Communists and the world

[poster_child]

Okay, so I know we're not all communists here: some of us are socailists, leninists, anarchists, or just anti-capitalists. Does anyone have any idea of how many there are of us in Canada, the US, Europe, or relitively any country? Have any studies been done?

I know the election results are published in Canada, and we could reference the communist party's votes, but I don't know if that will accurately tell us. I am an anti-capitalist, but I don't vote communist, simply because I think my vote can best be used to vote against the conservitive party, and picking the lesser to two evils. I know many people who think that way. Also, there are not communist candidtes in every riding, or some people just don't like the CPC.

I'm basically just curious about what per cent the population is communists, anarchists, or anything anti-capitalist. Does anyone have a rough estimate? Judging from the billions of dollars profit that wal-mart has, maybe not very many.

[donnie_middel1]

well i can tell u comrade ,as iam canadian, there are more communists who boycott the election then there are who vote in it, the RCP Canada, has alot of members and so does other organizations, Red Youth Front, DPLP, so u gotta scratch the surface to find the communist underground

[kurt]

I too am from Canada. Most leftists I know want nothing to do with the CPC.

[Stonewall]

I'm American and vote Green & Democrat =)

[drain.you]

I'm British and not yet old enough to vote.

[Stonewall]

=( well, when you do, vote Liberal Democrat......

[Mr Brightside]

I am from the Britain and voted (I've not been 18 very long) for the Scottish Socialist Party in the British and Scottish elections as they are the best option available for election in my view. However, i see methods and groups other than those involved in elections as of equal if not greater importance/significance. I am aware of many people who vote in a similar way to those mentioned in Canada, voting for Labour to keep the Conservatives out. Its hard to argue with people who lived through the Thatcher era.

[enigma2517]

By voting you're only giving the system more legitmacy while gaining nothing for yourself.

[Stonewall]

By not voting, you aren't doing **** and don't have a right to complain about whatever Administration is in power. Only far left extremists take the view, "don't vote, it just empowers the system" and most Democratic Socialists, Social Democrats, Socialists, etc. do vote [in Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark and Britain --- though New Labour isn't really much of a choice].

Voting for the Scottish Socialist Party makes sense, I just wasn't aware they were large enough to run in many elections at once? Course British voting is different from American voting. Basically, it comes down to;

1. Liberal Dems, Scottish Socialists, Greens. in Britain.
2. New Democratic Party in Canada.
3. Democrats, Greens & Socialists in USA.
4. Socialists in Spain & France.
5. Communists in Germany / maybe Social Democrats again, as 2010 is gone.

[poster_child]

Does anyone have any published results from communist or socialist parties around the world? I know this isn't representitive to the actual numbers of anti-capitalists, but it's somewhere to start.

How many of us out there do you think there are?

PS- I personally choose to vote.. I think we should all pick the lesser of the evils!

[DisIllusion]

By not voting, you aren't doing **** and don't have a right to complain about whatever Administration is in power. Only far left extremists take the view, "don't vote, it just empowers the system" and most Democratic Socialists, Social Democrats, Socialists, etc. do vote [in Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark and Britain --- though New Labour isn't really much of a choice].

That sounds like a capitalist argument, whenever I try to convince my friends to boycott the vote, they always bring that point up. But notice this in the American elections, our markets outlaw having too little competition, but our government doesn't seem to mind having an oligopolitic democratic system. Also, most people in America who vote left-wing are usually the people who just hate Bush and will vote for anybody besides Bush so they typically don't put that much research into the second candidate. True left-wingers actually voted for Bush in the 2004 election since anybody who researched Kerry's ideals would see that Kerry actually wanted to continue the war in Iraq by sending two more divisions. If one really read and paid attention to the two parties, you would see that there really isn't that much of a difference between Democrat and Republican. Since there isn't much of another choice outside those two major parties, it really would serve the unsure voter better by not voting than casting an uneducated ballot and hurting yourself and the rest of the country.

What point is there in a democracy that simply replaces one oppressor with another every four years?

Taking that into account, I believe that American Democracy has failed.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

As George Carlin counters that, only people that don't vote have the right to complain..


"Democracy", as it exists now in most countries around the world, is bourgeois democracy, a system in which the people are free to elect their dictator for a predetermined amount of time.

