Communists who want Capitalism (but it has a State so it's ok!)

[Dogs On Acid]

To cut a long story short, I joined the Portuguese Communist Party because:

- It's the only influential leftist organization in my hometown.
- A great place to meet fellow Communists.
- I can help with the struggle more easily (protests, fliers, etc.) because the party and union funds propaganda, and I'm poor so I could never afford it myself.

Now when I joined I was expecting to meet all these Marxists and have in-depth conversations about the Soviet Union and Marxism in general with the party staff.

I couldn't of been more disillusioned.

I'm not a Leninist, but I'm in no way Anti-Leninist, I can see first hand they also struggle for Socialism, it's just they have the wrong ideas on how to get there.

I work with a guy from the Party on weekends. We usually talk about Portuguese politics and whatnot, until one day we spoke on Marxism:


Me: "The party should do charity to a certain degree, even if we are against it, to start giving it a good name among the Portuguese. Some people still believe we eat babies and this is still taught in some churches. Now I'm not saying that we should support charity, what I'm saying is that we should act as a catalyst to people helping each-other, symbiotically, as in communism, without relying on the State, without any sort of centralized organization. We should build our own shelters, our own restaurants, our own communities."

Him: "That's the responsibility of the State. Nobody should be doing anything like that. Once we get into power (the party), we should offer all of that as Welfare."

Me: "Welfare is a Capitalist idea. Once we get into power we should start building the foundations of Communism, building communities and whatnot completely independent of the State and of Capital. This way, the State can dissolve as it's no longer necessary."

Him: "You must be dreaming! Dissolve the State? What planet do you live on?"

Me: "That's one of the central ideas of Marxism. Are you serious?"

Him: "I believe in a strong State, with plenty Welfare. That's what defines us as good Communists. It's the State's responsibility to help people, and believing it will cease to exist is silly."


This guy has been appointed by the Central Committee in the past to administer an area of Portugal. Now not only are there plenty of Capitalists like him in the ranks of administration, they also have NO IDEA about Marxism.

Fuck Democratic Centralism and fuck Leninist Capitalism.

Thank you.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

To cut a long story short, I joined the Portuguese Communist Party because:

- It's the only influential leftist organization in my hometown.
- A great place to meet fellow Communists.
- I can help with the struggle more easily (protests, fliers, etc.) because the party and union funds propaganda, and I'm poor so I could never afford it myself.

Now when I joined I was expecting to meet all these Marxists and have in-depth conversations about the Soviet Union and Marxism in general with the party staff.

I couldn't of been more disillusioned.

I'm not a Leninist, but I'm in no way Anti-Leninist, I can see first hand they also struggle for Socialism, it's just they have the wrong ideas on how to get there.

I work with a guy from the Party on weekends. We usually talk about Portuguese politics and whatnot, until one day we spoke on Marxism:


Me: "The party should do charity to a certain degree, even if we are against it, to start giving it a good name among the Portuguese. Some people still believe we eat babies and this is still taught in some churches. Now I'm not saying that we should support charity, what I'm saying is that we should act as a catalyst to people helping each-other, symbiotically, as in communism, without relying on the State, without any sort of centralized organization. We should build our own shelters, our own restaurants, our own communities."

Him: "That's the responsibility of the State. Nobody should be doing anything like that. Once we get into power (the party), we should offer all of that as Welfare."

Me: "Welfare is a Capitalist idea. Once we get into power we should start building the foundations of Communism, building communities and whatnot completely independent of the State and of Capital. This way, the State can dissolve as it's no longer necessary."

Him: "You must be dreaming! Dissolve the State? What planet do you live on?"

Me: "That's one of the central ideas of Marxism. Are you serious?"

Him: "I believe in a strong State, with plenty Welfare. That's what defines us as good Communists. It's the State's responsibility to help people, and believing it will cease to exist is silly."


This guy has been appointed by the Central Committee in the past to administer an area of Portugal. Now not only are there plenty of Capitalists like him in the ranks of administration, they also have NO IDEA about Marxism.

