How would the ideal communist state work?

[Y2A]

I'd like know how you believe a true communist state would work. Please explain it to me detail. I will not critize until I see how you plan to accomplish a communist state and how it would work.

[hazard]

first of all

hehe

a communist state would be a global community according to MARX, and would only exist after every nation state became socialist

so your question should really be how should a true socialist state work

I think that the USSR and Red China are both good examples, as both have the idea in their countries to expand socialism to all corners of the globe so as to make the whole bloody thing communist. so, while most members think of Cuba as a good example, it is too small to influence the capitalist juggernauts that surround it. I think Canada is a good example, as it is a pateient and persistent socialist country that, through modified free enterprize, thumbs its nose at the United States and retains excellent ties with all other socialist countries and former socialist countries worldwide.

[Pete]

'Communist state' is an oxymoron.

My ideal society would be a decentralized federation of people who look out for eachother, and the individual communities are small enough that direct democracy could work, but large enough to have a level of self sufficency.

Of course I forsee a large decrease in population (of course so did Malthus, but then we all know what happened then) and a slight distrust of technology that allows me to believe that putting complete or major fate in it is little past stupid.

You probaly want something more in detail. I am writting on it. Being a poet and a novelist I guess it is my way of getting things out. Perhaps if you are ever browsing through the literature forum you will see it. The working title is 'Of Darkness and Blossoms.' (currently 60 or so pages, just beginning of course, expecta few hundred minimum..so quite obviously only a bit will be postedo n this site ever, like with my epic).

-Pete

[Y2A]

I'd like you to or any of the other posters to explain, maoism, leninism, marxism, and other forms of communism in detail. How would there economies insure that the wealth is spread without taking to account the corruption that could come from this kind of power from the government. Please, I'm trying really hard not to judge, just to learn what you believe true communism is.

[redstar2000]

A recent innovation in the theory of how a communist society might function is demarchy.

Democracy without Elections (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1067737904&archive=1067850372&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Pete]

Marxist-Leninism (aka the base of Maoism, Stalinism, Trotskyism and the such) is based around a theory of the Vangaurd. This is were a group of elite revolutionaries lead the way for the emancapation of the entire population. Che Guevara learned the hard way that you could not create the revolutionary conditoins by simply fighting a revolution without mass grassroots (to take a term from the rightwing here in Canada) support. He died in Bolivia because of this. This is the most authoritarian stream of Marxism, and they are obessed, trust me OBESSED, with claiming that they are the true hiers of Marx and Engels, and especially Lenin. All examples of these systems, minus Cuba, have failed, or are in their death lurches, or are merely disguised as a form of socialism but really aren't. Other short lived revolutions have followed these models, but being short lived their is little to say, but Imperialism killed them (grenada, nicarauga, el slavador, ect).

Marxism is based on materialism, dialectial history, and another hting that elludes me. Materialism is basically we are material their is no 'other plan' the sacred does not exist. Period. Dialectical history is the process of class conflict that goes from thesis to antithesis to synthesis over and over and over, and will until communism, the classless society, has been reached. I have only dabbled in the writings of Marx, as being dogmatic to a mans name is just as bad as being dogmatic to something that doesn't exist, so others will be in a better position ot extrapoloate. Read the Manifesto, it is a good summary.

Anarchism is a subject that I've been leaning towards, though of course with my own glancings at. I won't try to define it past stateless, classless, privateless, and moneyless. Collectives and federations. Think collectives and federations.

Personally I believe almost any form of Marxism comes up short as it is more about humans than the environment in general. I am an environmentalist (look at my avatar, it should tell you the basis of my beliefs) and an 'extreme' leftist. I think less extreme than genuine. I reject reformism (that our current systems can be changed from within) though I do vote because it is five minutes for me to give the government the finger and vote for a party that has yet to win a seat (Green Party) in any election, if only to prove the system does not work. I reject the vanguard approach. It is too elitist, it has too much blood on its hands, and its followers are not my cup of tea, persea. Often dogmatic, and even more often dogmatic in their insistance that they are not dogmatic. I reject centralization, it is the antithesis of communism, as it gives too much power to the state. I believe in grassroots education, strong unions fighting for the rights of each worker, not for a cut of their salaries. I believe in the general goodness of humanity, and reject anythoughts that it is inherently evil. I believe that we can only conitnue to exist in unicent with the world around us, and that we are as mucha part of it as it is a part of us.