Bourgeois democracy is nothing more than a disguised dictatorship of the capitalists over the exploited masses. Under bourgeois democracy, every few years, in a process that lasts only a few minutes, the masses are able to select a so-called “representative” (all of whom truly only represent the capitalists) to rule over them for a predetermined amount of time. After these elections occur, for the remaining days , months and years until the next election, the masses return to being “subjects,” without the ability to make the decisions which effect their lives.

From the manifesto (http://freepeoplesmovement.org/manifesto.html) of the Free People's Movement.

[Rojo]

I think the Canadian left parties need to advertise more because I didn't even know that we had Communist parties until I joined this site a month and a half ago.

[DisIllusion]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2005, 07:57 PM
As George Carlin counters that, only people that don't vote have the right to complain..


"Democracy", as it exists now in most countries around the world, is bourgeois democracy, a system in which the people are free to elect their dictator for a predetermined amount of time.

Bourgeois democracy is nothing more than a disguised dictatorship of the capitalists over the exploited masses. Under bourgeois democracy, every few years, in a process that lasts only a few minutes, the masses are able to select a so-called “representative” (all of whom truly only represent the capitalists) to rule over them for a predetermined amount of time. After these elections occur, for the remaining days , months and years until the next election, the masses return to being “subjects,” without the ability to make the decisions which effect their lives.

From the manifesto (http://freepeoplesmovement.org/manifesto.html) of the Free People's Movement.
Agreed comrade, It is pretty hypocritical to say that you are Communist and then vote in a rotten democracy anyways. But then, doesn't that make voting for the CPUSA in America hypocrtical as well?

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yeah it does.. especially since the CPUSA isn't communist in anything but name.

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2005, 04:15 AM
I think the Canadian left parties need to advertise more because I didn't even know that we had Communist parties until I joined this site a month and a half ago.
It wouldn't make any difference if they had have done more "advertising". They wouldn't have won any seats. And even if they did, it would be useless. Class struggle takes place in the workplaces and streets, not in parliament. Bourgeois democracy is not democratic in any meaningful sense of the word.

[gewehr_3]

well, when you do, vote Liberal Democrat.....
I do not know much about hte libdems as i live in amerika, but charles kennedy is the only politician i have ever heard respond YES or NO to a simple question

[Iconoclast]

In the United States of America, we communists are doomed. The sustained saturation propaganda campaign for the last 50 years in an attempt to turn us against the Soviet Union has suceeded in making communism and socialism into dirty words and concepts that most people now believe are genuinely evil.

We need to find a new name.

[Ouroboros]

I'm from Croatia, and we have no communist party, because there are very few communists. Ex communist party, now Social Democratic party has nothing to do with socialism, literaly nothing have some 20% of votes. The first party that challenges capitalism for only a bit has some 0.3% of votes or so. Quite a strange, because during communist times, about 7.5% of voters were members of communist party. It reveals strange truth how huge majority of the communist leadersip in Croatia, and probably in other communist states were opportunists.

However, I think that communists should vote for communist parties, no matter if they are very small and have no seats in parliament. Why we should not care about lost votes? Because, if you care about that, you'll be trapped to forever chose between few, almost same, converging options. Marathon starts with a first step.

Also, I think that there is no much sense in boycott, since sole reason that we do not live in socialism is that our ideas are not popular, the fact we should face with and not invent conspiracies and class war where there is no shadow of that.

[FleasTheLemur]

Pfft. Political parties are way too vangardist for this Luxemburgist's taste.

[TheComrade]

By not voting you are powerless to stop extreme right parties from getting in. A violence revolution isn't always the answer - subtle use of the system, destroying it from within is better. You must be a part of the system to topple it...sadly....

[Tekun]

Voting in America is futile
I don't even consider myself an American, phuk America!