Fuck Democratic Centralism and fuck Leninist Capitalism.

Thank you.

I doubt that is what he said, and if he did say that, then he is not a Marxist or a Leninist. Lenin said that under socialism/the dictatorship of the proletariat, "he who does not work, neither shall he eat." Either you are lying or your friend is a phony communist.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

And real Leninists are not social democrats who worship welfare. Quite the opposite.

[Dogs On Acid]

I doubt that is what he said, and if he did say that, then he is not a Marxist or a Leninist. Lenin said that under socialism/the dictatorship of the proletariat, "he who does not work, neither shall he eat." Either you are lying or your friend is a phony communist.

I must be lying because it's impossible for the great Communist Party to contain any sort of reactionaries.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

I must be lying because it's impossible for the great Communist Party to contain any sort of reactionaries.


I actually do not like the Portuguese Communist Party. Anyways, there are always going to be reactionaries in every communist party, but your friend sounds so ignorant, I could not believe it.

[Manic Impressive]

As someone who is against the whole aberration which is Leninism I am not surprised by his comments in the slightest. I've seen many M-L's on here say the same thing.

I had a conversation with someone from SPEW recently which shocked me. When asked why they were out on the street campaigning for reform, they told me that's what the party stood for. I was quite shocked not because a Trotskyist group was advocating reform but because they were nonchalantly admitting it like they saw nothing wrong with it. I asked a Trotskyist on here and they told that was a legitimate strategy in their eyes. So the shock for me was not that Trotskyists are reformist, as i knew that. But that they openly admitted it and saw nothing wrong with it. Did you not know that statism is quite wide spread among stalinists? Or was your surprise like mine in that you didn't expect them to admit it?

[Omsk]

Fuck Democratic Centralism and fuck Leninist Capitalism.


This really shows how mature you are.

The party obviously has problems,because they let you in,in the first place,because,if they knew that you would speak against Leninism and some of it's principles,i really don't know how did you get in.It shows that they are probably opportunistic,since they don't check the ideological correctness of the people they let in the party.

You are generalizing,and what you described (If we suppose the text you wrote is actually true and the conversation happened.) is either the problem of the individual man,or the policies of the very party you mentioned.

In this short text,you showed your opportunism,your preparedness to go over your believes because of an opportunity to do something (Probably nothing,since you got to work with people who are dubious marxists.) you showed your quick changing temper and opinions and some un-ortodox views which are incompatible with the views of the party you joined.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

do "communist parties" still follow the comintern?

most commies agree we should only use electoral politics as a platform for strengthening working class mobilization against capitalism and the bourgeois state. but i know not all of us are the same page on this. there are some self proclaimed communists and trotskyists who act like social democrats.

[Sasha]

Welcome to eurocomunism, dictatorship of the social-democrat.

[Dogs On Acid]

As someone who is against the whole aberration which is Leninism I am not surprised by his comments in the slightest. I've seen many M-L's on here say the same thing.

I had a conversation with someone from SPEW recently which shocked me. When asked why they were out on the street campaigning for reform, they told me that's what the party stood for. I was quite shocked not because a Trotskyist group was advocating reform but because they were nonchalantly admitting it like they saw nothing wrong with it. I asked a Trotskyist on here and they told that was a legitimate strategy in their eyes. So the shock for me was not that Trotskyists are reformist, as i knew that. But that they openly admitted it and saw nothing wrong with it. Did you not know that statism is quite wide spread among stalinists? Or was your surprise like mine in that you didn't expect them to admit it?

Honestly didn't expect it coming from someone who was actually in administration. I guess I could expect it from the generic party member, but guys with responsibilities? Wow...

[Dogs On Acid]

do "communist parties" still follow the comintern?

most commies agree we should only use electoral politics as a platform for strengthening working class mobilization against capitalism and the bourgeois state. but i know not all of us are the same page on this. there are some self proclaimed communists and trotskyists who act like social democrats.

I don't know what the official position is anymore TBH. Before I joined I had a conversation with someone in the youth wing, also "high ranking".

