Mao Zhe Xi Wan Sui
24th October 2004, 20:34
Essay I wrote. The italicized and bold stuff dose'nt show through here.
On the Inevitability of Communism
A brief analysis of societal trends
By: Alex Lourie
Introduction:
Is Communism inevitable? Is it even possible? To answer these questions one must first know what exactly theoretical Communism is. The objective of Communism is the creation of a society in which there are no classes, there is no exploitation, and to bring forth a situation in which the quality of one’s life is dependant, and only dependant, on their labour, that is, their contribution to society. This means that nobody shall rule over another for arbitrary reasons, that the quality of one’s life shall be conditioned solely by their contribution to society, that racism and sexism will cease to exist, and that the prospect of everyone working together to improve the condition of society shall be brought into practice. This is of course very idealistic; and upon immediate consideration it seems entirely impossible. However, upon deeper consideration, one realizes that Communism is not only possible, but inevitable.
Then why, why did Communism fail so miserably in the 20th century? In short, adequate adherence to the ideas of Communism, or even an honest attempt to bring them about, never took place. Moreover, a “quick fix” was thought by many to be capable of creating a radically different society. This was proved to be wrong.
At the beginning of the 20th century, and upon entering the modern age, society rapidly undertook division into two great camps, both politically and economically speaking. No longer were there many different interpretations of certain things, no longer were there many different, unrelated, independent social classes. The world had become strung together, economically (i.e. concerning materialism, and actual situations) and ideologically (i.e. concerning religion, the mind, and theory).
This change is the most radical in human history. Never before has such a dramatic alteration taken place in society. Before the coming of the modern age, the world was divided into hundreds of communities with no communications between one another, and whose people were scattered and self-reliant. The improved efficiency of the means of production, transportation, and communication subjected society to a change greater than all others of the last several thousand years combined.
The Great Camps:
The pre-modern world, the feudal world, was characterized by hundreds of tiny, closed, and isolated industries and philosophies, respective to each isolated community. Neither market nor ideas could spread very far. Therefore, people developed beliefs and practices that were conditioned only by the situations to which they were accustomed, thereby making philosophical conditions very different from place to place. Arbitrary spiritual beliefs, wildly varying demands for certain commodities, hereditary rulership, etc. conditioned a society that comprised of many different classes and social standings.
Little by little, progress was made, until finally, pushed to the brink of starvation, and with feudal society crumbling at the hands of improved means of production and communication, the masses rebelled. In America, France, Japan, Germany, and Britain huge social leaps were made. These leaps, however, were lead by the nobility, the bourgeois, and only backed by the people. The bourgeois led the way for trade with far away lands, exchange of ideas between wildly different cultures, and accelerated the development of the means of production. As trade with colonies all over the world flung open the doors to new markets, the demand for production rose. This caused the many classes that had existed in the feudal system to merge with one of two classes: bosses or workers, bourgeois or proletariat.
The feudal system was washed away. This “bourgeois revolution” brought about the material and metaphysical division of society. Ideological change followed suit. When exposed to the new ideas this revolution had triggered, such as the revelation that there were no divine nor natural justification to rulership or servitude, people began to wonder why they were being bossed around at all.
Socialism evolved from this sentiment. This was one ideological camp, the worker’s democratic camp, which hurled away the arbitrary rule of the kings and clergy, and demanded to govern themselves. The goal of this ideology, the ideology that originated within the masses, was to put the people’s fate in their own hands.
The other camp originated in the upper class, and comprised of the bosses, the rulers, the bourgeois. This became, and still is, disproportionately powerful and hierarchical, and is characterized by its tight grip on the masses.
With no more intermediate classes, no more independent, self reliant communities, the modern age was born.
This is our age. Hitherto this point, individual societies have been scattered and isolated. Now, every aspect of the world is dividing into two camps. With growing global materialistic identity, intermediate aspects of society are assimilated into one of two extremes, or simply disappear.
The modern age began roughly 300 years ago, and it was then that these symptoms first became apparent. The two major components of society, economics and ideology were directly affected, in very similar ways.
Economic factors become much more simplified. There became the absolute rich, and the absolute poor. The absolute rulers and the absolute servants. The intermediate classes that had existed in the Feudal age began to blur. There arose the millionaire and the wage slave.
