Communist economics

[The Cheshire Cat]

What kind of economy would be used after a form of communism would have been achieved in one country? Would it be a planned economy or something different? (I'm not sure though what a planned economy exactly is, but it seems to be controlled by a minority of the people, and not by the workers themselves, is this correct? If it is, than this would not be a 'communist economy' at all?)

So what are the alternatives for a planned economy? And after a world revolution, when all countries have achieved full communism, should economy be abolished? Or would we have to maintain some form of an economy?

I know next to nothing about this topic, so sorry if asked unlogical questions.
Thank you.

[campesino]

my two cents are, the economy will be a decentralized planned economy, where communes will get together and decide what their needs are and how to meet them.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

What kind of economy would be used after a form of communism would have been achieved in one country?
Communism can never exist in one country.



Would it be a planned economy or something different?
Most here would argue for a planned economy.



(I'm not sure though what a planned economy exactly is, but it seems to be controlled by a minority of the people, and not by the workers themselves, is this correct? If it is, than this would not be a 'communist economy' at all?)

A planned economy is exactly what it sounds like, a economy that is planned. This can be done in a number of different ways but it is socialist because, as Marx argued, it disposes of the anarchy of capitalist production. A planned economy on it's own does not mean that socialism has been achieved or the dictatorship of the proletariat has been established by any means, but it is an essential part of it. Council and soviet autonomy is an absolutely awful idea for industry that is vital for the national economy and centralization would be essential.


So what are the alternatives for a planned economy?
Some argue for market socialism, but they are banned from this site for a good reason.


And after a world revolution, when all countries have achieved full communism, should economy be abolished? Or would we have to maintain some form of an economy?

This is all speculation and we can't really know until those material conditions necessitate and show themselves.


I know next to nothing about this topic, so sorry if asked unlogical questions.
Thank you.

1. Don't sell yourself short, I have seen much dumber questions and posts on this site.

2. Don't be afraid to ask questions.

[ckaihatsu]

Talking about this topic is interesting because while it's somewhat speculative, it's still *scientific* because it's premised on "known" facts for such a potential future society -- namely that the society would be able to produce a surplus, like our own.

From this one little certainty we can *extrapolate*, with a kind of sociological / anthropological reasoning, to describe potential conditions -- within certain general parameters.

So, stepping backwards in causation, if such a society would be able to produce a surplus *who* would be the ones producing it? Would they use machinery, as we do today, to leverage their efforts? And who would control this surplus?

*Or* -- is this an incorrect line of reasoning, and should we say that social production would come to a halt, like during the Middle Ages, after a post-capitalist moment of wealth redistribution?

It seems very unlikely that a post-capitalist society springboarding from the accomplishments of our present era would decide to abruptly *stop* using productive methods for itself. Would the politics of its revolution somehow propel an *austere* way of life and an *abstaining* from technology?

A revolution would most likely be a material-*positive* event, and not an *apocalyptic* one -- humanity has tended to *progress* in its tool-usage if unimpeded, so most likely a revolution would propel a rapid *advancement* of social production, not curtail it.

So, as for any kind of day-to-day planning, we can talk about "best-case" and "worst-case" scenarios, at best.





Best-case is that everything happens quickly and money instantly becomes obsolete and anachronistic -- this would equate to the resounding defeat of the bourgeoisie on a worldwide mass basis and the quick dissolution of its state. It would be replaced more-or-less in a bottom-up organic way with production rapidly reorganized on vast scales (for economies of scale and efficiency).

Worst-case is that there's an ongoing situation of dual-power where contending forces from the bourgeoisie and proletariat linger on in protracted labor-based battles, both political and physical. World public opinion remains divided and the class war takes on the characteristics of a country-by-country civil war between the classes. In such a situation it would be more-than-understandable for revolutionary forces to call for the seizing of the state, and to use it in an authoritarian, top-down way in the interests of the workers' forces, against the imperialists. This could include a system of labor vouchers, in an attempt to assert some kind of consistent economic valuation system, as counterposed to imperialist/colonialist resource extraction, corporatist/militarist syndicalism, and market-type commodity-production valuations.

[Comrades Unite!]

I just have to correct you as a Planned Economy is mainly controlled by the state and Communism is a society which is stateless.

[el_chavista]

I just have to correct you as a Planned Economy is mainly controlled by the state and Communism is a society which is stateless.Not so fast comrade, in Catalonia (Cataluña) during the Spanish civil war (1936-39), the Unions (the socialist CGT and the anarchocommunist CNT) created a General Council of Industries that coordinated production and distribution like a general administration.

[The Jay]

An economy can never be banned, it's how resources are distributed. An economy is not the same as a market. An economy can be socialistic, capitalistic, ect.

[Rafiq]

"Communist Economics" don't exist.

[ckaihatsu]

What kind of economy would be used after a form of communism would have been achieved in one country?





[A]t any given point in the revolution to surpass commodity production the political question will be: "Do we push on ahead to politically collectivize more production, or do we rest and capitulate to the capitalist way of doing things by trading with them?"





(I'm not sure though what a planned economy exactly is, but it seems to be controlled by a minority of the people, and not by the workers themselves, is this correct? If it is, than this would not be a 'communist economy' at all?)


What you're describing in this part would be an elitist Stalinistic party favoritism.





Would it be a planned economy or something different?


The reason to overthrow capitalism is because it's 'hands-off' -- no one's actually at the wheel, and we see the disastrous results, as with the ongoing Euro crisis, not to mention consistent everyday exploitation and oppression. A revolution would allow a mass *conscious* control over exactly what is pre-planned for production and distribution.





So what are the alternatives for a planned economy? And after a world revolution, when all countries have achieved full communism, should economy be abolished? Or would we have to maintain some form of an economy?


I've had some good discussions here at RevLeft that go over the subject of scarcity-vs.-abundance, on a per-item basis.

The argument comes up that sure, we all would most likely agree on a voluntarist collectivized mass production for everyone's basic humane needs, but *then* what should be produced after *that* -- ?

I also ran into a good *approach* to this that inspired me to create a graphic illustration of it -- depending on the item there could be a political economy of *gift production* (as just described, for the most common and necessary goods and services), but it could "taper" downward into a multi-communal communal-democratic basis of production for any given locality's more-specific, locally-agreed-upon requirements for mass production. This, too, could give way to a still-lesser system of local labor vouchers for more tentative, short-term, specialized production that's not large-scale in scope.

Finally, at the fringes, a kind of market system under political supervision could be allowed to exist for the most trivial and specialized items that couldn't easily be provided-for with general collectivized mass production. (This could also equate to individually made artistic arts and crafts, etc.)


Multi-Tiered System of Productive and Consumptive Zones for a Post-Capitalist Political Economy

http://tinyurl.com/mtspczpcpe