I asked if revolution came, and the PCP were in power, how would they change things.

She said "slowly".

[Dogs On Acid]

This really shows how mature you are.

The party obviously has problems,because they let you in,in the first place,because,if they knew that you would speak against Leninism and some of it's principles,i really don't know how did you get in.It shows that they are probably opportunistic,since they don't check the ideological correctness of the people they let in the party.

You are generalizing,and what you described (If we suppose the text you wrote is actually true and the conversation happened.) is either the problem of the individual man,or the policies of the very party you mentioned.

In this short text,you showed your opportunism,your preparedness to go over your believes because of an opportunity to do something (Probably nothing,since you got to work with people who are dubious marxists.) you showed your quick changing temper and opinions and some un-ortodox views which are incompatible with the views of the party you joined.

Hurt your feelings? Sorry about that... I know it's hard to see Leninism bite itself in the ass. I used to be a Leninist myself you know?

[gorillafuck]

that sounds like every formerly soviet allied CP after 1991.

[hatzel]

The party obviously has problems,because they let you in,in the first place,because,if they knew that you would speak against Leninism and some of it's principles,i really don't know how did you get in.It shows that they are probably opportunistic,since they don't check the ideological correctness of the people they let in the party.

Hah. This is precious. This is absolutely fucking precious. This is Ming vase precious. This is Koh-i-Noor precious. This is new-born baby cradled in mummy's arms precious. I'm not even kidding. Not in the slightest. Absolutely adorable. But also downright insane.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I don't know what the official position is anymore TBH. Before I joined I had a conversation with someone in the youth wing, also "high ranking".

I asked if revolution came, and the PCP were in power, how would they change things.

She said "slowly".

this is the stuff our (brazil's) best jokes are made of!

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

im not gonna defend marxism-leninism here because im not familiar with any decent ML organizations, but what has been posted here is a very far stretch from what lenin wrote, did and what the comintern defined as ML. and let's please not pretend like this is strictly a ML problem because there are plenty of trot parties and "luxembourgists" and others including fairly prominent users of this forum who are guilty of the same thing

[Agent Ducky]

This really shows how mature you are.

The party obviously has problems,because they let you in,in the first place,because,if they knew that you would speak against Leninism and some of it's principles,i really don't know how did you get in.It shows that they are probably opportunistic,since they don't check the ideological correctness of the people they let in the party.

You are generalizing,and what you described (If we suppose the text you wrote is actually true and the conversation happened.) is either the problem of the individual man,or the policies of the very party you mentioned.

In this short text,you showed your opportunism,your preparedness to go over your believes because of an opportunity to do something (Probably nothing,since you got to work with people who are dubious marxists.) you showed your quick changing temper and opinions and some un-ortodox views which are incompatible with the views of the party you joined.

OP isn't saying that's what all Leninists believe. He said "Leninist capitalism" as in "People who say they are Leninists but are actually capitalists."
Am I the only one who understood that?

[Dogs On Acid]

OP isn't saying that's what all Leninists believe. He said "Leninist capitalism" as in "People who say they are Leninists but are actually capitalists."
Am I the only one who understood that?

That's exactly what I meant. In fact I said at the beginning that I wasn't anti-Leninist at all.

[João Jerónimo]

In communist society there may still be something akin to a state, yes.
However, in essence it ceases to be a state as states are today, because it ceases to be the organization of violence in the hands of the ruling class, as the ruling class itself disappears.
In other words, human being will still have the need of pan-social institutions to organize their collective living, economy, production, et-cetera, albeit less that they need today. But these institutions will not represent an imposition of the will of some classes upon others, as they represent today or in socialist society.

JJ.

[João Jerónimo]

Also, I think you are very wrong in the way you point to charity. Charity is a work-arround to atenuate the limitations of the "free" market. Communist society has no market, so it has no need for charity (duh!). Not even socialist society has need for charity, because in socialism the market ceases to be a "free" market, and price controls and central planning come into place.