So too did the immaterial, the ideological aspect of society change. With the rampant proliferation of ideas and theories, mixed with the economic conditions at the time, two prominent ways of thinking arose. One was purely good, and the other purely evil.
Anarchists, socialists, and communists multiplied in the modernized world. They professed utopian societies, and yearned for a perfect, peaceful system. Achievable or not, their theoretical society was utterly devoid of flaw. Democrats arose. Republicans overthrew monarchs. The interests of the people were held high in the thinking of this political camp, as it was composed of the masses.
In contrast, there was a dark camp. In the U.S. imperialists took power and went to war with defenseless nations and enslaved millions. Fascists in Germany exterminated millions. The British, French, and Japanese enslaved less-advanced nations. Dictators the world over professed racial purity and strength through groundless nationalism, and formed the other, exploitive camp.
These camps, the camp of freedom and that of fascism, almost destroyed civilization in the middle of the 20th century. The conflict between these political and economic camps still rages today. Workers strike, bosses cut wages. Governments censor, people protest. As advanced thoughts and items are introduced to backward nations, the influence of the modern era spreads. So too does the space between the extreme factions of materialism and ideology.
The world stands ready to complete the task of globalization. Nations are more and more associating themselves with one end of the material/ideological spectrum. Classes are becoming much more universal than nationality. And in every nation, in every province, and on anything that can be administered, two things can be observed. In any area that is modernized, one can clearly observe the extremities of the ideological and material conditions.
The Left (Democratic) Camp:
The terms left and right were first attributed to politics in 1830, after the death of the famous German philosopher, Frederick Hegel. His work was gravitated around by dozens of philosophers, and he is a monumental thinker of the Western world. Hegel’s famous quote is “world history is the progress in the consciousness of liberty”. This means that as people become more and more aware that they can be free, they want to be free, more and more.
Hegel also stated that God only exists as a “world-spirit”, or the collective thinking of mankind, and God therefore becomes real, because he exists not in reality, but in the minds of every human. However, he also encouraged people to obey the church, which was at that time strongly tied to the government. Priests abused power and kings used blind faith to cheat the masses into serving them.
Hegel was so influential that after he died, two main political sentiments based around his ideas were formed. The group that paid more attention to his theories about freedom and liberty, and who desired the freedom of the people, became known as the left. Those who advocated his teachings of obedience to the state in unquestioning servitude became known as the right.
Therefore the term left is applied to mindful, considerate political thought, whereas the term right is applied to unquestioning and utter devotion to an idea or prospect. In short, leftism indicates the use of rationale, and rightism supports hierarchy and obligatory obedience to authority.
The communists, anarchists, and freedom-figthters associated themselves with “left-Hegelianism”, whereas the Nazis and fascists said they supported “right-Hegelianism”. WWII is widely seen as the great clash between the right and the left wings of Hegelian thought.
Democracy now flourishes in much of the world, but rigid authoritarianism still oppresses millions. The iron grip of a few dozen money-wielding capitalists holds sway over billions of lives, as is evidenced when one considers 98% of the world’s wealth is controlled by 5% of the people. Million toil to supply these rulers with champagne, private jets, limousines, and mansions, while they themselves receive nothing. This is the manifestation of the right-wing dictatorial capitalist camp, the enemy of freedom, which finds its home in the U.S., where nobody can challenge it.
Therefore, is a very interesting thing that in every democratic nation, the people’s wants drift more and more towards the left.
It is clear that leftism is favourable because the good extreme, the free extreme is leftist. Leftism is freedom, it is peace. An extremely low number of people desire dictatorialism, the absence of freedom, and therein lies the main difference between these camps.
The Rightist (Authoritarian) Camp:
In the future, humanity will either peacefully resolve conflicts, or perish by its own hand. This has been said for millennia, yet only now has it become a reality. Now, threatened with the systems we have created in order to thrive, we have endangered ourselves to an unimaginable degree.
The members rightist camp, that is the rulers, have always been reviled by the vast majority of the people. This is unsurprising, as nobody but the rulers, the exploiters, those who offer no help to the masses and grow fat off their work, benefit from a rightist system.
The ruling class, the capitalists, the dictators, exploit billions of hard working people to fulfill their insatiable greed. And the price is the world. The price is our lives. These people must be stopped.
