Can we ever reclaim the word communism or should it be abandoned completley?

[Craig_J]

Sorry if I have posted this in the wrong area, but wasn't sure where else to put it. But seeing as I've only been a socalist for a year or so, and only being 19, I guess I've still got much to learn anyway!

What I've noticed since becoming a socialist/ communist/ anarchist (in my honest opinion they all equate to the same meaning when taking an approach to what Marx said) is if someone asks me what political position I am off and I respond "I'm a communist" usually they'll look shocked and say "You believe in dictatorship?!" or something along those lines. Then I end up with a rather repetitive discussion about how true communists don't believe in dictatorship at all. To which they'll always respond "But what about in the USSR?!" and so on.

The word communism to me is a beautiful word with a romantic ring to it. It comes nicley of the tounge, it reminds me of community, of equality, of looking after each other, of comradeship, of compassion, of everything that us as human beings should strive for if we are to make this world a better place for our children to inhabit.

But there's a stigma to the word now. I find myself saying I'm "an Anarcho-collectivist" to which they'll give me a confused look or "I'm a socalist" to which they'll think I support the Labour Party (I live in the UK) who seriously aren't socalist at all! I really want to say "I'm a communist" but the stigma is one which once you say is hard to shake off. Soviet Union pops straight into their minds and they've already made their judgement.

So should we and CAN we reclaim the word communism? Or should be abandon it? What word should we replace it with if so? And what do you say when you're asked off your political position?

[MacchineBox]

The word can be reclaimed. Everyday the word loses its negative connotation a little more. When people bring up the dictatorships of the past you have to be able to defend your position. I find a lot of folks, especially younger folk, don't really know a whole lot about communism at all - just that they are suppose to hate it. The word can and will be reclaimed through re-education.

[Red Nightmare]

I don't know, I fear that the word "communism" may have such an negative connotation due to anti-communist propaganda and the actions of regimes like the Soviet Union who falsely claimed the banner of communism that I don't know if very many people will respond to positively to someone openly admitting that they are a communist. :(

Perhaps our best approach would be educating people and describing our views to them without putting a label on them.

[Craig_J]

I don't know, I fear that the word "communism" may have such an negative connotation due to anti-communist propaganda and the actions of regimes like the Soviet Union who falsely claimed the banner of communism that I don't know if very many people will respond to positively to someone openly admitting that they are a communist. :(

Perhaps our best approach would be educating people and describing our views to them without putting a label on them.

The thing is because it has a label it's hard to get them to change they're mind about the label they've come out with.

This is probably a poor example, but if someone is extremely patriotic witout being racist and they believe people should all be patriotic, regardless of race or heritage, and they say "I'm a nationalist" it conjures up "racist" and that's hard to get out off.

That's a terrible example really, especially seeing as I think it's near impossible to be nationalist without having a degree of racism aswell but I was strugglign to think!

[Fourth Internationalist]

Always say that you're a communist. When they bring up the USSR, saying its socialist, tell them it was in-name only. Or if they bring up North Korea, say that they call themselves socialist in the same way they call themselves democratic, then go on to say the full name of the country, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Tell them that just because a country claims to have socialism, democracy, or freedom, that doesn't mean that country actually has it. Then, go on to explain what communism, socialism is. Do not try to convince them to become a leftist, just explain your views, answer any questions, and disprove misconceptions.

[evermilion]

Always say that you're a communist. When they bring up the USSR, saying its socialist, tell them it was in-name only. Or if they bring up North Korea, say that they call themselves socialist in the same way they call themselves democratic, then go on to say the full name of the country, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Tell them that just because a country claims to have socialism, democracy, or freedom, that doesn't mean that country actually has it. Then, go on to explain what communism, socialism is. Do not try to convince them to become a leftist, just explain your views, answer any questions, and disprove misconceptions.

I have to say that this is awful advice. As it turns out, people who don't understand communism aren't willing to hear that any given communist thing they care to mention isn't really communist. Before you can defend yourself as a communist, you need to be able to apply dialectical materialist analysis to any given situation. Saying, "Oh no, that was not true socialism," will always make you look like an idiot, without exception.

[Craig_J]

I have to say that this is awful advice. As it turns out, people who don't understand communism aren't willing to hear that any given communist thing they care to mention isn't really communist. Before you can defend yourself as a communist, you need to be able to apply dialectical materialist analysis to any given situation. Saying, "Oh no, that was not true socialism," will always make you look like an idiot, without exception.

So do you think it's best to first explain the dislike of materialism and private property rather than attatching any kind of label to express my political views?

[evermilion]

So do you think it's best to first explain the dislike of materialism and private property rather than attatching any kind of label to express my political views?

Do you mean capitalism? Or consumerism? There's more to communism than disliking that people buy a bunch of crap. Materialism in the context of Marxism is actually a good thing: it's a method of social analysis that does not recognize the ideal or metaphysical, only the material reality of things.

[Fourth Internationalist]

I have to say that this is awful advice. As it turns out, people who don't understand communism aren't willing to hear that any given communist thing they care to mention isn't really communist. Before you can defend yourself as a communist, you need to be able to apply dialectical materialist analysis to any given situation. Saying, "Oh no, that was not true socialism," will always make you look like an idiot, without exception.

My personal experiences have shown me otherwise. Plus, since its true that countries like the USSR and NK didn't/don't have socialism and are/were not on their way to it, why identify with them? If we believe in democracy, should we stop calling the US "not a true democracy"? Should we indentify with the US because we believe in democracy and with NK becaue we believe in socialism? No, I will never.

