Communism Failure

[ComradeOmar]

Hi comrades. I just felt like pointing out a couple of facts that communists so often forget nowadays. #1Many people simply could not be bothered anymore with the idea of communism which is simply "outdated".

Think about it. Do we honestly try anything new and fresh that other parties try? We also focus too much on nostalgia (being a member of CPC i know).

#2 Who in their right mind will want to have a Violent Revolution and sacrifice their lives for something that has basically failed in the past?

That is true. Marxist theory of revolution is only through a violent revolution. realistically who wants to kill themselves for no reason???

# 3 I don't know of any communist party in my province/state.

This is simply due to the severe and utter laziness of majority of communist parties worldwide in spreading the word and organizing.

[CommunityBeliever]

Communism may have failed to come about so far, but we need it now more then ever.

[ComradeOmar]

Communism may have failed to come about so far, but we need it now more then ever.
I agree but I just cant see it happening

[CommunityBeliever]

I agree but I just cant see it happening

Capitalism is unsustainable, so it is going to have to go eventually, although that may seem a bit far off from where we are now.

[Sheepy]

It wasn't Communism that failed, it was the capitalists running it.

[Threetune]

Hi comrades. I just felt like pointing out a couple of facts that communists so often forget nowadays. #1Many people simply could not be bothered anymore with the idea of communism which is simply "outdated".

Think about it. Do we honestly try anything new and fresh that other parties try? We also focus too much on nostalgia (being a member of CPC i know).

#2 Who in their right mind will want to have a Violent Revolution and sacrifice their lives for something that has basically failed in the past?

That is true. Marxist theory of revolution is only through a violent revolution. realistically who wants to kill themselves for no reason???

# 3 I don't know of any communist party in my province/state.

This is simply due to the severe and utter laziness of majority of communist parties worldwide in spreading the word and organizing.

So why are you and the ruling classes so exercised about communism?

Why do you and them bother propagandising against communism so much?

Go ahead and try “something new and fresh that other parties try” as you say, and tell us how you get on.

[Aleenik]

Regarding Communism being outdated, I definitely don't feel that way at all. That is why I'm an Anarcho-Communist. Obviously though we can't look to people like (Insert long dead Communist or Anarchist person here) for everything regarding the modern age. As an example of what I mean, (Insert long dead Communist or Anarchist person here) didn't get to touch on how to use TV, Internet, Video Games and Radio to further Communism and how to incorporate them into a Communist society. Those 4 things can be/are very important tools for furthering Communism and would of course be very important in a Communist society not just for entertainment, but for helping Communism work efficiently (Maybe not Video Games, but the other 3 at least). New(er) technologies present great challenges and opportunities for Communism.

We also shouldn't be afraid to stray from (Insert Communist or Anarchist person here) exact theories by changing them up a bit and improving upon them. It's not like they are gods. We should continually try to better Communist theory when possible.

[GatesofLenin]

It wasn't Communism that failed, it was the capitalists running it.
Very true, hard to call oneself a true communist while wanting everything better than your fellow man.

[Threetune]

I think we should not get the methods of communication, e.g. printing press, telegraph, and radio v TV, Internet and cell phone mixed up with the essence of Marx and Lenin’s theories about working class revolution.

However, ‘communist revolutionary theory’ itself is not a fixed set of ideas for all times and places, but, if anyone wants to step up and start talking about “something new and fresh that other parties try”, they will need to say precisely what it is that they are talking about unless they want to give the impression that they are, in reality, only another anti-communist ‘left’.

[punisa]

Try something "fresh and new"? Is this some kind of joke topic?
I'm not laughing.

You know who thinks communism is outdated? liberal SOBs who protest because they can't afford the new iPhone.
People in the 3rd world don't find it outdated.
In essence you want a revolution to be hip and cool, right?
This makes me sick

[PhoenixAsh]

Well...any revolution is going to be violent in nature. Marx did not exactly advocate violent revolution. He was more subtile. I think the general idea is that when proletarians have their revolution the ruling class is going to do anything to prevent the loss of their position and protect it by any means including the use of force.

But your point is well taken....and I think it is valid.