Perhaps I should stop talking about me, but more or less I would be what some would call an anarchist, what others a I don't know what. I am not an authoritarian or reformist (democratic socialism, social democracy) in any way, but... well... leftism is like the light that hits the prism, and the prism shows all of its true colours, some a lot less pleasant than others.

Hope that helped.

-Pete

[Y2A]

So what he is basically saying is to have a true democracy like those of ancient greece. However there are many flaws to this theory and although it seems much more practical to me then communist revolution it will ultimitely hurt more then it will help due to the fact that the majority of any nation are uninformed individuals and compulsatory voting would bring this flaw to light. However this still does not explain my original post. How would a communist "state" run? How would it's economy work? How would you expect to get advances on technology and medicine that can save future lives? Why do you believe it would be immune from corruption? What is maoism. marxism, leninism, etc... in detail?

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 04:58 AM
So what he is basically saying is to have a true democracy like those of ancient greece. However there are many flaws to this theory and although it seems much more practical to me then communist revolution it will ultimitely hurt more then it will help due to the fact that the majority of any nation are uninformed individuals and compulsatory voting would bring this flaw to light. However this still does not explain my original post. How would a communist "state" run? How would it's economy work? How would you expect to get advances on technology and medicine that can save future lives? Why do you believe it would be immune from corruption? What is maoism. marxism, leninism, etc... in detail?
You will get a different answer from everyone. (They haven't really agreed on that yet)

[SonofRage]

Here is a good place to start http://reds.linefeed.org/vocab.html

[Bolshevika]

All examples of these systems, minus Cuba, have failed, or are in their death lurches, or are merely disguised as a form of socialism but really aren't.

Pete:

I do not see how the collapse or revision inside the USSR, China, etc has anything to do with the scientific sucesses of the ideology (Marxism-Leninism)?

During the 30's and 40's many Marxists, even liberal Marxists and Social-democrats called the USSR a sucessful alternative to capitalism. It is a mystery to me as to why people who have been to the Soviet Union under Stalin, saw how things were in comparison to the rest of the world, and praised it now jump on the anti-stalin bandwagon. I believe this may be a tactic to win support for their party (for example Workers World Party has said they are not "Stalinists", even though they obviously are) since Stalin is so unpopular. I am very critical of this because it is intellectually dishonest.

Do you truly believe the revisionist scum that is Khruschev, Deng, and Gorbachev were genuine Marxist-Leninists? Any rational person will tell you they certainly were not!

You must admit though, with the short amount of time Marxist-Leninists have had power in USSR and China, we have achieved a lot.

This revision problem is a problem in all ideologies, the wrong people with foreign intentions gaining support.

The only way to have this absolutely defeated is by destroying all imperialists who hire subversionists. The United States in particular, then all revisionists will not have much support and simply be ignored.

[el_profe]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 04:27 AM
I think that the USSR and Red China are both good examples, as both have the idea in their countries to expand socialism to all corners of the globe so as to make the whole bloody thing communist.
:o USSR's idea of expansion was taking over many easter european countries and controling the gov's of the rest of the Eastern european countries all by force.
Look what happened in Hungary, they had a revolution against the socialist(totalitarian) gov. and the USSR sent its army to install the socialist gov. again.
Both USSR and china oppressed anyone who did not believe in communism, like crushing other political parties.

[Pete]

I do not see how the collapse or revision inside the USSR, China, etc has anything to do with the scientific sucesses of the ideology (Marxism-Leninism)?

I was refering to, more or less, when I said believe they are socialist but arent places like 'Red China.'

The collapse of such places, or mere vieled conversation, isn't really a secret. I agree it doesn't show the success/failure of scientific socialism, but of, in my opinion, the vangaurd elitism that plagues most of the marxist leninist attempts.

Your obession with revisioinism is a bit disturbing though... what if the revisions are good? And shouldn't one, especially a self critical leftist, always be revising his/her (I am being overly politically correct here for some unknown reason.. must be the tea..) theorys?