[Sidagma]

IMO, it's actually a pretty good litmus test of who's worth engaging with. If someone refuses to listen to what you have to say and insists that you're in favor of say the DPRK, just excuse yourself from the conversation and spend your energy elsewhere.

The thing about the existing reactionary use of the word "Communism" is that it doesn't actually *mean* anything. In the West, at least, the popular conception of a dictatorship is one built on a mix of an utter lack of critical analysis and an utter failure to humanize the people who live within them.

So when someone has a certain idea in their head of what Communism is, they're not wrong, necessarily, they just have a hella basic understanding, and I don't think that educating based on that is entirely a lost cause. Truthfully, we are against liberal democracy, we hate the British royal family, we think the Olympics, Eurovision, the Superbowl are neoliberal spectacles with an extremely detrimental effect on the lives of the people who live in towns that host them. we're against a lot of the values that the mainstream west finds fundamental. Own this. Own that nobody actually needs to make things up to find major points of confrontation with bourgeois society. In that sense, it's not reclamation that's the issue, so much as clarification, which can be accomplished easily through a rudimentary fifteen minute education.

Own that you, personally, probably don't have every single answer that will avoid repeating the mistakes of past regimes. You don't need to. It would be ridiculous to say that you, or any single person, does, and that anyone who demands you do so is leading you into a trap. This isn't to say you shouldn't study them and apply analyses to the situations. It's to say don't let anyone back you into a corner in which they expect unreasonable things of you.

Absolutely take up the mantle of communism. Acknowledge that you're fighting a struggle that dates back centuries. Don't take it lightly. Know that people will disagree with you, and that some of that disagreement comes from genuine misunderstanding, some comes from hostility, and some comes from different places entirely. It won't be pleasant. We're not starting a book club, we're advocating the overthrow of an entire society. Some people like that society, or are (quite rightfully) fearful of what will happen in a situation in which it is overthrown.

You have to meet people where they're at, and you have to do it without compromising or watering down your own values or getting put in a disadvantageous position.

[Klaatu]

Rather than telling them you are "communist" or "socialist" right-off-the-bat, instead tell them what you stand for. That is, what the issues are and what the solutions are. Chances are that most folks you speak with will agree (or be sympathetic to) the community/social causes, which is, of course, exactly what communism/socialism is all about anyway (for example, workers' rights, human rights, etc)

Then you can ask them if they support you. If they agree, then enlighten them that they too, support communism/socialism, but did not even know it.

[evermilion]

My personal experiences have shown me otherwise. Plus, since its true that countries like the USSR and NK didn't/don't have socialism and are/were not on their way to it, why identify with them? If we believe in democracy, should we stop calling the US "not a true democracy"? Should we indentify with the US because we believe in democracy and with NK becaue we believe in socialism? No, I will never.

We're not identifying with them; we're trying to understand them in the context of historical development. Anyone who's willing to freak out over socialism is not going to here, "But it wasn't really socialist!" What you need to know, regardless whether you'll be asked about it or not, is what ought to have been done in those examples, and to seek out answers as to why those things didn't happen. Remember to avoid the pitfall of assigning blame for diversion from true Marxist political practice to the personalities of individuals, consider what realities beyond the individual existed that saw the development of history as it is.

[Asmo]

Any word can be reclaimed. Black communities have reclaimed one of the most offensive and negative words in history. The lesbian community has somewhat reclaimed 'dyke'. The gay community is split on reclaiming the word 'faggot'. The queer community has reclaimed 'queer'. Some women have reclaimed '*****', 'slut', and '****'. (I hope I don't get a warning for using these words. I'm trying to use them constructively.)
I think that 'Communism' and 'Anarchism' need to be reclaimed if we are ever going to gain steam as a movement. If we try to use 'Ooblaism', for example, people will look into what it means, and while some people will agree with it and join the movement, the talking heads will notice that it is exactly the same as what Communism and/or Anarchism are and will begin the same propaganda we've been facing for the past century and a half, but it would be worse because we're being sneaky and trying to "spread our Fascist Stalinist Communist propaganda and deceive the good people of 'Murica".
When I am asked about my political position, I say that I am an Anarchist, and if I am with more educated people I call myself an Anarcho-Communist. Of course I get all sorts of assumptions about what the former means thrown at me, like "Oh, you must want chaos and make total destroy!" or "You're just an angry teenager who doesn't know anything about the world." (though I'm not anymore). I try to remain calm and politely throw back some Kropotkin or history of Anarchism and Anarchist philosophy.
Now how does a group go about reclaiming a word? We already all (mostly) identify as Communists and Anarchists, so next we need to get people to understand what the words properly mean and to remove the stigma on them. For the first task the only thing we can do is educate, be it one-on-one, writing articles, or becoming a public figure. For the second task I would suggest opposing such things as Propaganda of the Deed, and not publicly supporting black/red blocs, as people associate them with violence, destruction, and riots, which make them afraid. Anarchists and Communists could organize to fill the needs of people that Capitalism does not, providing free education, shelter, food, and healthcare, supporting charities, and doing other such things things society finds positive. It should create good associations with the words in people's minds. It's an extremely difficult thing to deliberately change language, but I think it should be the primary goal of the Left to rebuild itself, and this would seem to be the best way to do it.