As conflict is created and “snowballed”, it will eventually lead to the highest stage of conflict: war. And today it is possible for nuclear war, that is instant apocalypse, to result from war. The only alternative to extinction is peaceful coexistence. A coexistence in which all are happy and free, a Communist coexistence.
Modern day authoritarianism manifests itself in the form of capitalism. In the modern age, money is the physical manifestation of power. There is no hope in capitalism. Capitalism is based on flaw, on inequality and is it therefore dependant on flaw, that is conflict, to exist. It is in the best interest of the capitalists to preserve flaw, conflict, and violence, for their very existence depends on it. Ironically, if this trend continues, it will be destroyed by it.
Rightist authoritarianism, rule of one man over another, always provokes revolution, a leftist, popular revolution.
The Option:
So how is Communism inevitable? It is inevitable because as society continues to separate into two factions, two ultimate results will occur. If the peaceful, free, universally beloved, leftist path is taken Communism will inevitably result. If a dictatorial route is followed, another, terrifying extreme will take place.
The foundation of democracy is peaceful resolution of conflicts, the universal coexistence between people. If democracy endures, and people keep getting what they want, which is freedom, which is equality, and keep deciding and voting in accordance to these wants, Communism will result. Whether or not a society intends to arrive at Communism, or even if they call it Communism, it shall do so by following the path of democracy.
What do the masses want? They want freedom. There are some things simply known to be good. Freedom from oppression and exploitation. Working for a common good. These characteristics are not unique to Communism, but incredibly more widespread.
What are the principles upheld (at least in word) by the Republicans and Democrats? What is constantly repeated in campaign promotions and debates in democratic societies all over the world? What are the Christian 10 commandments based around? What is Islam designed to bring about?
Consider what Communism is: free healthcare, equality, freedom from exploitation, fair wages, liberal speech. Consider what even the “anti-communist” parties speak of. In the presidential campaign of 2004 both sides say to they will try their hardest to bring about the above ideas. They promise Communism, because it appeals to the people. The ideas of Communism coincide perfectly with the common wants of society.
Christianity, the largest religion on Earth, started as peasant uprising against the dictatorial Roman Empire. The Romans encroached on their land and enslaved them, causing the Christians to rebel, and therefore create their own society. Stunningly, the early Christian societies, which held true to their beliefs, were idolized and emulated by the Communists. The early Christian societies were, in a word, Communist.
This clearly shows that Communism, idealist Communism, is the sole desire of every human being. Critics claim a Communist system is not compatible with human nature. The irony is, a Communist system is the only system compatible with human nature. Every human wants to be treated fairly. Every human loves peace and likes to be respected. This is human nature. This is Communism.
It is a common argument that greed, selfishness, envy, glutton, and other ego-centric emotions stand between Communism and reality. Those who make this claim have not considered the fact that if these emotions were to have any negative effect, they must be imposed on others. The imposing of ideas on another human, affecting another person’s material or psychological state for better or for worse, is the essence of hierarchy. Therefore the negative effects of ego-centrism are only felt in a society based on rulers, on class.
The absence of hierarchy and the proliferation of love is what makes Communism possible. It is a good argument that ego-centrism prevents Communism, because the society we live in now is hierarchical. Therefore, it is a self-fulfilling argument. How can Communism be brought about when it is permeated with the ideas it is designed to neutralize?
It is for this reason Communism is the inevitable ultimate product of freedom and democracy. These systems are designed to bring human will into practice, and human will is for Communism. However, another contradiction lies therein. If democracy and freedom bring human will, ideology, into practice, materialism, than it is also a conduit through which malicious will enters the material world.
This is because no system but Communism is perfect. All others run the risk of the other, rightist extreme. Then how can Communism possibly be brought about? Democracy. But did I not invalidate democracy as a harbinger of Communism? In a democracy, people get what they want. Negative ideas applied to the material plane of existence bring negative results. People do not want negative results, and will therefore oppose those ideas. This is why Communism is inevitable as long as humans live.
It is for this reason that Communism is self-sustaining, because ever conflict in a true Communist society is resolved peacefully, and is conditioned by the will of the people. Thus a cycle is created. A Communist society is one in which the people choose. The people want freedom. They want to choose, and therefore choose Communism, the system that enables them to choose to begin with.
History indisputably depicts a trend of material and idealistic situations drifting towards a dictatorial, hierarchical system, or towards a free and peaceful system.
This trend shall continue until it reaches one of two end points. A favourable and an unfavourable: peaceful coexistence or destruction.