However, IMHO your (our) comrade is wrong about that thing if the strong state... The state sometime is stronger, sometimes is weaker, and revolutions typically need a strong state in order to impose themselves against the previous ruling class, but this depends on the dynamic of class struggle.

JJ.

[Dogs On Acid]

Also, I think you are very wrong in the way you point to charity. Charity is a work-arround to atenuate the limitations of the "free" market. Communist society has no market, so it has no need for charity (duh!). Not even socialist society has need for charity, because in socialism the market ceases to be a "free" market, and price controls and central planning come into place.

However, IMHO your (our) comrade is wrong about that thing if the strong state... The state sometime is stronger, sometimes is weaker, and revolutions typically need a strong state in order to impose themselves against the previous ruling class, but this depends on the dynamic of class struggle.

JJ.

Camarada não percebeste bem :)

What I was saying is get the working class to organize itself, create it's own institutions and it's own democratic organizations. It's own shelters for the homeless and it's own activity centers. In other words, act as a catalyst to communal mentality.

This:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_power

[João Jerónimo]

there are some self proclaimed communists and trotskyists who act like social democrats.
I thought you were talking about what communists say, not about how communists act...

JJ.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

well the problem obviously was that the guy wasnt talking about a socialist state, but the bourgeois state under a Communist Party administration

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

for what it's worth this song is awesome

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90TJ6geLBlY

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

while i recognize that change will only come about thru revolution, i do realize that welfare and state assistance and public services are crucial things for the working class under capitalism and these institutions should be defended by communists from the attacks of the right.

[Dogs On Acid]

for what it's worth this song is awesome

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90TJ6geLBlY

The party actually has 2 Hymns. The one you posted and this one which we dance to as the Festa do Avante (the largest festival in Portugal held by the Communist Party every September):

L17OUWx3B2E

[João Jerónimo]

Camarada não percebeste bem :)
Olhe que não, olhe que não...


What I was saying is get the working class to organize itself, create it's own institutions and it's own democratic organizations. It's own shelters for the homeless and it's own activity centers. In other words, act as a catalyst to communal mentality.If what you defend it to foster the kind of good intentions that are present among many (I believe) people who practice charity, then I'm for it, and I truly believe that the party should be less-oposed-to-it (however, as we usually say, the party has some much more pressing tasks than that one).
However, what you said then was that after gaining power "we should building the foundations of Communism, building communities completely independent of the State and of Capital", patati, patatá... And there, I think you are lumping together the question (issue) of power; the practical ways of gaining the working class (and it's natural allies) to socialism;and the withering away of the state.
Socialism revolution destroys the power of capital (the class of capitalists). How? Mainly it's nationalization that break the property ties between the means of production and capital. Capital then ceases to exist as an objective social class, but it interests are to survive many generations into the future, so struggle continues. Then comes the building of working-class power, by creating self-management, workers control, peoples power, etc, etc. It's in the program of the party, btw... To begin the building of the foundations of Communism you first have to get rid of capital, so there is no such thing as "building communities completely independent (...) of Capital" after creating socialism.
To make socialist revolution, you need to foster solidarity. Supporting some types of charity may help in this task. But it's an entirely different matter to say that for communist society to arrive you will need "communities completely independent of the State", or that you should start to build then because otherwise you will not achieve communism. This does not mean that they cannot exist, however. But, as far as the withering away of the state is concerned, I don't see a problem in a socialist society laking communities independent from the state. We could of course discuss whether the existence of these communities could strengthen socialism or not.

Btw, it's perhaps a good idea to remember that during the carnation revolution a cooperative movement emerged among some communities, and that some of them went as far as building apartments.

JJ.

[João Jerónimo]

The party actually has 2 Hymns. The one you posted and this one which we dance to as the Festa do Avante (the largest festival in Portugal held by the Communist Party every September):
Officially the anthem is the Internationale.

JJ.

[Omsk]

Hurt your feelings? Sorry about that... I know it's hard to see Leninism bite itself in the ass. I used to be a Leninist myself you know?