The majority of the population is either voting for a Democrat or a Republican
This will never change and as a result, I rather gather the masses and ruin this country's control over certain aspects of society (ie unequal education, poor housing, healthcare...) with political weapons such as boycotts, sabotage, and self reliance

[BattleOfTheCowshed]

Voting is one of the most problematic issues for me. On the one hand I feel that we shouldn't participate in electoral politics, we should revolt and sweep away this entire system. On the other hand, I often feel that since the revolution is not at hand it's best to vote in some reformists for the time being to tangibly help ease poverty and help the working class. I have never voted before as I just turned voting age, but if I did it would probably be for the Green Party, not because I agree with them on everything (they are basically environmental reformist-socialists?) but more as a way of making a statement against the two-party system emblematic of the this society's bourgeoisie-rule. However, to address the original question of this thread, about the strength of the working class and the potential for a revolutionary movement, Rosa Luxembourg has a magnificent quote:

"Gauging the political maturity and revolutionary energy of the working class through electoral statistics and the membership of local branches is like trying to measure Mont Blanc with a ruler!" - Rosa Luxembourg

I think that quote sums up the nature of revolutionary fervor: the revolution will not come when however-many people join whatever-anti-capitalist party, it will happen organically and develop out of the strength, solidarity and anger of the working class. 15 years before the Russian Revolution, the Bolsheviks had like 200 members in Petrograd, but by the revolutionary months of late 1917 they numbered in the millions across Russia, keep that in mind.

"The liberation of humanity will be total or it will not be." -graffiti in Paris in May 1968

[poster_child]

they are basically environmental reformist-socialists

Don't be fooled. Environmentalism does not equal socialism. The green party is very pro-corporations, just environmentally friendly corporations. Sure, they support all kinds of environmentalism, but after doing some digging, I realized they aren't as left wing as I thought they were. They are green, and left wing on those issues, but they are also right wing on economic issues. If you're looking for an environmental socialist party, vote NDP (If you're Canadian).

[warnerraider]

I personally think it's stupid not to vote. Reason number one, unless there is the revolutionary fervor and an actual overthrowing of the psuedo-democratic government is at hand, one voter not coming out (in a nation where less than half -- well less than half -- actually vote) will be less than a drop in a bucket. Secondly, as has been said repeatedly, take the lesser of two evils when given only two rational choices. Think about it, let's take 2004 Bush v Kerry:

a) Vote for Bush, accept the government being screwed for another four years, allow for the blood-for-oil president to "lead" once again, and shove America's finger deeper into the world's ass. Increase Bush's chances of winning.

b) Vote for Kerry. Take someone that isn't much more left-wing than is Bush, but hey, at least he can enunciate and the product that fuels his (wife's) fortune is American-made, thus cancelling the need for war. Increase Kerry's chances of winning.

c) Don't vote. Let the ignorant masses, those who don't understand the pschological fascism being imposed on the American people, rule the vote and win. Increase Bush's chances of winning.

I am a capitalist in the sense that I think the American Gov. isn't a failure, and it isn't worse than communism. Remember, communism, socialism, etc, are all the perfect, best government In Theory, but in all practicality, are absolutely inefficient and constricting. I will vote Dem. when I'm older.

PS: Someone said that the parties were permanent and unmoving -- wrong. There have been at least 10 political parties in America's less-than-250-year history. We're due for another.

[Correa]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 11:58 PM
I am a capitalist in the sense that I think the American Gov. isn't a failure, and it isn't worse than communism. Remember, communism, socialism, etc, are all the perfect, best government In Theory, but in all practicality, are absolutely inefficient and constricting. I will vote Dem. when I'm older.
You are well in the minority with this philosophy.

[Tekun]

^ I concurr

[DisIllusion]

c) Don't vote. Let the ignorant masses, those who don't understand the pschological fascism being imposed on the American people, rule the vote and win. Increase Bush's chances of winning.

That's how American Democracy works. People are too goddamn lazy to put any research into the candidates and just choose whichever sounds better on the surface. Green Day and their army of followers is like this, they just hate Bush and vote for Kerry, but don't put any research into Kerry's ideals for the country which weren't that different from Bush's. American Democracy, in a nutshell, is giving two candidates, who are basically the same, to the people who are too lazy to research their options and put in somebody to oppress them for the next four years. During those four years, the people will see how they have fucked up and will start *****ing, next election the cycle restarts.

[BattleOfTheCowshed]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 06:58 AM

I am a capitalist in the sense that I think the American Gov. isn't a failure, and it isn't worse than communism. Remember, communism, socialism, etc, are all the perfect, best government In Theory, but in all practicality, are absolutely inefficient and constricting. I will vote Dem. when I'm older.

