Has Communism ever worked like Marx would want it?

[Chewillneverdie]

I was thinking the other day while in the shower lol, has Communism ever worked like it should? Has everyone equally experienced a gain of living standard? Everyone gone without being hungry? I figured the best people to answer it would be my trusty Che-Lives comrades

[New Tolerance]

Are we sure that we know how Marx wanted Communism to work?

[BuyOurEverything]

Well, according to Howard Zinn in Marx in Soho, Karl thought the Paris commune was a perfect example of communism.

[Pedro Alonso Lopez]

I studied this before and Marx was extremely wrong on the Paris Commune as most have conceded, I highly doubt you will find anybody who thinks the Paris Commune was in anyway communist.

There has been and most likely will never be a purely Marxist State.

[Y2A]

No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 07:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
I do not think that a purely Marxist state is possible until everyone becomes perfect, however, I see Marxism-Leninism not as something that should be avoided, but as something that should be embrased.

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
You're loving the slippery slope arguments (under which category your statement fell). Please, give a connection as to how these things will inevitably happen. Fallacious agruments are like chicken pox today.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
"Restricted rightist mentality", look at the bygones and disprove the future immediately and totally. Way to go , kid~~~ Way to go ....... :D

[Y2A]

Originally posted by socialist_tiger+Mar 15 2004, 01:07 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (socialist_tiger @ Mar 15 2004, 01:07 AM)
[email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
You&#39;re loving the slippery slope arguments (under which category your statement fell). Please, give a connection as to how these things will inevitably happen. Fallacious agruments are like chicken pox today. [/b]
"Fallacious arguments"??? History proves me right.

[STI]

Originally posted by Y2A+Mar 15 2004, 04:36 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Y2A @ Mar 15 2004, 04:36 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 01:07 AM

[email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
You&#39;re loving the slippery slope arguments (under which category your statement fell). Please, give a connection as to how these things will inevitably happen. Fallacious agruments are like chicken pox today.
"Fallacious arguments"??? History proves me right. [/b]
No it doesn&#39;t, as true Marxist communism has never been seriously attempted on any large scale and turned into Marxism- Leninism.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by socialist_tiger+Mar 15 2004, 04:40 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (socialist_tiger @ Mar 15 2004, 04:40 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 04:36 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 01:07 AM

[email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
You&#39;re loving the slippery slope arguments (under which category your statement fell). Please, give a connection as to how these things will inevitably happen. Fallacious agruments are like chicken pox today.
"Fallacious arguments"??? History proves me right.
No it doesn&#39;t, as true Marxist communism has never been seriously attempted on any large scale and turned into Marxism- Leninism. [/b]
It "hasn&#39;t been attempted" because people like Trotsky and Lenin realized that it was impossible to create a communist society without the state to protect it from capitalist outsiders so centralization of powers was created to protect it and inturn became totalitarian. The excuse of "true marxism has never been attempted" is ridiculous.

[STI]

Originally posted by Y2A+Mar 15 2004, 04:52 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Y2A @ Mar 15 2004, 04:52 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 04:40 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 04:36 AM

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 01:07 AM

[email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
You&#39;re loving the slippery slope arguments (under which category your statement fell). Please, give a connection as to how these things will inevitably happen. Fallacious agruments are like chicken pox today.
"Fallacious arguments"??? History proves me right.
No it doesn&#39;t, as true Marxist communism has never been seriously attempted on any large scale and turned into Marxism- Leninism.
It "hasn&#39;t been attempted" because people like Trotsky and Lenin realized that it was impossible to create a communist society without the state to protect it from capitalist outsiders so centralization of powers was created to protect it and inturn became totalitarian. The excuse of "true marxism has never been attempted" is ridiculous. [/b]
People like Lenin and Trotsky had no way of knowing that it wouldn&#39;t work, because it had never been tried before. They just assumed that it wouldn&#39;t, just like you are.

[Y2A]

ST would you agree that inorder for Communism to work it must be a worldwide system without capitalist influence?

[Hiero]

I kind of agree with Y2A in that there never will be a marxist state and it will turn marxist lennist. I believe this will happen if a full revolution happens, but it will progess out of this marxist-lennist period as time goes on. If the US is out of the way the marxist lennist period will be shorter as there will be less danager of counter revolution without the help of capitalist US protecting there interest.

And all communist should face the fact of this, that communism is a struggle for all to particapate.

[Som]

It "hasn&#39;t been attempted" because people like Trotsky and Lenin realized that it was impossible to create a communist society without the state to protect it from capitalist outsiders so centralization of powers was created to protect it and inturn became totalitarian. The excuse of "true marxism has never been attempted" is ridiculous.


No, people like lenin and trotsky realized that they could shit on the revolution for their own gain because they had started organized as a centralized political authority that launched a coup.

A authoritarian vanguard was a bad idea then, its still a bad idea, and and many revolutionary socialists have been saying so long before lenin.

If we have a revolution with no centralized or authoritarian vanguard, say paris, barcelona, or ukraine, is one going to magically pop out of the ass-end of the workers movement?

Its not ridiculous, historically there were no slippery slopes, all the marxist-leninist revolutions started off as leninist revolutions, and they got exactly what they wanted, Lenin was the only one that even pretended otherwise.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 04:36 AM
"Fallacious arguments"??? History proves me right.
Y2A, of course you have the right to foolhardily live with the bygones~ ;)

[little_cinderella]

Y2A is right that Leninism is doomed to failure although he doesn&#39;t realise why.

