A new name for Communism?

[New Tolerance]

It seems that nowdays whenever people hear the name Communism, they think of evil. It has been suggested that we change it's name (since the policies we stand for are generally not the same as those of the Soviets).

So, basically the question is: Should we change the name Communism? If so, what should we change it to?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Social egalitarianism

[Solace]

Social egalitarianism is way too long to pronouce, type and write. And how would you call yourslef social egalitarist. Nah. Rejected.

I don't see why we should change the name. In fact I found the idea pretty pointless.

If people thinks communism is "evil" then we need to educate, not hide under a new name.

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2004, 03:20 AM
Social egalitarianism is way too long to pronouce, type and write. And how would you call yourslef social egalitarist. Nah. Rejected.

I don't see why we should change the name. In fact I found the idea pretty pointless.

If people thinks communism is "evil" then we need to educate, not hide under a new name.

If people thinks communism is "evil" then we need to educate, not hide under a new name.


Well, once someone gets into the habit of believeing something, it's a bit hard to change it. We will have to this kind of education early in people's lives. But then their parents will hear about how their teachers are Communists, have a misunderstanding and get pissed.

This is a big mess, so much power in a name.

[Pete]

No need to change the name.. as Solace said the problem is education.

If we are too lazy/defeatist to try to reeducate the people then we have already lost. It is as simple as that.

[TC]

Call it "Bolivarianism" :)

[mia wallace]

i think the name should be changed. the education is the problem, and it would be easier to spread our views under another name. lots of people consider the word communism as a sinonim for evil and they think you're nuts if you say you like it. you can convinct few friends that communism is in fact great, but that idea would spread faster and among lager masses under a different name. :unsure:
the name should be short and easy to remember (i don't have any ideas how to call it)

[The Feral Underclass]

i think the name should be changed. the education is the problem, and it would be easier to spread our views under another name. lots of people consider the word communism as a sinonim for evil and they think you're nuts if you say you like it. you can convinct few friends that communism is in fact great, but that idea would spread faster and among lager masses under a different name.
the name should be short and easy to remember (i don't have any ideas how to call it)

We are not trying to sell a car here! It isnt the name which creates the problems it's the theory. I am sure there are many people who hear the world communism and pull a funny face but there are others who would very much like to subscribe to communism but do not believe that it would work.

Our job is not to change the name because it may upset a few people. Our job is to educate. Not sell them a brand of politics everyone can enjoy. Communism is a political philosophy and of people are ignorant to it then educate. If it is to much like hard work for you go off and make your own sect and call it Bolivianism or Social Egalitarianism :rolleyes:

The problem is that you may not have answers for everything they throw at you. They may say that communism is evil but then explain to them why it isnt. The will either not believe you, agree that it is a noble fight or they will disagree with you, in which case you argue and debate with them with the intention of getting them to understand and agree with you. Changing the name is not going to solve any of those things.

[commie kg]

By the time a revolution rolls around, it will be called by another name. Maybe it won't even have a name, who knows. It will just be a mass movement.

[Solace]

Besides, how stupid would you look when they start realizing that Communism and _______ are the same thing? That will come sooner or later and the problem will still exist.

Like Pete stated it, if we cannot work with the 'prejudices' and still be able to make communism 'attractive' then what's the use? No chance for a revolution to suceed.

You are just running away from the problem, translating it instead of facing it. And that can never be a good thing.

[redstar2000]

And further, it's not just the name that you'd have to change...there's a whole "lexicon" of terminology that you'd have to alter too.

Even the phrase "working class"--hell, even the word "class" would have to be dropped and a substitute found.

And then, if there was anything in Marx and Engels that you wanted to preserve, you'd have to re-write it using all your new terminology.

Then there's the fact that ruling class ideologues would spot the subterfuge more or less instantly--they may not be too bright but they're not totally stupid. The "new name" would quickly be tarred as just communism under a different label.

I recall reading (in the late 1980s) that a group of reformist-socialists discussed dropping the name "socialism" in favor of the name "economic democracy"...and even they concluded that there was really no point to the idea.

I sympathize with the desire to remove the impediment of past associations--that's one of the reasons I use the word Leninism so much when referring to the USSR, China, etc. I'm deliberately trying to break the association of Marxism and communism with what happened in those unhappy countries.

But it's an uphill battle.

:redstar2000:

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

[antieverything]

Exactly. Once people start to draw the parrallels with communism they will think, "isn't this just communism/socialism...they are just trying to pull the wool over our eyes, aren't they?" We don't want that. Revolutionaries tell the truth...that is what makes us revolutionaries.

[mia wallace]

alright, you guys convinced me i was wrong and i think the same thing is with the rest who were thinking as i did... ;)

i know the name doesn&#39;t really metter, it&#39;s what&#39;s behind the name what matters but a lot of people think that ussr is a great example of communism and its mechanism, and in ussr it wasn&#39;t really that great.... <_<

[Al Creed]

The USSR wasn&#39;t really Communism.

To rename Communism is just superfulous, and really doesn&#39;t accomplish much. The Left is split into far too many pieces to begin with, I believe.

[antieverything]

I do think that the term Democratic Socialism should be reclaimed in the tradition of King and Debs. I often use the term "Radical Democratic Socialist" to describe my politics.

I will say this: communism is a risky word. Socialism is much less risky. Seeing as I&#39;m not a strict Marxist, I don&#39;t feel like I&#39;m fooling myself by not using it but on that note, does anyone have any information on the split between the two terms and when the term Communist started to denote authoritarian regimes and Socialism became democratic?

[STI]

Here&#39;s the way I see it; If we can&#39;t convince people that our way of thinking is correct under the name &#39;communism&#39;, we sure as hell won&#39;t be able to do it &#39;secretly&#39; under a different name. Let&#39;s keep it the same.

