Communist explanation.

[MajesticVagrant]

I've only been exposed to the school version of communism. Vietnam, Cambodia, the USSR, and Cuba. It's been shown to me as no choices. I get that it's about equality and workers rights, but I don't really understand it fully. Is it big government or not? Is it just getting what you need? That doesn't seem very fun. Maybe I'm just being too capitalist. If someone could explain it, that would be a big help. Thanks!

[Marxaveli]

Yea, all the stuff they teach you about Communism in middle and high school is, to say the least, bullshit-filled propaganda.

Be definition, Communism is a classless, stateless society. So nope, it's not big government. In fact, it is little or even NO government at all, depending on which branch you subscribe to (unless you are a Marxist-Leninist or one of its other tendencies such as Stalinism or Maoism). Everyone shares the means to production and thus owns their own labor, it is the highest and ultimate form of democracy. All the countries you named are NOT Communist, and never were. I should probably mention that you cannot have Communism in one country, because by its very principle in what it seeks to achieve, it is a global thing (unlike Fascism, which is at a state or national level). Communism is the highest form of society possible, it would eliminate all socially constructed divisions that we see in our society today, not only class, but also race, gender, sexual orientation, state borders, and so on. All the wars, violence, discrimination, dehumanization, and terrible things we see today, are a product of Barbarism, aka Capitalism.

[MajesticVagrant]

I know those aren't communist. I was using them as bullshit examples people use. Thanks for the explanation, you really helped me!

[Erratus]

when you hear most people say "Communist" or "Socialist" they meanings have changed a lot from what Marx originally said. A country that is usually called communist(Cuba, USSR) is probably actually socialist (or state capitalism, depending on who you ask). As said above, communism cant exist in one country. I will go more into what communism is in a moment. The nations that often hear as being socialist (Canada, UK, France), are actually social democracies, or welfare states (or at least lean towards it). When dealing with socialist/communists, we'll be using the words as Marx initially described them to be, not as the media uses them.

Communism is when there are no nations or countries. They have all become one. This might be unsettling to some people, but the general Marxian view of nationalism is that it is generally bad. It divides people not by anything important, but just by arbitrary lines that doesn't actually exist. A communist society will be one where you can actually grow up to be whatever you want to be. It will not have money and not exclude anyone. If you want to be a farmer, you will be given land and the means to become a farmer. You will produce food and the food you produce will be given to all of society, based on who needs it the most. Because of this, you are allowed to follow whatever career you want, with no financial restrictions. There will be no classes, no homeless people on the streets or rich billionaires that own a home for every month of the year.

As mentioned before, the government will be small to non-existent. It will primarily just be a means to distribute commodities. And what you get depends largely on what society has to work with. Since people are free to pursue making any commodity they want, if people want to make computers and iPods, and there are the resources for it, they will be made and produced. A random side note too; in a capitalistic society it is important that you continually buy. Because of these, a lot of merchandise is made to be replaced. It is either fragile, wears away easily, or in need of often updating. In a communist society, this would be the case, things would be built to last and with much better quality.

A socialist society is harder to describe. Socialism is the transition from capitalism to communism. There are a lot of different takes on what this should look like. Some people say that Cuba and/or the USSR were/are socialist states, others disagree. I'll leave it vague, and simply say that transitional period.

Common misconceptions of communism are:

Communists are against democracy. Which is wrong. Some communists might be against democracy, but there are a lot of libertarian socialists/anarchists that actually support direct democracy.

That it is too idealists/goes against human nature. The principle behind it is that of general exchange. To give to a community, knowing you are not likely to get a return from the exact person you gave to, but that by giving to the community you will also get from the community. It isn't about altruism, it is about understanding what needs to be done. Another big point is how living in a capitalist world has created your mindset. Rarely do you find someone who enjoys work; so you learn that work is something to be avoided and hated. in a communist world, work will be doing what you love. Programming videos games, assembling cars, teaching the youth; work will something that you look forward to, not dread.

That communists want to take away your personal property. We don't, you are free to own you books, car, chairs, computers, and anything else that you use personally. What we want to be publicly owned are the means of production. Which are used to make money. Very likely not by you. We are talking about machines that are used by labourers. Tractors, print presses, ect...

That communists want to take your hard earned money away. We usually support higher taxes for the rich, but what we really want is the exact opposite. As mentioned above, certain people own the means of production (the things used to make commodities). They then rent out people to use the machines to make commodities. They themselves don't actually do any labour. Rather, they hire people to use the MoP to make commodities, which they in turn sell. What we believe is that the labour made it, and owner of the MoP has no right to take it and sell it, only giving the labour a partial amount of the money he produced. So we actually agree with you, no one should be exploiting you and taking your hard earn money. That is what we want to fix.