The theory of Leninism states that the bougoire state will be replaced by a proletariat state, &#39;the dictatorship of the proletariat,&#39; which will then &#39;wither away&#39; becuase the function of the state is to mediate the class war and so it will no longer have a function.

The problem with the dictatorship of the proletariat is that Leninism concentrates the means of production into the hands of the state which, being a state, must have a hierachy. The very definition of class is the relationship to the means of production so in a leninist state each layer of the hierachy will inevitably constitute a seperate class therfore providing a function for the state and thus preventing it from &#39;withering away.&#39;

Of couse Leninism is not the only form of Marxism and i wouldn&#39;t even consider it a form of Marxism so the "well communism is never going to work, just look at history" argument isn&#39;t really applicable.

Marx did not advocate a dictatorship, the phrase, in the few times he actualy used it, denoted a class dictatorship not a political one.

Marx didn&#39;t come up with a definate theory on how communism would be achieved and wrote very little on the matter, he merely advanced the socialist transition stage as a possibility. When addressing the first international he once even siad that communism could be achieved without a violent revolution.

Eevn if lenin had interpreted Marx correctly, the conditions in Russia at the time were clearly nothing like ready for communism.

To suggest that The examples of countries like the USSR disprove Marxism is foolish. Martov raises an interesting point in which he makes the argument that Marx thought it was possible for the proletariat to sieze political power before society is ready for communism and that it would serve as &#39;only a point in the bougoire revolution.&#39; An example of this is the Jacobins in france who removed the last remenants of feudalism far more effectivly than the bougoirsie was capable of, needless to say, Martov believed that the USSR would also be a point in the bougoire revolution&#39; which in hindsight seems to be what happened not only in Russia but very notably in China.

EDIT: This is Misodoctakleidist, i was using little_cinderella&#39;s computer and forgot to log into my account, sorry&#33;

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 01:01 AM
ST would you agree that inorder for Communism to work it must be a worldwide system without capitalist influence?
Its more like a bullshit excuse to have Leninism until then. Not that Leninism is bad, just the bullshitting is.

[SittingBull47]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2004, 11:31 PM
No and there never will be a true marxist state because it will eventually become Marxist-Leninism and inturn totalitarianism.
That&#39;s quite a radical right-wing point of view. please, divulge your thoughts on how communism will reverse itself, mr. righty mc rightwing. *points*

[Osman Ghazi]

Ah, the slippery slope.

Just look at the French Revolution, that was the first ever real democracy and what happened because of it?
France was nearly destroyed as a world power and it turned into an Empire.
Did that mean that democracy could never work? Because it seems to be &#39;working&#39; right now.

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2004, 05:01 AM
ST would you agree that inorder for Communism to work it must be a worldwide system without capitalist influence?
No, but for &#39;100% pure communism&#39; to &#39;exist&#39;, capitalism must be completely eradicated. &#39;Communism&#39; (in the &#39;holdover until true communism sense) can exist and work, i believe. It has never truly been attempted, though, so I really don&#39;t see where you&#39;re getting this whole &#39;Marxism will necessarily become Leninism&#39; idea from. It&#39;s certainly not history, that&#39;s for sure.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Yeah, basically what I think Lenin was saying is that we will honestly give pure Marxism a half-hearted attempt soon as we take over the world. *winks*

[dark fairy]

i don&#39;t think so, because there might be small time capitalism going on, and the basis under which these countries {places}aren&#39;tweren&#39;t the best...
it might have been for a short period of time... i mean you don&#39;t just wake up someday and the nation is communist&#33;?&#33;
:unsure:

[Y2A]

Originally posted by socialist_tiger+Mar 16 2004, 03:59 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (socialist_tiger @ Mar 16 2004, 03:59 AM)
[email protected] 15 2004, 05:01 AM
ST would you agree that inorder for Communism to work it must be a worldwide system without capitalist influence?
No, but for &#39;100% pure communism&#39; to &#39;exist&#39;, capitalism must be completely eradicated. &#39;Communism&#39; (in the &#39;holdover until true communism sense) can exist and work, i believe. It has never truly been attempted, though, so I really don&#39;t see where you&#39;re getting this whole &#39;Marxism will necessarily become Leninism&#39; idea from. It&#39;s certainly not history, that&#39;s for sure. [/b]
That proves why every revolution will turn Marxist-Leninist.

[MiDnIgHtMaRaUdEr]

Originally posted by Y2A+Mar 17 2004, 09:16 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Y2A @ Mar 17 2004, 09:16 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2004, 03:59 AM

[email protected] 15 2004, 05:01 AM
ST would you agree that inorder for Communism to work it must be a worldwide system without capitalist influence?
No, but for &#39;100% pure communism&#39; to &#39;exist&#39;, capitalism must be completely eradicated. &#39;Communism&#39; (in the &#39;holdover until true communism sense) can exist and work, i believe. It has never truly been attempted, though, so I really don&#39;t see where you&#39;re getting this whole &#39;Marxism will necessarily become Leninism&#39; idea from. It&#39;s certainly not history, that&#39;s for sure.
That proves why every revolution will turn Marxist-Leninist. [/b]
That is a bad thing why?

[Som]

That proves why every revolution will turn Marxist-Leninist.

It doesn&#39;t in the slightest.

This is probably because you refuse to aknowledge that Communism is the end goal in marxist theory, that its when the state can dissapear.

The fact that the Marxists think that without the state the revolution would have no way to defend itself from capitalist aggressors (hence no communism untill theres no more capitalist agressors) in no way has any argument against a non-leninist marxist state.

Try again, this time you could maybe back up your baseless assertions.

[Hiero]

Marxism is without Leninism is unrealistic.