[Bolshevika]

Your obession with revisioinism is a bit disturbing though... what if the revisions are good? And shouldn't one, especially a self critical leftist, always be revising his/her (I am being overly politically correct here for some unknown reason.. must be the tea..) theorys?

The revision I speak of has little to do with theory and everything to do with ideal betrayal.

The revisionism I usually refer to is capitalism, the market reforms by Khruschev, and most notably Gorbachev, the betrayal of the planned economy. If you believe we shouldn't have atleast basic principles to go by under socialism (central government, democracy, planned economy) to stick by, then what is the point of having an ideology?

[synthesis]

The revisionism I usually refer to is capitalism, the market reforms by Khruschev, and most notably Gorbachev, the betrayal of the planned economy.

Consider this - would the backtracking process initiated by Khrushchev and completed by Gorbachev have even been possible had the decision-making process not been centralized to a discrete state apparatus?

[Bolshevika]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 07:27 AM

The revisionism I usually refer to is capitalism, the market reforms by Khruschev, and most notably Gorbachev, the betrayal of the planned economy.

Consider this - would the backtracking process initiated by Khrushchev and completed by Gorbachev have even been possible had the decision-making process not been centralized to a discrete state apparatus?
What do you suggest? Anarchism? That is worse because it is so much easier to corrupt. A few people decide to open up shops and hire employees, what will you Anarchists do? You believe in "freedom" and oppose us evil authoritarians when we rid the world of such scum, so I suppose you guys would do it differently?

[Deniz Gezmis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 05:37 AM
:o USSR's idea of expansion was taking over many easter european countries and controling the gov's of the rest of the Eastern european countries all by force.
Really? Then why did Britian, American and the Soviet Union agree that many Eastern European countries should be under Soviet influence after WWII?

[Misodoctakleidist]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 04:58 AM
So what he is basically saying is to have a true democracy like those of ancient greece.
i dont't think the slaves had any say in ancient greek society.

[synthesis]

What do you suggest? Anarchism? That is worse because it is so much easier to corrupt. A few people decide to open up shops and hire employees, what will you Anarchists do? You believe in "freedom" and oppose us evil authoritarians when we rid the world of such scum, so I suppose you guys would do it differently?

I'm not an Anarchist, so I do not know how to respond for one. However, it seems to me that if the great majority of a society supports socialism - through conditions created by capitalism, so they know just how bad capitalism can get - then they would take the initiative themselves to 'deal' with the labor appropriation.

By the way, I do not oppose authoritarianism in terms of dealing with capitalists and racists. It is only authoritarianism on the working class, something Lenin and his followers were quite guilty of, that I find fault with.

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2004, 08:02 AM
What do you suggest? Anarchism? That is worse because it is so much easier to corrupt. A few people decide to open up shops and hire employees, what will you Anarchists do? You believe in "freedom" and oppose us evil authoritarians when we rid the world of such scum, so I suppose you guys would do it differently?
Well those opning shops would starve because everything would be available freely outside them. They could, however, open factories that follow leftist principles.

You "evil authoritarians" should stop pretending to be always right on everything.

[Y2A]

No one has still explained to me in detail how communism would work. How would you insure that everyone shared everything equally?

[The Feral Underclass]

Communist state.......like jewish nazi!!!

[Y2A]

Originally posted by The Anarchist [email protected] 5 2004, 07:05 PM
Communist state.......like jewish nazi!!!
You know what I mean. How will you insure that the wealth is spread evenly? The only way this is possible is by a dictatorship of the proletariat and we all know that this would be shortlived and would lead to a totalitarian government. How can it be possible without a dictatorship of the proletariat?

[Xprewatik RED]

Elections and a house of communists?(parliment)<-- just off the top of my head just to divide power so one man can&#39;t or a group of officials can&#39;t exert force without control- There has to be some sort of overall body controling laws because c&#39;mon you think in a new system all the workers are suddenly become perfect?

[Hoppe]

Originally posted by Xprewatik [email protected] 5 2004, 09:41 PM
Elections and a house of communists?(parliment)<-- just off the top of my head just to divide power so one man can&#39;t or a group of officials can&#39;t exert force without control- There has to be some sort of overall body controling laws because c&#39;mon you think in a new system all the workers are suddenly become perfect?
How you make sure this house won&#39;t abuse its power? Or that it will favor certain special interest groups?