Communalism V Communism

[Iepilei]

Hola Comrades,

Earlier today I was engaged in a discussion with a professor of mine who offered to me, the stereotypical reply - communism only will work in small groups, like tribes.

I was looking to see what the reaction of the boards would be to this comment. Personally I believe a massive difference between communalism and communism. For one, communism is (which he claimed has never worked) is international - hence the small "communes" would be impossible unless they belonged to a larger federation. Secondly, the degrees on which they're formed and their basic values are inheriantly different. Communism seeks international expansion - where as communalism focuses on 'returning to our roots'.

When I think reds, I think industrialists - when I think communalists, I think hippies.

Is there anyone who agrees / disagrees? What's your insight to this?

[chamo]

I would disagree with communalism as it creates seperation between different groups of workers due to limited communication and basically isolates groups. Seperation is isolation and segregation. These are the kind of things that lead to misunderstanding and narrow mindedness and eventually to war and hatred.

[Som]

I take your defintion of communalism is anything using communes as a basis of society.

Communalism in that sense IS communism. When you have your ultimate communism society, people would likely have a seperation into local participatory communities, communes, these communes would be federated together. Communes hardly have to be isolated, your neighbor might be part of a different commune than you are, you don't dissasociate with him, he's simply not a general part of your own little direct democracy.

the idea of a sort of 'world commune' is impractical because in a communist society we can't associate everyones needs. Essentially communes would just be loose associations of people you directly interact with.

When they say communism will only work in small groups, I tend to agree, but not how they imply it. Everyone can be part of one of these small groups who work together in larger groups, that work together in larger groups and so on.


Then again, I'm not really sure if i get what you mean by communalism.

[Iepilei]

not the exact definition (proposed by the French) when I think of communalism, however a more tribal look on life - seemingly more isolationistic, by their definitions. maybe such notions have other names, this is the one that came to my mind.

Take into consideration I'm not against such concepts of division, I tend to be federalistic in my thinking. However, I disagree that the only way for a society such as communism would work would be isolated as such in small groups. By small groups they're not referring to organised masses, like you and I envision. Rather, the disfunctional tribes found around the world.

[Umoja]

According to the general consensus then, a Communist society would have problems existing properly in Mumbai or NYC?

[Som]

Ah, alright then, your thinking more along the lines of the primitivists.

From merriam-webster (not so bad a source)

Main Entry: com·mu·nal·ism
Pronunciation: -n&l-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1871
1 : social organization on a communal basis
2 : loyalty to a sociopolitical grouping based on religious or ethnic affiliation

Ignoring the second definition, its something I agree with, but its just when you throw in the word 'isolated' that I wouldn't. I think the best way for an advanced society to organize would be through the idea of communes.

Either way, I think we're saying the same thing, a federated mass of groups is better than isolated ones.

Edit- Umoja posted at the same time,
It wouldnt have problems working in large cities, because the principles would be the same, association with community and need and such.

(Edited by Som at 3:32 am on Jan. 25, 2003)

[DisruptiveBehaviour]

Well, actually, your preffesor was right in one sense, that is that communism has never TRULY existed ( http://www.communism.com , http://www.communism.org ). But I myself believe that communism can either exist only one a world wide standard, or isolated country/region/city standard . I'd like to hear what you or your preffesor has to say about Ché or Castro. He seems rather ignorant though :(.

[nz revolution]

I tend to agree with that, especially the hippies and industrialists.

Communalism also sounds a bit like anarchism, no centralised means of anything... total anarchy (meaning chaos)

[Som]

Communalism also sounds a bit like anarchism, no centralised means of anything...

Well thats the idea of communism, a classless, therefore stateless society. Anarchism.

total anarchy (meaning chaos)

We've had enough of the anarchy trails on here for me to just mention this is crap and move on.

[Panamarisen]

I throughly agree with Som.

Besides, we must remember small communities are an essential part of larger ones. A lot of small ones indeed will eventually become part of a large one. Thus, we got to take care of those individual, small ones in the first place... They mean our nearest contact and understanding of what´s surrounding us all, what´s affecting, and what´s important to all of us.

Doing the contrary, i.e., caring for the general, average statistics, leads us to the present situation: Neoliberalism, Globalisation, Capitalism, and the such.


¡HASTA LA VICTORIA SIEMPRE!