organizing and the bourgeoisie's control of the media which demonizes socialist actions.In order for their to be a revolutionary movement,the working class must have class consciousness;something which they do not currently have.

It is always good to keep in mind the fact that communism has never been achieved so it is impossible to say that it didn't work.And if they try and retreat to socialism just tell them that it did in fact work just fine (excluding Stalin's brutal policies of course).

[ArrowLance]

This is because of our own lack of organizing and the bourgeoisie's control of the media which demonizes socialist actions.In order for their to be a revolutionary movement,the working class must have class consciousness;something which they do not currently have.

It is always good to keep in mind the fact that communism has never been achieved so it is impossible to say that it didn't work.And if they try and retreat to socialism just tell them that it did in fact work just fine (excluding Stalin's brutal policies of course).

Actually, even including the brutal policies of Stalin.

[Ballyfornia]

Actually, even including the brutal policies of Stalin.

Yes we should all say how Mr. Mustache was the greatest thing that ever, ever happened and gain massive, massive support from that.


Whether or not he killed as many people as was said. People are still going to be weird-ed out by the Stalin fetishism.

Be practical.

[CommunityBeliever]

Merchants failed to overthrow their fuedal lords on many occasions.

[piet11111]

Study the rise of capitalism and point out how long it took them to overthrow feudalism.

Point out that communism requires a fully developed capitalist system to succeed and that Russia was the weakest link in the capitalist chain of country's and due to its primitive development simply lacked the productive capacity to achieve communism and that due to the isolated and threatened position it was in it required a strong state apparatus to remain in power and we all know that the bureaucrats managed to take over to become the new bourgeois.

[Aspiring Humanist]

Stalinism =/= Communism
Simple as that

[DarkPast]

OK, #1: Communism (a stateless, classless society) never existed so it is impossible to say that it "doesn't work."

#2: Tell them that people in the 18th century were probably saying the same thing about modern democracy. I can imagine those people saying "Who'd put our country in the hands of a bunch of rabble instead of our great and just king? Look what happened to the Ancient Greeks! They tried democracy and it failed!"

[Lobotomy]

When people say things like "communism sounds good on paper but wouldn't work in real life", I usually bring up the American Revolution. Even people who supported the American Revolution back in the day were certain that it wouldn't last because democracy was considered to be synonymous with anarchy (in the chaotic sense). This wasn't even real democracy, it was representative democracy and the only "common people" who could vote were not common at all, they were white males who owned X amount of land. And in 1776 this was all hugely experimental. It was madness. Contrary to peoples' expectations, the US went on to become one of the most powerful nations.

My point is that no one is an authority on what is or isn't possible. The idea of what is or isn't "possible" changes dramatically over time, and there are so many variables to consider that no one can predict.

[Ocean Seal]

Remember that French revolution thing. Yep, what exactly happened to Napoleonic France? It was defeated by the Holy Alliance showing the capitalism would never triumph over feudalism. Metternich proclaimed the same, and most people thought that he was right. A few other capitalist revolutions were put down, so I guess that means that we should still have feudalism today?

Also socialism or state capitalism, never actually collapsed. Nope some high ranking anti-communist bureaucrats turned many nations into free market capitalist societies without the consent of the workers.

[A Marxist Historian]

Ok, so Communism and the ideal have been around for many a year. But still, it seems it has never been truly achieved.

And many of the current riots/uprisings have yielded no strong favor side to the Communists.

It seems we are gradually becoming less and less of importance and impact on the political and social realm.

The obvious answer is that capitalism doesn't work either. But that only leads to despair all by itself, not to getting people interested in socialism and communism.

The only possible real answer is the almost equally obvious one, namely, yes, Stalinism didn't work but Stalinism isn't communism.

If you don't make that distinction, you lose the argument. That is why all of our latterday "Marxist Leninists" here on Revleft can post here to their heart's content but will never make it with the working class.

But you can't just say Stalinism is capitalism or a new form of class rule, or nobody will take you seriously there either.

Why? Because just what is the socialist program, anyway?

Get rid of unemployment, get rid of homelessness, free education, rent and health care, take over the banks and corporations, etc. etc.

All of which was done in the Soviet Union.

So if you say that's just another form of capitalism, people either won't believe you, or they will conclude that you with your socialistic program are just another upcoming Stalin and bad news.

No, you have to give a more complicated answer. You have to say that the Soviet Union was a conquest of the working people, with a lot of good things about it, but that control over it was seized by corrupt bureaucrats, just like our unions have been seized by corrupt bureaucrats, who have to be kicked out, just like the Soviet working people needed to kick out the Stalinist bureaucrats to defend their revolution and their Soviet Union.

In other words, you have to be a Trotskyist.

Lastly, one other thing you can add, especially if you are an American.

Socialism failed? Well, if at first you don't succeed, try try again. Basic American rule.

-M.H.-

[ComradeOmar]

How can anything be achieved if nothing is done actively in its favor? Communism is not something a lot of people think of anymore because of our own lack of organization and commitment. Basic truth to the whole situation.

[robbo203]

Study the rise of capitalism and point out how long it took them to overthrow feudalism.

Point out that communism requires a fully developed capitalist system to succeed and that Russia was the weakest link in the capitalist chain of country's and due to its primitive development simply lacked the productive capacity to achieve communism and that due to the isolated and threatened position it was in it required a strong state apparatus to remain in power and we all know that the bureaucrats managed to take over to become the new bourgeois.

Yes and not only that - you can't have communism/socialism without majority support and understanding. It cannot be imposed from above by some "enlightened" elite . Even Lenin acknowleged that, at the time of the Russian revolutiuon, the great majority of workers were not socialists and had no real grasp of what socialism was about. Support for the Bolsheviks was predicated instead on its reformist programme and its decision to take Russia out of the war. Furthernore, the Russian working class was itself only a small fraction of the total population - perhaps 10%.

For all sorts of reasons, then, communism aka socialism was simply not on the cards and even with the best of intentions. As Karl Kautsky noted, those who try to explain away the failure to establish communism (or "socialism", his prefered term) tended not to "enquire from what causes it did not succeed. They would not seek for the explanation in the unfavourable or unripe conditions, but in Socialism itself, and would conclude that Socialism is realisable under no circumstances" (Kautsky K , 1918, The Dictatorship of the Proletariat, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press 1964, p.89).