Remember, communism, socialism, etc, are all the perfect, best government In Theory, but in all practicality, are absolutely inefficient and constricting. I will vote Dem. when I'm older.

That's a very incorrect statement. It depends how you measure "efficiency". If you are talking about the raw process of production then Capitalism is the most systematically inefficient economic model. If you wish to see how this is demonstrated you should read 'Capital', specifically Marx's description of Surplus Value and how it exploits workers. You should read the Wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surplus_value , it may take some background in economics but is not terribly difficult to understand. To quote from it: "According to Marx's theory of exploitation, living labour at an adequate level of productivity is able to create and conserve more value than it costs the employer to buy; which is exactly the economic reason why the employer buys it, i.e. to preserve and augment the value of the capital at his command. Thus, the surplus-labour is unpaid labour appropriated by employers in the form of work-time and outputs, on the basis that employers own and supply the means of production worked with. The commercial function of labour is only to conserve their value, add value to them, and transfer value." Basically Marx describes how the concept of profit is based on the notion that workers produce both paid labor, for which they are obviously paid, however they produce more than it costs the employer to buy, leading to their being unpaid labor, which is where the worker's labor causes capital accumulation in the capital-owning class. This is an inherently inefficient model that results in workers being exploited and underpaid, thus causing massive inequality. The entire Capitalist system is also heavily controlled by private owners who can decide where their forces of production go (which is highly inefficient as it is NOT based on demand).

A true Socialist society would be extremely efficient. First of all, workplaces would be collectively and democratically controlled meaning that production would be based on a cooperative demand model and not on the speculative wasteful Capitalist market. Furthermore, the majority of Capitalist-influenced industries would become unnecessary and all of that labor potential would be funnelled into necessary labor tasks. Think of it this way, in a society where advertising, speculative stock market exchanges, most banking enterprises etc. were unnecessary all the people who work in those industries would have to work at production tasks ACTUALLY VITAL for society, i.e. food and housing production. In such a society the average amount of hours a person would have to work would most likely be drastically reduced, and food/housing/clothing would be plentiful and cheap.

What you were probably thinking of as inefficient are the models proposed by Reformist pseudo "Socialists" like the Democrats, Green parties worlwide, Labour, SDP in Germany, etc. These are not true Revolutionary Leftists as they seek to gain power electorally instead of via a revolutionary movement led by the working class. Furthermore, instead of wiping out the old capitalist model, they seek to slowly replace it with Socialism by implementing slow welfare social reforms. This is almost impossible to do however, its hard to combat Capitalism in a Capitalist society, especially when pro-Capitalist forces are in economic combat with you. As a result of this most of these reforms do very little to help actual working and poor people. Nonetheless it depends what viewpoint you see efficient from. These reformist programs are not particularly efficient in helping people but they DO help people. They are however INefficient from the viewpoint of corporations/pro-Capitalist forces which have very little (or nothing) to do with actual economic efficiency.

[Xiao Banfa]

I have a point of view in between all of you comrades.
I reckon that one should vote for the most progressive candidate possible if their is no chance of a political crisis or a revolution.
This really depends on the country you live in
I wouldn't vote for Kerry because he would carry out the Iraq war better and it would take alot longer for the US to be ejected from that country.

Although in my country I voted Labour/Green because we have one of the most feeble revolutionary movements on the planet and there are slight but important
differences between a right and a left government in NZ.

I thought I had been betrayed when Labour went into coalition with a fucked up old style anti immigration/protectionist party.
However I went to the doctor the other day and my bill came to about 30 bucks less than I would have had to pay previously.

That is one of many differences. I have no illusions that long term Labour is actually worse for this country and we will need a revolution, but while the revolutionary movement is hopeless lets not make things unnecessarily bad for the workers when revolutionaries can't provide an alternative.

[Xiao Banfa]

Warner Raider, what you said is 100% counter-revolutionary. You should read into the history of socialist nations. There have been some complete fuckups but on the whole socialism has been a positive influence in the 20th century and continues to be such.

Capitalism must create economic growth, not simply to cover wages, production costs, and state services but also to quench the LIMITLESS greed of the bosses.
How is that efficient.

I'd say that's shameless insanity.