This is fact is self evident; because when conflict occurs and is not resolved, a greater conflict is created. If the resulting conflict remains unresolved, it will create yet a larger conflict, and so on, thereby creating an exponential growth of conflict. The troubling truth is that the height of conflict is war.
If Communism is a system in which all conflicts are resolved peacefully, everything that is non-Communist resolves conflicts by means of force. Through evil. Therein lies the other option, The other extreme. This extreme may be brought about by the failure of democracy, of freedom, of Leftism, and the triumph of dictatorialism and of evil.
The route of freedom therefore arrives at Communism. Those who support democracy, free speech, representation, and basic human rights may know it or they may not, but they desire Communism.
There are two destinations for society, two certain points that humanity will arrive at no matter what. The choice that lies before every human alive is between Communism and the unsparing, utter destruction of society.
Endangered beyond comprehension by omnipotent weaponry, threatened by the destruction of the base of our survival, the environment, and menaced by rampant overpopulation, the situation of mankind is growing dire. If the forces of exploitation, violence, and destruction are not stopped, the impossible will occur. Our age, the capitalist age, is what has been prophesized and feared for millennia. Our society is drawing nearer and nearer to the infamous “Judgement Day”, and all people must decide their fate. They must decide which of the extremes to align themselves with. Will the people choose to have despots rule over them by force or will they choose freedom? Will they opt for greedy self interest, or Socialist communitarianism? This is a decision that is being made now, and which will grow much more significant in the future.
None of the philosophers, none of the intellectuals, have had to decide as big of a decision that is placed on the shoulders of the working people, and on you, the reader. Humanity stands on the edge of a knife, and the select few who own the factories, who declare the wars, and who trash the environment push our fate, your fate, towards destruction; while the forces of freedom, democracy, and the will of the people sets society on a path that ends with Communism.
It is for this reason that Communism is inevitable as long as society exists. Those who further democracy further Communism, for Communism is the goal of democracy. Communism is the only system devoid of flaw, and is therefore the only system capable of being permanent, whereas all others will yield to either Communism or destruction. Communism can only be avoided through apocalypse.
Defeatism of the Communist cause goes hand in hand with the desire for complete annihilation of the human race.
On the Inevitability of Communism
A brief analysis of societal trends
By: Alex Lourie
Introduction:
Is Communism inevitable? Is it even possible? To answer these questions one must first know what exactly theoretical Communism is. The objective of Communism is the creation of a society in which there are no classes, there is no exploitation, and to bring forth a situation in which the quality of one’s life is dependant, and only dependant, on their labour, that is, their contribution to society. This means that nobody shall rule over another for arbitrary reasons, that the quality of one’s life shall be conditioned solely by their contribution to society, that racism and sexism will cease to exist, and that the prospect of everyone working together to improve the condition of society shall be brought into practice. This is of course very idealistic; and upon immediate consideration it seems entirely impossible. However, upon deeper consideration, one realizes that Communism is not only possible, but inevitable.
Then why, why did Communism fail so miserably in the 20th century? In short, adequate adherence to the ideas of Communism, or even an honest attempt to bring them about, never took place. Moreover, a “quick fix” was thought by many to be capable of creating a radically different society. This was proved to be wrong.
At the beginning of the 20th century, and upon entering the modern age, society rapidly undertook division into two great camps, both politically and economically speaking. No longer were there many different interpretations of certain things, no longer were there many different, unrelated, independent social classes. The world had become strung together, economically (i.e. concerning materialism, and actual situations) and ideologically (i.e. concerning religion, the mind, and theory).
This change is the most radical in human history. Never before has such a dramatic alteration taken place in society. Before the coming of the modern age, the world was divided into hundreds of communities with no communications between one another, and whose people were scattered and self-reliant. The improved efficiency of the means of production, transportation, and communication subjected society to a change greater than all others of the last several thousand years combined.
The Great Camps:
The pre-modern world, the feudal world, was characterized by hundreds of tiny, closed, and isolated industries and philosophies, respective to each isolated community. Neither market nor ideas could spread very far. Therefore, people developed beliefs and practices that were conditioned only by the situations to which they were accustomed, thereby making philosophical conditions very different from place to place. Arbitrary spiritual beliefs, wildly varying demands for certain commodities, hereditary rulership, etc. conditioned a society that comprised of many different classes and social standings.