[Zealot]

Generally speaking, Socialism is considered to be a transitional period to Communism in which the workers take control of the state to prevent the bourgeoisie from returning to power, among other things. To reiterate what has been said, we want a classless, stateless society free from imperialism, racism, nationalism, nation-states, borders and all forms of exploitation which includes capitalism. Here are some quotes from prominent Communist texts.

Private Property:

"Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property..." - Marx/Engels, The Communist Manifesto

Class and The State:

"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." - Marx/Engels, The Communist Manifesto

"The proletariat seizes political power and turns the means of production into State property. But, in doing this, it abolishes itself as proletariat, abolishes all class distinction and class antagonisms, abolishes also the State as State.... As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon our present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from these, are removed, nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary" - Engels, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific

Imperialism:

"The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere." - Marx/Engels, The Communist Manifesto

"Monopolies, oligarchy, the striving for domination and not for freedom, the exploitation of an increasing number of small or weak nations by a handful of the richest or most powerful nations—all these have given birth to those distinctive characteristics of imperialism which compel us to define it as parasitic or decaying capitalism." - Lenin, Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism

[RedRose]

Communism is a moneyless (aeconomic) stateless (anarchic) classless (equal) society. That's the simplest way to put it.

The problem most people have with communism is the middle-stage. According to Marxism-Leninism (the most common branch of communism) society goes through several stages. Namely:

Pre Capitalism (feudalism, etc.) > Capitalism > -revolution- > Socialism > Communism

No-one has ever achieved communism, because it requires by definition to be a worldwide, moneyless and stateless. The USSR, China, Cuba were all (or mainly intended to be) socialist. Socialism is where the workers own the means of production.

It's important to note however, that most states under ML governments where not pure socialist, and where some deviation of it or 'state capitalism' (where small scale capitalist businesses are allowed, but the state still controls the majority of the industry).

There are other forms of communism aswell, 'Left Communism' describes ideas on the 'left' of communism, such as Luxemburgism. These generally believe the middle socialist stage should be more democratic, etc.

Anarcho-communism is a form of communism that believes we should skip the socialist stage altogether, and go straight into stateless socialism.

[Zav]

Yea, all the stuff they teach you about Communism in middle and high school is, to say the least, bullshit-filled propaganda.

Be definition, Communism is a classless, stateless society. So nope, it's not big government. In fact, it is little or even NO government at all, depending on which branch you subscribe to (unless you are a Marxist-Leninist or one of its other tendencies such as Stalinism or Maoism). Everyone shares the means to production and thus owns their own labor, it is the highest and ultimate form of democracy. All the countries you named are NOT Communist, and never were. I should probably mention that you cannot have Communism in one country, because by its very principle in what it seeks to achieve, it is a global thing (unlike Fascism, which is at a state or national level). Communism is the highest form of society possible, it would eliminate all socially constructed divisions that we see in our society today, not only class, but also race, gender, sexual orientation, state borders, and so on. All the wars, violence, discrimination, dehumanization, and terrible things we see today, are a product of Barbarism, aka Capitalism.
1. It is the highest form thus far conceived. History doesn't stop there.
2. So Anarchist Catalonia, the Free Territory, and others weren't Communist? They were stateless, classless, free, and Socialist, ergo Communism existed there.
3. They are a product of hierarchy. They exist in Feudalism, Imperialism, and slave economies as well as Capitalism.

[Mr. Natural]

Looking at communism from another vantage point, I'll say that communism is the system within which humans may realize their human and individual nature. We are social individuals who produce and create our lives, and we will realize our individual natures and potentials within socialist/communist society.

Marx: "Only in community [with others has each] individual the means of cultivating his gifts in all directions; only in the community, therefore, is personal freedom possible ....In the real community the individuals obtain their freedom in and through their association." (The German Ideology)

[Rooster]

Communism is the striving for human liberation. That means the abolition of classes and the only class that can do that is the proletariat. Class refers to how you relate to the way things are made, not by your income, not by your birth, not by your ideological outlook. If you sell your labour to work so that you can earn money to live, then you are proletariat. If you buy the labour from proletariats, with the intention of making more money (ie, capital) then you are a capitalist. As for the question of big government or not, then the answer is that we want no government. If there is a state then that means there still are classes which is something we don't want. We don't want to just set up a state to help prevent the bourgeoisie from coming back, we want to make it impossible for the exploitation of man by man to ever happen again.


Generally speaking, Socialism is considered to be a transitional period to Communism in which the workers take control of the state to prevent the bourgeoisie from returning to power, among other things.

Which is complete bullshit. Show where Marx said anything like this. Explain to me the mode of production here then and how it differs from capitalism and communism.


