Abolish what?

[STN]

Hey,
Please help me with knowing basically everything communism is trying to abolish.

[Livetrueordie]

Capitalism, religion, class struggle

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Private property.

[STN]

Why religion. Arent people allowed to practice what they want. If theres no religion that might anger some people. And who do they believe in.

[hamperleft]

the fact that someone can enjoy a nice steak dinner, in a mansion by the ocean, paid for with money his/her parents made, while i have eatin pop tarts the last couple meals.
(i like the cherry frosted ones best)

[Lamanov]

Alienation of human beings and internal separation of society as a whole. This would be the general goal, which is conditioned by abolition of many cause-aspects in society as it is now -- wage slavery and private properity in particular.

[which doctor]

Tradition.

[hamperleft]

religon is the base of most of the worlds problems, it pitts people against eachother, who might other wise have been freinds, people are murderd for religon, people sacrifice their lives for it. And what has it ever brought the world? Idealy religon would not be banned, you would be free to pratice, but would gradualy dissipear, as the class strugle.


i'm gona go have another pop tart.

[STN]

alienation of human beings???

[hamperleft]

Alienation of human beings is what a communist society would abolish.

[Lamanov]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 01:58 AM
alienation of human beings???

Yes. Alienation, from each other, from our work, from what we produce, from the History we make, from politics we are encouraged to support, from "our" time which is "free" but not freed, from everything and within everything class society generates.

Read this: Alienated Labor, by Karl Marx (http://www.prole.info/articles/marx_alienated.html)

[Livetrueordie]

Religion must be removed or their can't be communism. Doesn't mean it will get abolished, just won't be real communism then.

[Floyce White]

Property.

All property. Not just private property. Public property, personal property, "everybody owns everything"--you name it, that's the type of property communism will abolish. Please see the WEBSITE>> button at the bottom of my post.

Why?

Because property is the relation of violence between people with regard to things, places, ideas, and other people. To abolish property is to abolish anti-social disruption of normal socialization.

[Jadan ja]

Property will be abolished (and that will lead to means abolishemnt of exploitation and alienation).

[KC]

All property. Not just private property. Public property, personal property, "everybody owns everything"--you name it, that's the type of property communism will abolish. Please see the WEBSITE>> button at the bottom of my post.

Personal property? What the fuck???

[loveme4whoiam]

Indeed, what the hell? If private property is gone, then what's to stop some punk spray-painting his name across the side of my house because "its owned by him as much as it is by me" :blink:

[anomaly]

I don't know what Floyce is talking about. Communism will not abolish personal property. Each person will still have their own car, home, toothbrush, television, computer, etc. Now, there may be communal computer 'cafes' and communal transportation, but to use such things will be a conscious choice. I'm guessing either houses or apartments will be used, with the decision of which to use probably based on a commune's size (if a commune is rather large, apartments just make more sense than houses).

Anyway, communism seeks to abolish religion, class, hierarchy, and production for profit. Now, to do these things, private property must be abolished, this is true. However, what we mean by private property is not your home, but rather capital, that is, factories, machines and the like, in other words, that which individual proprieters today use to increase profits. We will make capital not ruled by a person, but by all people; it will switch from private property to communal property.

[Floyce White]

"I don't know" or "I'm pretending I don't know how to click the WEBSITE>> button on the bottom of Floyce's post?"

[KC]

"I don't feel like wading through a shitload of papers to find Floyce's explanation when he can just tell me when he responds because that is what the forum is about."

[anomaly]

Lazar, who are you quoting?

[Seong]

I'm not sure who he's quoting either. But whoever he is quoting has a point. It's very discouraging when more learned members can't even be bothered to post their views.

[Global_Justice]

abolish religionhttp://69.93.183.37/2326/53/emo/sf4.gif

that will never happen. you can't abolish something that has existed for thousands of years, basically since human life began, in one form religion has existed. you can't stop people believing in god, because the more you try, the more they will believe. you want freedom? yet you want to stop peoples freedom to believe in god, or not believe in god as they see fit. all this anti-religion shit does, is give more propaganda to the capatalists. by all means, seperate religion from the state, that must be done, but you can never abolish it.

