What happened to Communism?

[Major. Rudiger]

Well i going to start of this thread wiht my hello. HEY, everyone. Well im new here and i am a strong beliver to help each other to make a better place and what not. Well you can say im a NEW AGE HIPPIE, help everyone you can, live life to the most, never be negtive, etc... Well let me get to the point... I Polish and you know that Poland was a Communist counter, becasue of the stupid british and american that didnt help us at all. Well now to the point.

Communism was a great idea that you and your people work for a better countery. To stop all this povrety and to make this countery a good safe countery. Strong as a rock and a labour force that is strong as a rock too. To have a great amry to fight off any one who comes.


Sound familer, that was the great idea of the great Sovit Union. Well look at rassuia today it is crap. Everyone is poor and the the youth are fucked up becasue of the sovet union were to make them great soliders and great people. But the sovit union left them behind and they have no money and no food. But thank god that they are recofereing from this downfall. Same with Poland that we have like a 20% unempolyed rate. And most off the people working for crap. Like 2 -5 bucks a hour.

But dont you see what happened to these counteries when they were robed of there freedom and there money. But of course the rich stade rich by the corruption what is in commuism. Oh man Communism sinks of its coruption and its lack of supervision of its books and money keeping. That commusim isnt that great of an idea. Well yeah it is a great idea that you, as a people make a better countery by a big labour force. But this goverment is to corrupted.

Take a look at North Korea it is a communist countery. It has one of the biggest and strongest in the world. That it has the nukeler weapons and want not. But look at the econmy, it is crap it is falling a part. well people in taht countery are dieing of no food becaseu the countery cant aford money to bring a truck to the farm land and get the food. But see they arent makeing a great countery bcasue you arent feeding your labour force what makes the guns and makes the money for the countery.

But dont you see how the "the general" or the "the father" of the countery is making the counteries ecen wores. That they are so self centered that they dont care about anyone. THat communisom is corrupt by the fact that the leaders arnt making a better countery with there leadership, but tring to safe there own butts!

-Major. Rudiger

[redstar2000]

Communism sinks of its corruption and its lack of supervision of its books and money keeping.

You understand, of course, that you are speaking of socialist countries...not communist countries.

Socialism is a class society and has most, if not quite all, of the characteristics of capitalist society.

Now that Russia, Poland, etc. have become capitalist countries, they are still corrupt...in fact, even more corrupt than they used to be. Recall the incident a few years ago when the International Monetary Fund made a US$5,000,000,000 loan payment to Russia...and a billion of it "disappeared" within days? :lol:

Communism is something quite different than socialism...as you will learn here:

What is Communism? A Brief Definition (http://redstar2000papers.fightcapitalism.net/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1082898978&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

Welcome to the board. :)

:redstar2000:

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

[Major. Rudiger]

Well thanks for that link to that site. I was just wondering, did you make that site?


the thing im trying to say that communism is a great idea in THEORY. But it never works out. People on the top want more money or more things then they need so they corpput the top more and more. Just to get a painting or a tv or a computer.
The thing im tring to say is communism always has corppution in it matter of what. Everyone wants something. that something makes him have more and more and more. So Communsim doesnt work.


But its is a great idea. That is why you should take ideas from it and better your own lives and other peoples lives around you.

[Djehuti]

Poland, Sovjet Union, Noth Korea, etc is/was all capitalist states, or according to leninist terminology; "socialist" states. Redstar said "Socialism is a class society and has most, if not quite all, of the characteristics of capitalist society.", I somewhat agree, but i would say that socialism IS capitalism. It is not a new way of production, like feodalism or communism. It basicly is capialism. That the state owns and administrate the capital is not really relevant, it is still capital that is being administrated. Even if the workers took conrol over the resources and the means of production, there would still be capitalism. Who owns is NOT the central, it is rather WHAT is being owned that is.

[Major. Rudiger]

OK then it if they are all soiclest counteries then which counteries are communist coumteries?