The problem most people have with communism is the middle-stage. According to Marxism-Leninism (the most common branch of communism) society goes through several stages. Namely:

Pre Capitalism (feudalism, etc.) > Capitalism > -revolution- > Socialism > Communism

Again, that's complete nonsense. Such a mechanistic view of history is false. What's the differences in the modes of production here? What classes exist under socialism compared to communism? How do you get from socialism to communism? Are you saying that you need another revolution or that you can reform yourself out of different modes of production?

[Zealot]

Really? Do you have to bring up tendency debates here? FFS. We were just explaining to him the difference between Socialism and Communism because he brought up Vietnam and Cuba.

Anyway, Majestic, ignore that you can form your own opinions on things like the state later.

[Rooster]

Really? Do you have to bring up tendency debates here? FFS. We were just explaining to him the difference between Socialism and Communism because he brought up Vietnam and Cuba.

Anyway, Majestic, ignore that you can form your own opinions on things like the state later.

The only differences between socialism and communism is spelling and pronunciation, not in mode of production, not in meaning. If you feel like there is, then you can explain what the mode of production under socialism is and how it differs under your concept of communism, the role of the state in such and how it differs in both capitalism and communism, the mechanisms through which the state and classes disappear, how that comes about and if that requires a revolution or if you think that these things can work themsevles out in a reformist way.

[RedRose]

Which is complete bullshit. Show where Marx said anything like this. Explain to me the mode of production here then and how it differs from capitalism and communism.

How is this bullshit? I'm putting this very simply, I'm not explaining what the means of production are because I'm trying to give a gentle, simple introduction. Socialism and communism are very different things.


"Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat."
:marx:
This quote clearly shows that Marx believed that after capitalism and before communism, there would be a dictatorship of the proletariat.

The actual means of production won't particularly change from socialism to communism but the rest of society will.



Again, that's complete nonsense. Such a mechanistic view of history is false. What's the differences in the modes of production here? What classes exist under socialism compared to communism? How do you get from socialism to communism? Are you saying that you need another revolution or that you can reform yourself out of different modes of production?

Of course history didn't happen in neat bunches like that, but I'm just trying to illustrate the basic points without having to smash him over the head with massive lumps of text. According to Marx, the state will "wither away" from socialism into communism. Under my interpretation, this will mean the world leaders will slowly begin to open borders, etc. until there is a stable communist society implemented.
Not all societies are decided simply by how commodities are mode. Communism and socialism/DotP are different because they are completely different stages in terms of economics and politics, as well as who owns the factories.

I've probably misinterpretted everything you said by the way, so sorry if I completely missed the point but I'm getting tired

[Rooster]

How is this bullshit? I'm putting this very simply, I'm not explaining what the means of production are because I'm trying to give a gentle, simple introduction. Socialism and communism are very different things.

You might be putting things in a simple way, but you're saying things that aren't true and you can't explain what socialism/communism is without referring to the means of production and the relation of people to them. If they are so different then explain to me this difference, how one gets to one and how one gets to the other.



:marx:
This quote clearly shows that Marx believed that after capitalism and before communism, there would be a dictatorship of the proletariat.Correct, that is the DotP which implies a class society (as the proletariat still exists) but it does not say that the means of production are in the hands of the workers, that it is socialist. This is the revolution, the pinnacle end of intensified class struggle, where states because classes still exist. The next point would be socialism.


The actual means of production won't particularly change from socialism to communism but the rest of society will.So they aren't different? As marxists we refer to each epoch in history based on the predominant mode of production. So there is no classes here. What is different from the lower stage of communism and the higher is the productive abilities, from a limited society to one where free access is available.


Of course history didn't happen in neat bunches like that, but I'm just trying to illustrate the basic points without having to smash him over the head with massive lumps of text. And I'm trying to explain why your approach of separating society into a mechanistic view like that is wrong. The OP already stated that he though the USSR, Cuba and Vietnam weren't communist, and they're not socialist. It's not a hard thing to understand. It becomes harder to try to explain it away when you start saying that socialism is a different mode of production, that it is different from communism.


According to Marx, the state will "wither away" from socialism into communism. According to Marx where?


Under my interpretation, this will mean the world leaders will slowly begin to open borders, etc. until there is a stable communist society implemented.Your interpretation relies on the good will of leaders, a top down approach. What should actually happen is that during the revolution the working class, with it's struggle for power, learns for itself how to govern itself.


Not all societies are decided simply by how commodities are mode. Communism and socialism are different because they are completely different societies in terms of economics and politics, as well as who owns the factories.How are they different?


I've probably misinterpretted everything you said by the way, so sorry if I completely missed the point but I'm getting tiredI think you've been reading some of the wrong texts and misinterpreting them yourself. It's a common mistake for people to make who are new to the movement. I have learned a lot from reading certain posters on this forum (and by going back to Marx and Lenin, and looking at history) and it takes time to learn. I'm still doing it.