[loveme4whoiam]

I believe Lazar was responding in kind to Floyce's obtuse post, when he really could have just pointed out how and why all property would suddenly become communal property? If you can't outline (at least, give a summary of) the reason in less than a series of papers, then I'd say it's not a very smart idea.

[KC]

...all property would suddenly become communal property?

He isn't talking about property becoming communal property. He is talking about abolishing all property. Nothing belongs to anyone. Someone could just walk into your house and take all your shit because there's no personal property.


abolish religionuser posted image

that will never happen. you can't abolish something that has existed for thousands of years, basically since human life began, in one form religion has existed. you can't stop people believing in god, because the more you try, the more they will believe. you want freedom? yet you want to stop peoples freedom to believe in god, or not believe in god as they see fit. all this anti-religion shit does, is give more propaganda to the capatalists. by all means, seperate religion from the state, that must be done, but you can never abolish it.

Religion will die out on its own. We won't need to abolish it.

[Social Greenman]

It was unusual to read that all property would be abolished. Rather, the only private property to be abolished is the means of production currently owned by the capitalist class. Peoples homes, trailors, cars, etc., is personal property. Even the former capitalist would keep his/her mansion but have no servants or anyone to drive him/her around. Homes that were "up for sale" can be given to those who are in need of a home. I know the entire concept of real estate would be very different than today. Some people would be content to live in apartments while others, like myself, like a lot of personal space. Room to grow a garden, tend the flowers around the house and mow the grass. I hate the city, keep Manhatten and give me the country side. :P

What would happen after the revolution? Will those who are Marxist and Anachist expect the workers, and also many of the capitalists and their allies, to have an entirely mental revolution, all such human faults as greed and laziness will vanish from all people's minds and habits, and then we start fresh the next morning with a near-perfect world? I can't understand why there are people here who think like that.

It does me good to read that religions won't be abolished. My opinion is that religion will continue but the characteristics would change, over time,to be compatible with the new society. Then again, religions may just die out on their own. The only thing I see presently is that religion is not conpatible with some peoples socialism.

[Abood]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 10:17 AM
Indeed, what the hell? If private property is gone, then what's to stop some punk spray-painting his name across the side of my house because "its owned by him as much as it is by me" :blink:
the fact that he knows its wrong ;)
the most important thing in a communist revolution is awareness. if people are aware that what they do is wrong, then they wouldn't do it. but governments make people not do things cuz theyre illegal instead of them being wrong, so people tend to revolt against them. but when there is no law, u would follow ur morals. and destroyin property is morally wrong, since if everyone does it the whole world would be in total chaos.

[nickdlc]

He isn't talking about property becoming communal property. He is talking about abolishing all property. Nothing belongs to anyone. Someone could just walk into your house and take all your shit because there's no personal property.

What would be the reason though? This "thief" could go to any store and get what this person has for free. I think the whole idea of owning something would just wither away after a while and that your house is just the place you happen to live in. Lazar you are projecting today's mindset into the future!

[KC]

What would be the reason though? This "thief" could go to any store and get what this person has for free. I think the whole idea of owning something would just wither away after a while and that your house is just the place you happen to live in. Lazar you are projecting today's mindset into the future!

You fell for the trap I set for Floyce. Personal property always exists. You can't destroy it.

[Fight Them With Your Lives]

well i personally think that communism trys to abolish nothing...all it merely does is put it in the arms of the state while claiming fairness and equality!!!

They dont try to abolish private propety at all, all they merely do is change the hands that its in!!! EVERYTHING GOES TO THE STATE!!!! EVERYTHING!!!
Take the communist structure for example its all based on giving everything to the state for later distribution (that never happens)! Stalin and the bolshevik party (mainly stalin) are prime examples of this! once everything is in the hands of the state there is a massive pyramid of power where all of the states wealth and propety is. This makes it really easy for the corrupt and wealthly politications to climb to the top just like stalin did!!!