Little by little, progress was made, until finally, pushed to the brink of starvation, and with feudal society crumbling at the hands of improved means of production and communication, the masses rebelled. In America, France, Japan, Germany, and Britain huge social leaps were made. These leaps, however, were lead by the nobility, the bourgeois, and only backed by the people. The bourgeois led the way for trade with far away lands, exchange of ideas between wildly different cultures, and accelerated the development of the means of production. As trade with colonies all over the world flung open the doors to new markets, the demand for production rose. This caused the many classes that had existed in the feudal system to merge with one of two classes: bosses or workers, bourgeois or proletariat.
The feudal system was washed away. This “bourgeois revolution” brought about the material and metaphysical division of society. Ideological change followed suit. When exposed to the new ideas this revolution had triggered, such as the revelation that there were no divine nor natural justification to rulership or servitude, people began to wonder why they were being bossed around at all.
Socialism evolved from this sentiment. This was one ideological camp, the worker’s democratic camp, which hurled away the arbitrary rule of the kings and clergy, and demanded to govern themselves. The goal of this ideology, the ideology that originated within the masses, was to put the people’s fate in their own hands.
The other camp originated in the upper class, and comprised of the bosses, the rulers, the bourgeois. This became, and still is, disproportionately powerful and hierarchical, and is characterized by its tight grip on the masses.
With no more intermediate classes, no more independent, self reliant communities, the modern age was born.
This is our age. Hitherto this point, individual societies have been scattered and isolated. Now, every aspect of the world is dividing into two camps. With growing global materialistic identity, intermediate aspects of society are assimilated into one of two extremes, or simply disappear.
The modern age began roughly 300 years ago, and it was then that these symptoms first became apparent. The two major components of society, economics and ideology were directly affected, in very similar ways.
Economic factors become much more simplified. There became the absolute rich, and the absolute poor. The absolute rulers and the absolute servants. The intermediate classes that had existed in the Feudal age began to blur. There arose the millionaire and the wage slave.
So too did the immaterial, the ideological aspect of society change. With the rampant proliferation of ideas and theories, mixed with the economic conditions at the time, two prominent ways of thinking arose. One was purely good, and the other purely evil.
Anarchists, socialists, and communists multiplied in the modernized world. They professed utopian societies, and yearned for a perfect, peaceful system. Achievable or not, their theoretical society was utterly devoid of flaw. Democrats arose. Republicans overthrew monarchs. The interests of the people were held high in the thinking of this political camp, as it was composed of the masses.
In contrast, there was a dark camp. In the U.S. imperialists took power and went to war with defenseless nations and enslaved millions. Fascists in Germany exterminated millions. The British, French, and Japanese enslaved less-advanced nations. Dictators the world over professed racial purity and strength through groundless nationalism, and formed the other, exploitive camp.
These camps, the camp of freedom and that of fascism, almost destroyed civilization in the middle of the 20th century. The conflict between these political and economic camps still rages today. Workers strike, bosses cut wages. Governments censor, people protest. As advanced thoughts and items are introduced to backward nations, the influence of the modern era spreads. So too does the space between the extreme factions of materialism and ideology.
The world stands ready to complete the task of globalization. Nations are more and more associating themselves with one end of the material/ideological spectrum. Classes are becoming much more universal than nationality. And in every nation, in every province, and on anything that can be administered, two things can be observed. In any area that is modernized, one can clearly observe the extremities of the ideological and material conditions.
The Left (Democratic) Camp:
The terms left and right were first attributed to politics in 1830, after the death of the famous German philosopher, Frederick Hegel. His work was gravitated around by dozens of philosophers, and he is a monumental thinker of the Western world. Hegel’s famous quote is “world history is the progress in the consciousness of liberty”. This means that as people become more and more aware that they can be free, they want to be free, more and more.
Hegel also stated that God only exists as a “world-spirit”, or the collective thinking of mankind, and God therefore becomes real, because he exists not in reality, but in the minds of every human. However, he also encouraged people to obey the church, which was at that time strongly tied to the government. Priests abused power and kings used blind faith to cheat the masses into serving them.
Hegel was so influential that after he died, two main political sentiments based around his ideas were formed. The group that paid more attention to his theories about freedom and liberty, and who desired the freedom of the people, became known as the left. Those who advocated his teachings of obedience to the state in unquestioning servitude became known as the right.