People have very little reason or motivation in the western world to risk what they have right now. For that I think there needs to be more class consciousness and a direct threat to their position. Such an event would more easilly occur in circumstances of economic regression or crisis.

Kind of like the situation we have now. We see a political movement of the general population towards more radical ideas and ideologies. Both on the left an on the right.

[JFB.anon]

Don't be stupid. Communism failed everywhere it went because it doesn't work. Don't act like libertarian fuckwits who say there's a vast conspiracy to keep free market economics from working.

Hate the capitalist and their worker exploitation, don't resort to historical revisionism and irrationality.

[ComradeOmar]

Try something "fresh and new"? Is this some kind of joke topic?
I'm not laughing.

You know who thinks communism is outdated? liberal SOBs who protest because they can't afford the new iPhone.
People in the 3rd world don't find it outdated.
In essence you want a revolution to be hip and cool, right?
This makes me sick
did you even understand what I was trying to say by "fresh'? Comrade just take a look at the Communist party of Russia . It has to be the most nostalgic party in the world. They have the most idiotic slogans and in some ways support putin. I'm saying this because, in many ways its true not to poke fun at communism

[thriller]

Hi comrades. I just felt like pointing out a couple of facts that communists so often forget nowadays. #1Many people simply could not be bothered anymore with the idea of communism which is simply "outdated".

Think about it. Do we honestly try anything new and fresh that other parties try? We also focus too much on nostalgia (being a member of CPC i know).

#2 Who in their right mind will want to have a Violent Revolution and sacrifice their lives for something that has basically failed in the past?

That is true. Marxist theory of revolution is only through a violent revolution. realistically who wants to kill themselves for no reason???

# 3 I don't know of any communist party in my province/state.

This is simply due to the severe and utter laziness of majority of communist parties worldwide in spreading the word and organizing.

1. Many people don't want to bother with the outdated idea of capitalism, just look at the status of inequality in the world as of today.
2. Who in their right mind would want to literally work themselves to death to just stay alive? It doesn't make sense.
3. I don't know of any capitalist parties in my area that are locally controlled, they all support bourgeois control of the means of production.

[Mr. Natural]

ComradeOmar, You wrote, "Marxist theory of revolution is only through a violent revolution."

Fortunately, you are wrong. Marx and Engels, as radical thinkers, would always alter their revolutionary views to reflect changing conditions.

Here is Marx in a speech delivered in Amsterdam, Holland, on Sep 8, 1872, after a congress of the First International: "You know that the institutions, mores, and traditions of various countries must be taken into consideration, and we do not deny that there are countries--such as America, England, and if I were more familiar with your institutions, I would perhaps add Holland--where the workers can attain their goal by peaceful means." (The Marx-Engels Reader, Robert C. Tucker, ed., 1978, p. 523)

Here are Engels' views on this matter, expressed in an essay published in 1895, the year he died. "He allowed that classic street-fighting on the barricades had largely been rendered obsolete by the technological improvements favoring the military, and hailed the German Social Democrats' two million voters as 'the decisive shock force of the international proletarian army.'" (The Marx-Engels Reader, p. xxxvi)

I say it is fortunate you are wrong, ComradeOmar, for although I'm not opposed to revolutionary violence when necessary, I don't believe violent revolution is possible in the advanced capitalist nations. The major capitalist states have a monopoly of violent means and extraordinarily advanced surveillance technologies. Violent revolution is the US, Canada, and Western Europe is a fantasy.

But there are other paths open to us, and ComradeOmar in Canada and I in the US need to explore and develop these paths.

Venceremos!

[Mithr4ndir]

This is not the idead of Communisml which is outdated, but the important personalities using this word who are.
I am probably saying something which has been told already, but communism has never existed yet. All the tries failed because of some reasons, in "Cuba" (is that the right name for the Che's country ?) and in Russia. Indeed, Revolution must takes place in an industrialised country, but in the twenties, Russia was for 70% rural, and same is true for Cuba.
Then, the leaders of these countries weren't looking for communism, if Lenin did, Stalin didn't.
Nowadays, the richest countries are industrialised, and so, the revolution can take place, and should ^^.
The ideology isn't outdated as I said, the leaders are though.