[RedComrade]

I once did an experiment to test the principles in question in this discussion. I talked to one friend about my political beleifs using the word communism to identify them, with the other I made no attempt to categorize or label any of the ideas I was discussing. The results? I had one amigo sputtering incessantly about how "communism will never work" while the other was nodding his head in agreement. I agree with some of the previous posters, our ideas would be much easier to spread if we were not using such an infamous name. My suggestion?, at the very least call it communism for the twentieth century, I prefer to refer to myself as a socialist when I&#39;m using labels at all.

[sanpal]

Originally posted by New [email protected] 9 2004, 02:42 AM
It seems that nowdays whenever people hear the name Communism, they think of evil. It has been suggested that we change it&#39;s name (since the policies we stand for are generally not the same as those of the Soviets).

So, basically the question is: Should we change the name Communism? If so, what should we change it to?
The communism is philosophical (political-economical) concept but not your idea to have the right to change this name. Tell "many thanks" stalinists for association of evil in huge amount of people which the word "communism" causes.

I agree the people must be educated. But who are teachers? Unfortunately, (I suppose) stalinists and other nonmarxists are mostly :(
Thus this circumstance will be the reason of the future failure and revolutionary process will not be accelerated.

Instead of it creation of small communes on manufactures could be offered. It could be as "proving grounds" for initial communistic relations. Such communes could be as
"building bricks" for the further creation of a communistic society.

Advantages of such way are obvious. First, there is no antagonistic incompatibility with remaining capitalist economic sector in the state because communistic (inside) economic unit is usual (outside) the capitalist enterprise.

Second, there is no basic contradiction of communistic relations in a commune (self-government, anarchism) with the State if representatives of communes will participate in the State government.

Thirdly the nonmarket economic system of communistic sector will not be languid and dying as economy of the stalinist states because the competition to capitalist economic sector will compel workers of communistic economic sector to increase labour productivity. Not to squeeze out some sweats of itself, they should apply the most progressive technologies and encourage invention and an efficiency work


Fourthly, if conditions for people by manufacture and distribution of products of work in communistic sector will be more attractive there will be an outflow of a labour from capitalist economic sector into communistic economic sector.

Fifthly, separate communistic units could be incorporated into uniform nonmarket economic space because they have parallel economic systems. It will result in natural gradual dying off of the state.

It is natural that ideological struggle between capitalism and communism will be kept until the capitalism will die and bourgeois propagandists will call communism as evil for a long time. The State can be named socialist if it allows two immiscible economic (market and nonmarket) sectors to existence and does not allow passage ideological struggle in civil war.

I think ordinary people will not listen long to any words and will go there where it will be better for them.


PS I consider this point of view is marxism as science

[mia wallace]

I think ordinary people will not listen long to any words and will go there where it will be better for them.
that&#39;s for sure... unfortunately :unsure:

there&#39;s very little people who would do sth what&#39;s worse for them then sth else for what they&#39;d have oportunity to do...
and those who&#39;d do that worse thing, would do it only because of their beliefs which tell them it would work if they take pains.

[redstar2000]

...does anyone have any information on the split between the two terms and when the term Communist started to denote authoritarian regimes and Socialism became democratic?

The earliest German followers of Marx preferred the "less-threatening" term "socialism" to the more "dangerous" term "communism". In fact, even "socialism" was thought "too radical", so the first significant Marxist "party" was called the "Social-Democratic Party" and the words "social democrat", "socialist", and "Marxist" all meant the same thing.

After World War I and the Bolshevik revolution, Lenin & Co. wanted to organize a new international organization of like-minded parties to replace the 2nd or Social-Democratic International. To emphasize their revolutionary aspirations, they chose the name "Communist International".

The Social Democratic parties, re-organizing themselves after the end of the war, lost no opportunity to make it plain to the bourgeois media that they were "peaceful" and "democratic"...as opposed to the communists who were "violent" and "authoritarian".

And thus it has been ever since.

Further reading...Socialists and Communists (http://www.che-lives.com/home/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=11)

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.vze.com)
A site about communist ideas

[Rasta Sapian]

its really simple, keep the same idealism, call it Universalism, the masses will except it with open arms, its our only hope to organize a resistance to globalization and impirialism&#33;

peace yall

[SittingBull47]

social ejaculation?&#33; (sorry, that was the first thing that popped into my head :unsure:

I totally agree with the first few posts. Ignorance is the reason why people believe communism to be bad. Too much brainwashing and cold war propaganda leaves what would be open minded people filled with contempt for the humanist idea.

[synthesis]

To the original question...

21st Century Socialism was an attempt to give a name to "roots" Marxism - the idea of a dictatorship of the class as opposed to one of the party. It is revolutionary, so it cannot be considered reformist; it is most emphatically without a vanguard, so it cannot be considered Leninist; and it is certainly a dictatorship of the class, so it cannot really be considered &#39;stateless socialism&#39;, although in truth it is probably closer to early 20th-century anarchism than anything else.

I wouldn&#39;t say it&#39;s simply a &#39;new name for Communism&#39; - it is a specific ideology, discrete from the other three major branches of leftist theory, but it was constructed with the intent of reconstructing the image of Marxism in favor of emphasizing economic democracy as opposed to economic statism.

21st Century Socialism (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=12&t=15437)

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I suggested "social egalitarianism" as something you can refer to yourself as if you&#39;re not willing to explain to fella why you support Stalin&#39;s brutal masacre of 800 quadrillion people.

I kind of enjoy the fact that the bourgoisie and bourgeois appeasers cower at the name of our movement. =D

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2004, 09:05 AM
social ejaculation
Now, I really think we&#39;ve got something here&#33; :P