To highlight what anomaly quoted a few posts back about communism and property:

"communism seeks to abolish religion, class, hierarchy, and production for profit."

sorry anomaly i dont agree they abolish religion by replacing it with there own leaders (Stalin and the cult of personality show this) so they are seen as god and INFALLABLE!!! They talk about abolishing class but its only talk or just for show. While in the mean time the leaders who are now on top of the power pyramid create thier own elite ruling class!!!! They hide this by saying that they have created a workers state but as if changing the name of a state changed anything its still the same structure as when the revolution first took place because in the end there is still a RULING party, a party with the MOST power and a party with the MOST wealth (that comes from the people they exploit)!!!! The idea of communism abolishing hierarchy is crap its merely a cover to appeal to the masses because like i said before the ruling class namely stalin or thte bolsheviks whoever they are they still create a elite class up top and so with that comes hierarchy!!!! and the idea of abolishing production for profit seems stupid to the leaders at the time (stalin) why would they abolish one of the main things that is keeping them and there elite class on top????

*IMPORTANT*Sorry anomaly im not having a go or anything i do agree that there are aspects of communism that are good.

But i cant help but feel that what is more important is self sustanable and self sufficent communitys and that everyone is empowered for a NEW change and a DIFFERENT change and the presevation of the state must not continue the state must be abolished...communism talks about this but merely coughs it back up in a different form its still the same thing just under a different name....

[nickdlc]

You fell for the trap I set for Floyce. Personal property always exists. You can't destroy it. Nice trap, but do you seriously picture people going into peoples houses for no good reason stealing personal belongings? Also i'm not talking about destroying personal property it's just obvious people in communist society won't be concerned with who has what, and if i can make a quick buck by stealing personal property


They dont try to abolish private propety at all, all they merely do is change the hands that its in!!! EVERYTHING GOES TO THE STATE!!!! I'm guessing your new to the whole idea of communism and what it actually means. I would reccomend you read more posts on revolutionary left to get a better idea.

[NovelGentry]

It was unusual to read that all property would be abolished.

It does scare many people.


Even the former capitalist would keep his/her mansion

Not on my watch, and I highly doubt on most other proletarians'.


Homes that were "up for sale" can be given to those who are in need of a home. I know the entire concept of real estate would be very different than today.

SG... you are a proponent of labor time vouchers. You should know better than anyone precisely how real estate would be different.


Some people would be content to live in apartments while others, like myself, like a lot of personal space. Room to grow a garden, tend the flowers around the house and mow the grass. I hate the city, keep Manhatten and give me the country side.

I'll take Manhatten... all of it. BWUHAHAHAHHA


What would happen after the revolution? Will those who are Marxist and Anachist expect the workers, and also many of the capitalists and their allies, to have an entirely mental revolution, all such human faults as greed and laziness will vanish from all people's minds and habits, and then we start fresh the next morning with a near-perfect world? I can't understand why there are people here who think like that.

I can.


It does me good to read that religions won't be abolished. My opinion is that religion will continue but the characteristics would change, over time,to be compatible with the new society. Then again, religions may just die out on their own. The only thing I see presently is that religion is not conpatible with some peoples socialism.

See your previous quote and my response of "I can." You denounce the possibility of miracles and can't understand why some people would believe such to be possible... but gladly accept other forms of superstition. Maybe now you see why I can understand there are people here who think like that.

[KC]

Nice trap, but do you seriously picture people going into peoples houses for no good reason stealing personal belongings? Also i'm not talking about destroying personal property it's just obvious people in communist society won't be concerned with who has what, and if i can make a quick buck by stealing personal property


No, I don't. That is why personal property will never be abolished. Abolishing personal property means that that kind of stuff will happen, and I don't think that it ever would in a communist society.

[anomaly]

Originally posted by Fight Them With Your [email protected] 17 2006, 10:55 PM
well i personally think that communism trys to abolish nothing...all it merely does is put it in the arms of the state while claiming fairness and equality!!!