[Thirsty Crow]

Hi comrades. I just felt like pointing out a couple of facts that communists so often forget nowadays. #1Many people simply could not be bothered anymore with the idea of communism which is simply "outdated".

Think about it. Do we honestly try anything new and fresh that other parties try? We also focus too much on nostalgia (being a member of CPC i know).There are two specific problem which you merged here, which is problematic. I think this specific problem caused confusion, evident in punisa's response. They need to be disentangled:

1) Communism being outdated - that's hardly a new argument since the social theorists, economists, political "scientists" and politicians have been peddling the idea of "post-industrial society" or "information society" since at least the beginning of the 70s (I think that the credit for being a pioneer goes to Daniel Bell), stating that with the changes brought on by communication and information technologies (manifested in the structure of production and the rise of service sector employment and "post-fordism") dissolve the class antagonisms which plagued capitalism in the past, effectively bringing about the end of class society.

Which is ridiculous, and should be taken as ridiculous by any rational individual capable of sober assessment of the current social conditions in the whole of the world (manifesting its most brutal aspects in the "underdeveloped" countries). More specifically, the recent crisis (take a fucking look at Greece!) has shown something which should have been clear all along: that class antagonisms are still with us. That implies that communism, as a project and a living movement, is not outdated. I can't see how radical leftists could think that communism - the abolition of capitalism - is outdated and still refer to themselves as revolutionaries.

2. The related problem, though clearly distinct, is the horrid political situation in self-designated communist organizations, evident in what you identify as simple nostalgia. This is a problem too "big" for the confines of this thread, but I'll say that I agree with you that simplistic Soviet nostalgia is a negative factor in militants' building of organizations and creation of connections with the workers' movement. Also, the whole issue of concrete organization is, in my humble opinion, quite neglected in light of the changes in the structure of the working class (precarious and temp work, the relative disappearance of the "mass factory" which was a breeding ground for working class militancy and the consequent rise of the service sector etc.).


#2 Who in their right mind will want to have a Violent Revolution and sacrifice their lives for something that has basically failed in the past?

That is true. Marxist theory of revolution is only through a violent revolution. realistically who wants to kill themselves for no reason???This point is obnoxiously oversimplistic.

For starters, Marxism is not so monolithically homogenous as to see no possibility for a (relatively) peaceful workers' revolution. For instance, Marx himself, as well as Engels, saw the possibility of workers' using the parliament as a means for establishing proleterian political rule and the abolition of capitalism. Though, it should be noted that the historical conditions under which this view came to the fore, with respect to the concrete functioning of the ascendant parliamentary democracy, were quite different than our contemporary conditions (and I do think that borugeois democracy cannot be seen as a stepping stone for the creation of socialism). But for better or worse, some revolutionary organizations, like the SPGB, still hold the position that parliamentary action is conducive to a workers' reovolution, thus positing the relativity of opinions with regard to the necessity of a violent revolution.

But the basic problem with this point is that it presupposes that communism and capitalism are abstractly competing "systems" which can be tried, as if in a vacuum, in exactly the same conditions, and chosen according to the perceived efficiency. That's entirely erroneous. Just recall under which concrete, material conditions did USSR develop as a society and as an economy. Thus, I can't agree that communism failed - what failed was a concrete state and its foundation - the concrete economy, which was historically dettermined by a whole host of factors.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

If anything failed, it was vanguard party dictatorships substituting themselves for a dictatorship of the working class.

[Threetune]

Don't be stupid. Communism failed everywhere it went because it doesn't work. Don't act like libertarian fuckwits who say there's a vast conspiracy to keep free market economics from working.

Hate the capitalist and their worker exploitation, don't resort to historical revisionism and irrationality.

What should we do then?

[SacRedMan]

that has basically failed in the past?

Marx used the term 'communism' when he spoke about utopic societies based on common property. The system didn't failed, it was were the humans that failed in trying to realize it. And oh, don't forget that we still didn't saw real communism, but interprentatios and ideals like leninism, maoïsm,...

[ZeroNowhere]

Other parties base their whole hope of expansion upon convincing people of their ideas, converting and recruiting them. The Party lets capitalism do the work for us.