Of course not,the party you joined is Brezhnevite,and it was quite loyal to the USSR until it collapsed.And how did Leninism,a political ideology,'bite itself in the ass' ? Just because you,while talking with a member of a Brezhnevite party,discovered that he is not much of a communist,doesn't mean anything.And obviously,democratic centralism,doesn't have anything to do with this little story,in fact,it's completely unrelated.



Hah. This is precious. This is absolutely fucking precious. This is Ming vase precious. This is Koh-i-Noor precious. This is new-born baby cradled in mummy's arms precious. I'm not even kidding. Not in the slightest. Absolutely adorable. But also downright insane.


Excuse me?What is the point of this?

[hatzel]

Excuse me?What is the point of this?

Are you familiar with the concept of a discussion forum? If so, the point is to do as one does on a discussion forum...

[Omsk]

Are you familiar with the concept of a discussion forum? If so, the point is to do as one does on a discussion forum...


Oh really?Oh i didn't know that.I was talking about your very low personal attacks and insults.

[Dogs On Acid]

Of course not,the party you joined is Brezhnevite,and it was quite loyal to the USSR until it collapsed.And how did Leninism,a political ideology,'bite itself in the ass' ? Just because you,while talking with a member of a Brezhnevite party,discovered that he is not much of a communist,doesn't mean anything.And obviously,democratic centralism,doesn't have anything to do with this little story,in fact,it's completely unrelated.



Excuse me?What is the point of this?

Democratic Centralism is exactly what got him appointed as an administrator (he isn't any longer, but spend about a year I think). The fact is he got appointed without any sort of consensus from the bottom, it was the Central Committee who appointed a Social-Democrat. And anyone who didn't like it could get stuffed.

[Anarpest]

It is somewhat ironic how most supposed vanguard parties end up more resemblant to the excreta of the working class movement.


Oh really?Oh i didn't know that.I was talking about your very low personal attacks and insults.

Omsk: A person who never substitutes low personal attacks and insults for discussion.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

Kind of sounds like the CPUSA. Just more confirmation for me that almost all Comintern parties are going to have to be struggled against for real socialist revolution.

[Omsk]

Democratic Centralism is exactly what got him appointed as an administrator (he isn't any longer, but spend about a year I think). The fact is he got appointed without any sort of consensus from the bottom, it was the Central Committee who appointed a Social-Democrat. And anyone who didn't like it could get stuffed.

Of course not,the main principle and 'point' of democratic centralism is the unity in actions,or the decision,and the freedom to debate.Your problem has nothing to do with democratic centralism,and everything to do with the party you are talking about.Becuase,if the party valued democratic-centralism,some opposing votes were sure to be there,or voices who were against.

This particular problem has nothing to do with the principle of democratic-centralism,it just shows that the party is full of opportunists and is corrupt,ideologically weak,which is natural,because it's a Brezhnevite party.


Omsk: A person who never substitutes low personal attacks and insults for discussion.

You have 20 posts and you joined this forum just recently,you don't know anything about me,or my posts and opinions,you based your view on the fact that i am a Marxist-Leninist,and nothing more.

[Anarpest]

You have 20 posts and you joined this forum just recently,you don't know anything about me,or my posts and opinions Perhaps, but I have read this thread.

[Omsk]

Too bad but you won't find insults and low attacks as substitutions for actual arguments which I wrote, in this thread,or any other.I just won't tolerate slander and false assumptions that are divorced from the ideological basis,and actual theoretical work.

[Geiseric]

There is a difference between Leninists and Social Dems... I don't think an actual Leninist party exists in Europe or the Americas right now.

[NewLeft]

There is a difference between Leninists and Social Dems... I don't think an actual Leninist party exists in Europe or the Americas right now.
that's too bad, it would have been cute :lol:

[Rooster]

while i recognize that change will only come about thru revolution, i do realize that welfare and state assistance and public services are crucial things for the working class under capitalism and these institutions should be defended by communists from the attacks of the right.