Therefore the term left is applied to mindful, considerate political thought, whereas the term right is applied to unquestioning and utter devotion to an idea or prospect. In short, leftism indicates the use of rationale, and rightism supports hierarchy and obligatory obedience to authority.
The communists, anarchists, and freedom-figthters associated themselves with “left-Hegelianism”, whereas the Nazis and fascists said they supported “right-Hegelianism”. WWII is widely seen as the great clash between the right and the left wings of Hegelian thought.
Democracy now flourishes in much of the world, but rigid authoritarianism still oppresses millions. The iron grip of a few dozen money-wielding capitalists holds sway over billions of lives, as is evidenced when one considers 98% of the world’s wealth is controlled by 5% of the people. Million toil to supply these rulers with champagne, private jets, limousines, and mansions, while they themselves receive nothing. This is the manifestation of the right-wing dictatorial capitalist camp, the enemy of freedom, which finds its home in the U.S., where nobody can challenge it.
Therefore, is a very interesting thing that in every democratic nation, the people’s wants drift more and more towards the left.
It is clear that leftism is favourable because the good extreme, the free extreme is leftist. Leftism is freedom, it is peace. An extremely low number of people desire dictatorialism, the absence of freedom, and therein lies the main difference between these camps.
The Rightist (Authoritarian) Camp:
In the future, humanity will either peacefully resolve conflicts, or perish by its own hand. This has been said for millennia, yet only now has it become a reality. Now, threatened with the systems we have created in order to thrive, we have endangered ourselves to an unimaginable degree.
The members rightist camp, that is the rulers, have always been reviled by the vast majority of the people. This is unsurprising, as nobody but the rulers, the exploiters, those who offer no help to the masses and grow fat off their work, benefit from a rightist system.
The ruling class, the capitalists, the dictators, exploit billions of hard working people to fulfill their insatiable greed. And the price is the world. The price is our lives. These people must be stopped.
As conflict is created and “snowballed”, it will eventually lead to the highest stage of conflict: war. And today it is possible for nuclear war, that is instant apocalypse, to result from war. The only alternative to extinction is peaceful coexistence. A coexistence in which all are happy and free, a Communist coexistence.
Modern day authoritarianism manifests itself in the form of capitalism. In the modern age, money is the physical manifestation of power. There is no hope in capitalism. Capitalism is based on flaw, on inequality and is it therefore dependant on flaw, that is conflict, to exist. It is in the best interest of the capitalists to preserve flaw, conflict, and violence, for their very existence depends on it. Ironically, if this trend continues, it will be destroyed by it.
Rightist authoritarianism, rule of one man over another, always provokes revolution, a leftist, popular revolution.
The Option:
So how is Communism inevitable? It is inevitable because as society continues to separate into two factions, two ultimate results will occur. If the peaceful, free, universally beloved, leftist path is taken Communism will inevitably result. If a dictatorial route is followed, another, terrifying extreme will take place.
The foundation of democracy is peaceful resolution of conflicts, the universal coexistence between people. If democracy endures, and people keep getting what they want, which is freedom, which is equality, and keep deciding and voting in accordance to these wants, Communism will result. Whether or not a society intends to arrive at Communism, or even if they call it Communism, it shall do so by following the path of democracy.
What do the masses want? They want freedom. There are some things simply known to be good. Freedom from oppression and exploitation. Working for a common good. These characteristics are not unique to Communism, but incredibly more widespread.
What are the principles upheld (at least in word) by the Republicans and Democrats? What is constantly repeated in campaign promotions and debates in democratic societies all over the world? What are the Christian 10 commandments based around? What is Islam designed to bring about?
Consider what Communism is: free healthcare, equality, freedom from exploitation, fair wages, liberal speech. Consider what even the “anti-communist” parties speak of. In the presidential campaign of 2004 both sides say to they will try their hardest to bring about the above ideas. They promise Communism, because it appeals to the people. The ideas of Communism coincide perfectly with the common wants of society.
Christianity, the largest religion on Earth, started as peasant uprising against the dictatorial Roman Empire. The Romans encroached on their land and enslaved them, causing the Christians to rebel, and therefore create their own society. Stunningly, the early Christian societies, which held true to their beliefs, were idolized and emulated by the Communists. The early Christian societies were, in a word, Communist.