[Lanky Wanker]

Just reverse everything they teach you about communism in school and hey, you're already Karl Marx.

[Smyg]

Just reverse everything they teach you about communism


So, uhm, we like blue now? And peaceful reform? And American ideals? :D

[Blake's Baby]

Majestic Vagrant: you've opened a can of worms I'm afraid.

There isn't a 'simple' explanation I'm afraid, as you have no-doubt realised.

However, at about the simplest level you can get and for it to still make sense....

Communism is a society in which private property and the state have been abolished. So in its modern form it has never existed, though in fact humanity seems to have survived quite nicely in 'primitive communism' without private property and the state until about 5000BC (so, for about 245,000 years for homo sapiens).

The abolition of private property means the abolition of class society, because all classes are, are groups in society who have different relations to the productive forces (land, buildings, machines etc). Once private property is abolished and we all have the same relationship to the means of production, then classes lose their meaning as there is only one class. There will be no seperate 'owners' who tell 'workers' (ie producers) what to do and take the products produced to sell to other 'workers' (who are now acting as consumers).

The state is a tool of class rule. Private property produces classes, the class with the privilege (economic power) is most generally the class with political power, so the owners are also the rulers. Even in a 'democracy' the ruling class and the owning class are the same thing even when they're not exactly the same people. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet and Ted Turner and Donald Trump don't rule America (or the world) directly but the interests of their class - the owners of property, the bourgeoisie or capitalist class - make up both business and government. Thus, states seek to promote and protect capitalism.

Capitalism - the system of private ownership of the means of production, and the exploitation of a vast number of wage labourers who have nothing to sell but their labour power to produce goods which are then sold for a profit (ie comodities) - is a worldwide system. The working class or proletariat is also a worldwide class, because it is capitalism that produces a working class, as it depends on people who work, who have their labour power exploited, to produce profit for the capitalist.

In the end capitalism is a system of exploitation, dependent on the labour of the working class to produce riches for the few. Under capitalism, the few who own the means of production get to determine the conditions of life of the vast majority of humanity. It is in the interests of the working class as a whole to do away with capitalism and the class system because then the products of societry - the social wealth that the working class produces - can be used to fulfill human need not make a few people rich. Under socialism, the social wealth will be used to benefit everyone, not just a few.

The working class is the class that can do away with capitalism because it has the latent power in our economic system. The capitalists legally own the means of production but the workers work on it, it is our labour power that is exploited, we can shut off the machines or use them to produce for ourselves. The capitalist class will never free us from slavery to private property, we must do it ourselves - 'the liberation of the working class is the task of the workering class' as the Pre-amble to the Address to the International Workingmen's Association has it.

Because capitalism is a worldwide system, and the proletariat is a worldwide class, the overthrow of capitalism must also be worldwide 'the working class has no country' and 'workers of the world unite' in Marx's words. An isolated workers revolution cannot become communist because communism is the end of classes and states; if classes and states exist, we have not reached communism. So the USSR was a class state in a world of class states, all the so-called 'socialist' countries were class states existing in a world of class states.

There is little prospect that the working class will be able to peacefully collectivise the world. First, because the capitalist class controls the media and the state (everywhere), socialism is not on the agenda; 'the ruling ideas of any epoch are the ideas of the ruling class' as Marx said. We cannot rely on the 'democracy' of the state to 'allow' socialism. I'd like that not to be true, but honestly if the state reacts in such a brutal way as we've seen in recent months (in Greece, in the US, in Egypt and Syria etc) to relatively unthreatening expressions of discontent then how much more brutal will it be if we threaten the very basis of class rule?

As a result, the working class will neewd to confront, directly, the power of the state - all states - and overthrow them. It will then be in a position to institute the dictatorship of the proletariat when it administers society and re-arranges the economy, politics, the whole fabric of social life, transforming production from a back-breaking means to enrich other people to an activity that benefits everyone (and freed from the necessity to 'make a profit' will also be more pleasant and less damaging to the environment).

This is what some people call 'socialism'. Because Lenin said so. But Marx never used 'socialism' to mean 'the dictatorship of the proletariat' and he never envisioned it being a red bastion that lasted for 70 years either. So what the Soviet Union was, and what Lenin thought 'socialism' meant, have little bearing on Marxism.

So, the working class can bring about its overthrow of the existing order, or it can be beaten and the capiutaists can win - this is the choice facing the world - socialism or barbarism. Though the working class is not ultimately defeated, there are many struggles happening around the world (more than for many years past it seems to me) we have to conclude I think that barbarism is winning.

Anyway; it turned out longer than I expected but I hope it helps somewhat.