[ComradeRed]

There were never communist nations, namely because there are no states in communism. It is when there are no classes, the leninism practiced really had classes. The Paris Commune was the closest thing to a communist society.

[Subversive Pessimist]

Socialism is a class society and has most, if not quite all, of the characteristics of capitalist society.

Why do you say socialism is a class society?

IMO, a little thing called exploitation is the major difference between socialism and capitalism.

[ComradeRed]

Socialism is a class society with the aims of a classless society, i.e. making the changes to become one.

[Subversive Pessimist]

If it is direct democracy in a socialist country, and no one have more control over the means of production then others, and has no different relation to the means of production as other folks, then how can you say that socialism is a class society?

[YKTMX]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2004, 09:33 AM
If it is direct democracy in a socialist country, and no one have more control over the means of production then others, and has no different relation to the means of production as other folks, then how can you say that socialism is a class society?
It is a class society in that the fact that there is a "state" proves the existence of competing classes. The state is the manifestation of irreconcilible class antagonisms. The bourgeoise will bitterly and bloodily fight for the re-instatement of their previous "rights" and will probably still control sections of "armed men". Therefore, socialism is a class society because the working class still needs to eradicate the old class while building the new society.

[Subversive Pessimist]

The bourgeoise will bitterly and bloodily fight for the re-instatement of their previous "rights" and will probably still control sections of "armed men". Therefore, socialism is a class society because the working class still needs to eradicate the old class while building the new society.

I still can't see why they will still be a class, because they have lost their relation to the means of production. Classes are for one class to take advantage of another. Therefore, when no class exploit another class, there will be no classes, and classes will cease to exist. If a man owns a resturant, and he gets bankrupt, close the resturant and starts out again with a menial job, he goes from bourgeoise to proletariat. By my calculation, then, classes does not exist in a socialist society.

[YKTMX]

I still can't see why they will still be a class, because they have lost their relation to the means of production. Classes are for one class to take advantage of another. Therefore, when no class exploit another class, there will be no classes, and classes will cease to exist. If a man owns a resturant, and he gets bankrupt, close the resturant and starts out again with a menial job, he goes from bourgeoise to proletariat. By my calculation, then, classes does not exist in a socialist society.

I can totally see what you are saying and does make sense, however, where I suggest you are going wrong is that you are failing to position socialism in the process of history.

Socialism is the period directly after capitalism therefore there will still be remnants of the old class. It is correct to say that everyone will be in a similar position to the means of production but these new relations are to the benefit of the working class and to the detrement of the old ruling class. This means that there will still be competing class interests. The ruling class, though now expropriated and theoritically anulled will still actually exist and undoubtedly will react with ferocity to reinstate their priveliges. There may still be sections of the army or particuarly reactionery religious groups who will seek to defeat the revolution therefore the "class war" will be exist in it's most literal and obvious form.

[Subversive Pessimist]

I understand and agree what you are saying. ;)

I guess we both agree with each other, it was just that we had different opinions on what we meant about "socialism as a class society".

[DaCuBaN]

What happened to Communism?

Fragmentation. Whilst the origins of Communism are firmly rooted in Marxism, in modern times the difference of opinion - and sectarianism - is rife amongst the left. What started as a simple difference of methodology resulted in the complete fragmentation of the left.

Whilst the enemy has not changed other than his appearance, the goals of 'comrades' consistently do - with such incositency forward movement is impossible.

What happened to communism? It's subject to genocide.

[Essential Insignificance]

What happened to communism? It's subject to genocide.

If that's even a proposition to be held as being even remotely truth, wouldn't it have made much more sense to suggest that it was socialism, not communism, instead?

[DaCuBaN]

No, I was just tired. I'm not sure where I pulled the word genocide from, but what I meant to say was "It committed suicide".

[Essential Insignificance]

Hmm...are you tired again (?); your wording "it committed suicide" is yet another poor choice of words...I think.