What do Marx and Engels mean...

[Broviet Union]

...when, in The German Ideology they say:

"Communism is not for us a state of affairs which is to be established...an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions for this movement result from the premises now in existence”

[Tim Cornelis]

Communism is not an abstract philosophy drawn up by the minds of great thinkers and society having to adjust itself to, or adopt these ideals through the power of ideas and persuasion. Communism is not consciously designed policies that need to be enacted, and it is not voluntaristic in that it can be willed in (or out) of existence as for instance Stalinists implicitly argue. Communism emerges, automatically and organically, from the social dynamics of capitalist society itself, not philosophical abstractions. How?


transformation of industry, at first be means of simple cooperation and manufacture. Concentration of the means of production, hitherto scattered, into great workshops. As a consequence, their transformation from individual to social means of production — a transformation which does not, on the whole, affect the form of exchange. The old forms of appropriation remain in force. The capitalist appears. In his capacity as owner of the means of production, he also appropriates the products and turns them into commodities. Production has become a social act. Exchange and appropriation continue to be individual acts, the acts of individuals. The social product is appropriated by the individual capitalist. Fundamental contradiction, whence arise all the contradictions in which our present-day society moves, and which modern industry brings to light.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch03.htm

There is a fundamental primary contradiction of socialised production and capitalist or individual appropriation in capitalism through which all sorts of secondary contradictions emerge, such as " an antagonism between the organization of production in the individual workshop and the anarchy of production in society generally" and "The contradiction between socialized production and capitalistic appropriation manifested itself as the antagonism of proletariat and bourgeoisie." Capitalism prepares society for communism through its own development which accelerates these contradictions. These are "the premises now in existence". Communism emerges as the solution to these contradictions:


III. Proletarian Revolution Solution of the contradictions. The proletariat seizes the public power, and by means of this transforms the socialized means of production, slipping from the hands of the bourgeoisie, into public property. By this act, the proletariat frees the means of production from the character of capital they have thus far borne, and gives their socialized character complete freedom to work itself out. Socialized production upon a predetermined plan becomes henceforth possible. The development of production makes the existence of different classes of society thenceforth an anachronism. In proportion as anarchy in social production vanishes, the political authority of the State dies out. Man, at last the master of his own form of social organization, becomes at the same time the lord over Nature, his own master — free.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch03.htm

Communism is not an ideal it is a movement originating from capitalism's internal contradictions.

[reb]

Communism isn't a set of polices to be implemented through political action or on good intentions. It is the objective movement of labor against capital that results in the deconstruction of capital, the state and of the law of value. These objective movements are within capital social relations now, as counterpointed with the idea that you can develop communism without capitalist development.

[The Idler]

It's not a utopia.

[Comrade #138672]

The communist movement needs to have a materialist foundation, rooted in the here and now, in order for it to be effective and relevant to society. The idealism of utopian socialism must be rejected and replaced by the materialism of scientific socialism. The communist movement must base itself on the real needs of society instead of vague and abstract ideals.

[neola]

I'm not sure if I understand right that quote. For me, it means that communism for them is not something to obtain but rather it is a proposal that bears the truth as an answer in their state problem.

[RedMaterialist]

...when, in The German Ideology they say:

"Communism is not for us a state of affairs which is to be established...an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions for this movement result from the premises now in existence”

For me the first and third sentences are relatively straightforward: communism is an objective reality which will result and develop from real, presently existing conditions. Communism will create a new reality.

But the second sentence. Does it mean that communism is a revolution which abolishes bourgeois society? If so, then why is communism different from any previous revolution which abolished the present state of things. Or does the "present state of things" mean the general class structure of society which previous revolutions merely re-created, except in different forms.

Or is the emphasis on the word "movement." Communism is not a finite, static goal to be achieved, but a continual, dialectic process, always abolishing the present state of things, regardless of what that present state is. If this is the meaning, then there is no communist society, but rather a continuous revolutionizing of whatever is in existence, whether humanity, society, economics, science, culture, etc.

This could be one of the sources of the "permanent revolution." In this sense communism is simply the dialectic process of permanent, rapid change. It may mean that it is useless to describe what a communist society would be because it would always be involved in the process of revolution.

[Tim Cornelis]

The communist movement needs to have a materialist foundation, rooted in the here and now, in order for it to be effective and relevant to society. The idealism of utopian socialism must be rejected and replaced by the materialism of scientific socialism. The communist movement must base itself on the real needs of society instead of vague and abstract ideals.

I don't think this is accurate. It think that quote pertains to a descriptive analysis of capitalism and class struggle, whereas your interpretation is prescriptive in that you think they mean communism should be materialist, rather than it being materialist in and of itself.


For me the first and third sentences are relatively straightforward: communism is an objective reality which will result and develop from real, presently existing conditions. Communism will create a new reality.

But the second sentence. Does it mean that communism is a revolution which abolishes bourgeois society?

Yes.


If so, then why is communism different from any previous revolution which abolished the present state of things.

It isn't and it is. It is different in that, obviously, it abolishes capitalism. It isn't in that each revolution accompanied by a change in the mode of production abolished their respective state of things.


Or does the "present state of things" mean the general class structure of society which previous revolutions merely re-created, except in different forms.

No, the present state of things is the present state of things as it was published, bourgeois society.


Or is the emphasis on the word "movement." Communism is not a finite, static goal to be achieved, but a continual, dialectic process, always abolishing the present state of things, regardless of what that present state is.

No it specifically refers to the present state of things: capitalism.


If this is the meaning, then there is no communist society, but rather a continuous revolutionizing of whatever is in existence, whether humanity, society, economics, science, culture, etc.
[
This could be one of the sources of the "permanent revolution." In this sense communism is simply the dialectic process of permanent, rapid change. It may mean that it is useless to describe what a communist society would be because it would always be involved in the process of revolution.

I don't think that is what it means. Present state of things is simply referring to capitalist society, the international contradictions (see Engels' quotes in my previous post), the disempowered, dispossessed proletariat, the socialisation of the productive process, as preconditions for communism and automatically giving rise to communism.

[Lokomotive293]

...when, in The German Ideology they say:

"Communism is not for us a state of affairs which is to be established...an ideal to which reality will have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions for this movement result from the premises now in existence”

1) Materialism: We do not dream up an ideal world and just expect reality to adjust itself to it, we analyse the here and now as well as history, and its contradictions.
2) Political practice: Communism is a real movement, not some ivory tower intellectuals.
3) Dialectics: The Communist movement is the result of capitalism with the task to abolish capitalism.

It's basically an attack on utopian socialists (i.e. the people who thought they just needed to convince the capitalists that what they're doing is immoral and everything would be great.)