Communism has no govenment?

[CCCPneubauten]

People talk about there being a small or non-existant government in a communist society...can some one tell me how this is possible? I mean, how is land divided? How is order kept? I thought Marx talked about a strong central government...I need help...

Thanks guys...

[Led Zeppelin]

4. The Higher Phase of Communist Society (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch05.htm#s4).

[Organic Revolution]

the end result is a stateless society.

[Donnie]

"Government is chaos, anarchy is order"
First of all do you really believe that having a government means we have order? Look around you, we don’t have order the reason why is because we’re bossed around and used as tools.

If we have economic stability and complete freedom we’ll have rational human beings because when we don’t have economic stability like the present day capitalist system we worry about our financial problems and so we are quick to blame others and result in doing petty crimes like theft so that we can have a little bit better lifestyle. I mean the rich don’t have financial problems or power problems because they rule over us; that’s why you never see a rich person fighting in the street.
Who are the people that fight in the streets? The working class of course, because we have financial problems not to mention we have no power what so ever over ourselves. However as we become class conscious and realise the situation we know that we are not to blame ourselves or our working class comrades but the oppressive regime that we live in day out.

For example you know when you have one of those days (not very often) when everything is fine and going smoothly that you are surprisingly kind rational and very sociable to people, well picture that all the time nearly everyday. That’s what it would be like in a communist society because we can decide over our own fate because we’ll not be bossed around by a state or by a boss. We will have no financial problems because it will be a moneyless society.

However I'm not saying communism is going to be the perfect society because it's going to have it's odd mishaps when you feel down and angry etc, but it will be a lot better than the present day system we live in.

Disorder is the result if economic and power inequalities, that’s why much of the crime (if you can call it a crime, which I don’t) is normally property related.

[Clarksist]

"Government is chaos, anarchy is order"
First of all do you really believe that having a government means we have order? Look around you, we don’t have order the reason why is because we’re bossed around and used as tools.


Who said Anarchy/Communism had no government?

There is no state there is a strong government of democracy however.

[matiasm]

and what is your definition of state?

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 20 2005, 08:09 PM
Who said Anarchy/Communism had no government?

There is no state there is a strong government of democracy however.

Government:

1.The office, function, or authority of a governing individual or body.
2.Exercise of authority in a political unit; rule.
3.The agency or apparatus through which a governing individual or body functions and exercises authority.

Anarchism/Communism has no government. The people rule themselves through direct democracy.

You could argue that everyone becomes the government at this stage, but it renders the term obsolete, and may as well be disposed of.

[Clarksist]

1.The office, function, or authority of a governing individual or body.
2.Exercise of authority in a political unit; rule.
3.The agency or apparatus through which a governing individual or body functions and exercises authority.


Hmm... that's what a government is.

However, even in Anarchism there are laws and rules. So to say that there would be no body to control this is simply denial.

The people govern themselves, and that is a government... as democracy is a form of government. I see what your saying, but you know, its just coming down to semantics.

It could go either way.

[OleMarxco]

Exactly...except's it's more like no-state - than no government. Made on a can-do basis, but not have-to. Jus' a lil' council-house here an'rere won't hurt, no, to the "oh-so-friggin'"-sacred theory? ;)


Originally posted by "CompaneroDeLibertad"
No country has ever been Communist or or even claimed to be.

AAAAAHh...hold'ron a friggin'secon' here, oyh! Sure, I believe the first parth, but the second? I beg to fuckin' differ! First of all, it's also border-less. So it can't just be a country; "It's all communial", re'nember 'at! What 'bout'rat shit, uh, Vietnam, Soviet? Didn't they claim...well, maybe not. But they jawed over'a loth. Perhaps they only said Socialist...but 'we' like to potray'rem as claimin' themselves o'be "Communist". As if'rat's possible in a national-isiolastici country, huh! Fascist's in nice red-dress, aye? :P

[Hiero]

However, even in Anarchism there are laws and rules. So to say that there would be no body to control this is simply denial.

In any society there are rules and laws. In class society rules and laws revolve around the ruling class, so they use government to make them clear and inforce them.

In classless society there are laws, but since there is no class there is no need for a government to make laws clear and enforce them.

Although unless you mean criminal laws, laws which are created by humans to protect individuals. Though i would guess these laws would take the same patern as laws which are created by society, as these criminal laws would function in the same direction as society.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Additives [email protected] 21 2005, 11:57 AM
However, even in Anarchism there are laws and rules. So to say that there would be no body to control this is simply denial.

The 'body' that 'controls' this would be the people. There would be no authoritative organisation known as a government. There would be a lowerachy.

A government consists of a ruling minority body, that governs the majority. Now perhaps Im wrong, but I don't think the majority ruling themselves is technically a government.

There's definitely no such thing as an Anarchist Government or a Communist one, as direct democracy is far to variable to be given a static name.

[OleMarxco]

Feh'so 'rat's a government in such a society, but not a "list o'rules" as the people have to follow, some abstract paper -WE- follow, and it ownes us. No, the people will decide single-handely every case as far we can, not havin' to give a shit 'bout a papah! HAH! Our judgement to belong to a set of rules, it belon's to what we think should be done about it :P

It's all a spontane decision of the moment. 'Course it might mean we could've chop the head off the trouble-maker, but also decide to be more benevolent than the current system, heck, even decide to leave'em alone. It's all up to'ra people, and if're people ain't civilized enough to do'ris, then who is? Bah, barbaric, schmarmaric. It's all in comparison...people's rule, abstract definitions and moral's....there's no after-life to punish so why the hellll not? Guilottinè's are pretty pain-less, after-all. Okay, y's kiddin'. We'll prolly just exile'em the whole bunch to somewhere else, and then someone could kick their ass if they want. P.S., there's no law's against stealin' anymore 'tho, 'cuz there's no permanent properity, q'ed! ;)

[Luís Henrique]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2005, 10:37 PM
What 'bout'rat shit, uh, Vietnam, Soviet? Didn't they claim...well, maybe not. But they jawed over'a loth. Perhaps they only said Socialist...but 'we' like to potray'rem as claimin' themselves o'be "Communist". As if'rat's possible in a national-isiolastici country, huh!
They claimed to be Socialist countries ruled by Communist parties, ie, parties that were struggling to make the transition to Communism.

BS, of course.

[OleMarxco]

Yeah, atleast if you're so sure, huh. We don't really know, heck, I don't really, atleast, but should we believe story... They'd either be too lazy, un-genuine or too hard-presed by "un-revolutionary" condition's to do it. Take yer pick - 'Tho I'll not necessarily follow'eir plan for a new society.

By the way - A communist-party might rule a socialistic land, but they're only it in name, and the fact that's their goal is in only abstract thought, and shh, just as much as I can say I'm Communist and strugglin' for the transistion to Communism, it mean's as much jack shit as if a hard-core Capitalist would've said it ;)