They dont try to abolish private propety at all, all they merely do is change the hands that its in!!! EVERYTHING GOES TO THE STATE!!!! EVERYTHING!!!
Take the communist structure for example its all based on giving everything to the state for later distribution (that never happens)! Stalin and the bolshevik party (mainly stalin) are prime examples of this! once everything is in the hands of the state there is a massive pyramid of power where all of the states wealth and propety is. This makes it really easy for the corrupt and wealthly politications to climb to the top just like stalin did!!!

To highlight what anomaly quoted a few posts back about communism and property:

"communism seeks to abolish religion, class, hierarchy, and production for profit."

sorry anomaly i dont agree they abolish religion by replacing it with there own leaders (Stalin and the cult of personality show this) so they are seen as god and INFALLABLE!!! They talk about abolishing class but its only talk or just for show. While in the mean time the leaders who are now on top of the power pyramid create thier own elite ruling class!!!! They hide this by saying that they have created a workers state but as if changing the name of a state changed anything its still the same structure as when the revolution first took place because in the end there is still a RULING party, a party with the MOST power and a party with the MOST wealth (that comes from the people they exploit)!!!! The idea of communism abolishing hierarchy is crap its merely a cover to appeal to the masses because like i said before the ruling class namely stalin or thte bolsheviks whoever they are they still create a elite class up top and so with that comes hierarchy!!!! and the idea of abolishing production for profit seems stupid to the leaders at the time (stalin) why would they abolish one of the main things that is keeping them and there elite class on top????

*IMPORTANT*Sorry anomaly im not having a go or anything i do agree that there are aspects of communism that are good.

But i cant help but feel that what is more important is self sustanable and self sufficent communitys and that everyone is empowered for a NEW change and a DIFFERENT change and the presevation of the state must not continue the state must be abolished...communism talks about this but merely coughs it back up in a different form its still the same thing just under a different name....

Just a question: have you ever read a word of Marx? I ask this because everything you say about communism is false. It sounds like you are regurgitating the rants of a bourgeois history teacher.

[Fight Them With Your Lives]

i understand that there is more to communism then what i have stated and yes it can work in many other different ways...i have read some marx(Communist manifesto etc...) but the point i was making was its merely just another system of control its just replacing something with another (but not everything) its just the same as when the revolution first took place namely the "state"!!!!
Without looking at the theory of the books tell me if its really any different to say a dictatorship in the end???? (which it ended up being) i understand what communism wants to achieve but i feel that its mostly theory because in practice it didnt work!!!!! Just look at the evidence of history???

But that dosent mean that it wouldnt work, it just didnt work in the way they installed it!!!! i have no problem with communism in its self i just have a major problem with the way its implemented or should i say the way it was implemented and what it became!!!

As an anarchist i understand what communism wants and could achieve and i would support that but i would only support the social change not the political (if u can understand why!)!!!!

im sorry if i caused offense anomaly i didnt mean to if i did!!!! the main issue i have with communism is the politcal spectrum not the social!!!

[Body Count]

Regarding the property thing.

I think that it can and will depend on specific situations.

I mean, if you live on an island, and there is ONE speed boat...I think its obvious that no one person should have a "right" to that speedboat....regardless of what she did to get it. Even if she built it herself, that should still be the Island speedboat.

And for the record, I think that in a communist society, people will obviously have the sharing mentality, and they will also respect others.

There won't be *anything* to stop someone from spray painting your home other then common sense...will these things still happen once in awhile? Sure, buts its not like they don't happen now (Even with all the law enforcement and surveillance we have).

As far as something like a toothbrush goes....once again, specific situations will call for specific policies (or customs, whatever you want to call it). I don't see why anyone would want to use another toothbrush of another. However, hypothetically speaking, if for some odd reason, there was a time when there was such a limited supply of toothbrush....people probably would have to share them. But thats such an abstract thought that its not even worth mentioning really.

[Social Greenman]

Novel Gentry wrote:

QUOTE
It was unusual to read that all property would be abolished.


It does scare many people.

Yup.