This clearly shows that Communism, idealist Communism, is the sole desire of every human being. Critics claim a Communist system is not compatible with human nature. The irony is, a Communist system is the only system compatible with human nature. Every human wants to be treated fairly. Every human loves peace and likes to be respected. This is human nature. This is Communism.
It is a common argument that greed, selfishness, envy, glutton, and other ego-centric emotions stand between Communism and reality. Those who make this claim have not considered the fact that if these emotions were to have any negative effect, they must be imposed on others. The imposing of ideas on another human, affecting another person’s material or psychological state for better or for worse, is the essence of hierarchy. Therefore the negative effects of ego-centrism are only felt in a society based on rulers, on class.
The absence of hierarchy and the proliferation of love is what makes Communism possible. It is a good argument that ego-centrism prevents Communism, because the society we live in now is hierarchical. Therefore, it is a self-fulfilling argument. How can Communism be brought about when it is permeated with the ideas it is designed to neutralize?
It is for this reason Communism is the inevitable ultimate product of freedom and democracy. These systems are designed to bring human will into practice, and human will is for Communism. However, another contradiction lies therein. If democracy and freedom bring human will, ideology, into practice, materialism, than it is also a conduit through which malicious will enters the material world.
This is because no system but Communism is perfect. All others run the risk of the other, rightist extreme. Then how can Communism possibly be brought about? Democracy. But did I not invalidate democracy as a harbinger of Communism? In a democracy, people get what they want. Negative ideas applied to the material plane of existence bring negative results. People do not want negative results, and will therefore oppose those ideas. This is why Communism is inevitable as long as humans live.
It is for this reason that Communism is self-sustaining, because ever conflict in a true Communist society is resolved peacefully, and is conditioned by the will of the people. Thus a cycle is created. A Communist society is one in which the people choose. The people want freedom. They want to choose, and therefore choose Communism, the system that enables them to choose to begin with.
History indisputably depicts a trend of material and idealistic situations drifting towards a dictatorial, hierarchical system, or towards a free and peaceful system.
This trend shall continue until it reaches one of two end points. A favourable and an unfavourable: peaceful coexistence or destruction.
This is fact is self evident; because when conflict occurs and is not resolved, a greater conflict is created. If the resulting conflict remains unresolved, it will create yet a larger conflict, and so on, thereby creating an exponential growth of conflict. The troubling truth is that the height of conflict is war.
If Communism is a system in which all conflicts are resolved peacefully, everything that is non-Communist resolves conflicts by means of force. Through evil. Therein lies the other option, The other extreme. This extreme may be brought about by the failure of democracy, of freedom, of Leftism, and the triumph of dictatorialism and of evil.
The route of freedom therefore arrives at Communism. Those who support democracy, free speech, representation, and basic human rights may know it or they may not, but they desire Communism.
There are two destinations for society, two certain points that humanity will arrive at no matter what. The choice that lies before every human alive is between Communism and the unsparing, utter destruction of society.
Endangered beyond comprehension by omnipotent weaponry, threatened by the destruction of the base of our survival, the environment, and menaced by rampant overpopulation, the situation of mankind is growing dire. If the forces of exploitation, violence, and destruction are not stopped, the impossible will occur. Our age, the capitalist age, is what has been prophesized and feared for millennia. Our society is drawing nearer and nearer to the infamous “Judgement Day”, and all people must decide their fate. They must decide which of the extremes to align themselves with. Will the people choose to have despots rule over them by force or will they choose freedom? Will they opt for greedy self interest, or Socialist communitarianism? This is a decision that is being made now, and which will grow much more significant in the future.
None of the philosophers, none of the intellectuals, have had to decide as big of a decision that is placed on the shoulders of the working people, and on you, the reader. Humanity stands on the edge of a knife, and the select few who own the factories, who declare the wars, and who trash the environment push our fate, your fate, towards destruction; while the forces of freedom, democracy, and the will of the people sets society on a path that ends with Communism.
It is for this reason that Communism is inevitable as long as society exists. Those who further democracy further Communism, for Communism is the goal of democracy. Communism is the only system devoid of flaw, and is therefore the only system capable of being permanent, whereas all others will yield to either Communism or destruction. Communism can only be avoided through apocalypse.
Defeatism of the Communist cause goes hand in hand with the desire for complete annihilation of the human race.