Meh, this just opens up a whole bag of problems. Many of the Leninists on the forum here are in favour of the welfare state that was created under Lenin/Stalin (that whole "state capitalism made to benefit the people" thing). But, on the other hand, you also get ones, again mostly Stalin loving Leninists of some variety, who denounce the working class gains in this very area in capitalist countries as bourgeois or some form of labour aristocracy. Go figure.

[João Jerónimo]

This particular problem has nothing to do with the principle of democratic-centralism,it just shows that the party is full of opportunists and is corrupt,ideologically weak,which is natural,because it's a Brezhnevite party.
The party may have some opportunists because it's impossible for a party to be perfect, and because people take time to learn the theory and practice. And, you should see, opportunists are not to be expelled just because they have opportunist opinions. They are to be expelled if they break the statute (party constitution). Overall, the militants of the PCP are not opportunists, and my experience is that the average PCP member is quite conscious about the need to struggle against capital. This doesn't means that I have never heard some ideas that I don't agree with, and some people I know have expressed some disgust with some of the actions of the party in the past.

Excuse me, but I find it very annoying to read someone attacking a party when one doesn't even know it by self experience. Where are you from, by the way?

JJ.

[Thirsty Crow]

I actually do not like the Portuguese Communist Party. Anyways, there are always going to be reactionaries in every communist party, but your friend sounds so ignorant, I could not believe it.
Oh here's a great idea, don't treat party membership as a "the more the merrier" affair and actually start placing emphasis on the platform (though I doubt that the conception of communism could play such a part in a platform of an organization such as CP of Portugal).

[MustCrushCapitalism]

And real Leninists are not social democrats who worship welfare. Quite the opposite.
if this were not chit chat I'd be reppin up this here post.

Yeah, this guy isn't a Leninist at all.

[Omsk]

The party may have some opportunists because it's impossible for a party to be perfect, and because people take time to learn the theory and practice. And, you should see, opportunists are not to be expelled just because they have opportunist opinions. They are to be expelled if they break the statute (party constitution). Overall, the militants of the PCP are not opportunists, and my experience is that the average PCP member is quite conscious about the need to struggle against capital. This doesn't means that I have never heard some ideas that I don't agree with, and some people I know have expressed some disgust with some of the actions of the party in the past.




You obviously know about the mentioned organization,care to share some more information on it?(Some of it's views?)

[OCMO]

I think it's a little unfair to compare to CPUSA, eurocoms and soc-dems, a party that not only in its history was one of the most defiant forces against portuguese fascism and tryied to push forward a socialist program after fascism fell, altough it may be argued that it was more on a "allendista" way than a bolshevik one, and certainly some critiques can be done to method in that period, but it never to this day aligned in terms of legislation with other parties like the Socialist Party who are full capitalists.

The party still advocates what was done in the revolutionary period, like free education and healthcare, nationalization of key sectors of the economy, agrarian reform, etc, and it was done with the envolment of the party and working-class military officers, among other progressives who weren'te envolved in the process of counter-revolution. Where the party still has a hold on a municipal level, they are plenty of organizations for the elderly, youth, sport, leisure and culture organized for and by the people for their well-being, it's anti-EU anti-NATO as never supported an european treaty or a military operation and still maintains this position that is coherent with his action.

It never felt the pressure in the parliament to compromise, because only uses as a platform to make a stand proposing laws condemned to not pass, promote several debates in the parliament because it gets media attention often being the most respectful members, wich is a plus on gaining simpathy with the working class. There is a sort of catch-phrase used by liberals not blinded by anti-communist that say if the communist were in control,it might not be bad, they say this by the actions and results the party shows to portuguese society.

I can agree, that on a ideological level is not at top, and sometimes I think it could go further, but it compensates with a enormous amount of activity and struggles from work-place to national that improve peoples lives. So comparing it to Obama-loving, yellow compromisers, austerity-pushers twats is a bit of a strecht. Not saying you should love it, i'm well aware of the different tendencies here, but, at least, not putting them in the same categories as others.