QUOTE
Even the former capitalist would keep his/her mansion


Not on my watch, and I highly doubt on most other proletarians'.

We may never see what will happen after the revolution since both of us will be long gone.

QUOTE
Homes that were "up for sale" can be given to those who are in need of a home. I know the entire concept of real estate would be very different than today.


SG... you are a proponent of labor time vouchers. You should know better than anyone precisely how real estate would be different.

Yes I know but I had this conversation on another website and we were at loss to what the social dynamics would be for people having a place to live and what sort of land distribution would exist if any here in the U.S. It was complicated.

QUOTE
Some people would be content to live in apartments while others, like myself, like a lot of personal space. Room to grow a garden, tend the flowers around the house and mow the grass. I hate the city, keep Manhatten and give me the country side.


I'll take Manhatten... all of it. BWUHAHAHAHHA

SOLD!!! No wait, I can't do that.

QUOTE
What would happen after the revolution? Will those who are Marxist and Anachist expect the workers, and also many of the capitalists and their allies, to have an entirely mental revolution, all such human faults as greed and laziness will vanish from all people's minds and habits, and then we start fresh the next morning with a near-perfect world? I can't understand why there are people here who think like that.


I can.


QUOTE
It does me good to read that religions won't be abolished. My opinion is that religion will continue but the characteristics would change, over time,to be compatible with the new society. Then again, religions may just die out on their own. The only thing I see presently is that religion is not conpatible with some peoples socialism.


See your previous quote and my response of "I can." You denounce the possibility of miracles and can't understand why some people would believe such to be possible... but gladly accept other forms of superstition. Maybe now you see why I can understand there are people here who think like that.

I can understand ending exploitation that exist under capitalism. But to force people to give up their spiritual beliefs is authoritarian. You can separate religion and state which is fine to do and abolish organized religion. But even after the revolution people will still meet in houses to do their rituals and such.

I should have been a bit more careful in my wording. Perhaps most here have the "hope" that the day after the revolution their hard work would pay off and that many people would have the desired mindset for a "free access" society. Yes, there will be people with that desired frame of mind but I don't believe that the entire work force will have it. There will be those who will be confused and those who will still side with the capitalist class. The capitalist class and their allies would be still be around. There will still be conflict in some places more than others. A tug of war will continue so to speak. Hope and superstition are not related.

[NovelGentry]

Yup.

I take it such an idea scares you?


We may never see what will happen after the revolution since both of us will be long gone.

I think that's uncertain at best. Some have considered me optimistic for when socialism is going to be a reality for many Western European/American countries. I don't think there's anything optimistic in recognizing the dynamic currently underway in the US economy.

Then again, I thought a majority of people would be using Linux on their desktop by 2005. No doubt this will be our year.


Yes I know but I had this conversation on another website and we were at loss to what the social dynamics would be for people having a place to live and what sort of land distribution would exist if any here in the U.S. It was complicated.

Well there are things to remember. The value of any house (mortgaged or not) has most likely been accounted for 8,000 times over. Real estate is the ultimate in capitalist markets. It is essentially lots of value from nothing which produces value.

My theory is liquidate all retail assetts in banks, real estate firms, etc into diverse foreign currency for future or immediately necessary imports. After that, let those who already have a home keep the home they have, with the exception of the wealthy who have massive homes and only 1.5 kids or something. In the circumstances of the superrich... turn their mansions into apartment complexes to house previously homeless people, etc. The new labor created can be accounted for by using up some of those other assets that were liquidated.

Land itself is just... well... land. The idea of private property is unacceptable. Gated communities, fenced in farms (with the exception of keeping certain animals in check) are all ridiculous concepts of this "private property" craze. Go as you please.... in terms of who gets land to use, well I think that's a decision of the workers. What land best serves certain production? What land is required for that? Workers can do that on broader scales, and then what is left can be left up to local workers government to decide on residential distribution.

The point is... after that, no existing house/apartment/ranch/whatever really costs anything. Even if a house actually costs $190,000, think of how many people have lived in such a house over the years and paid mortgage after mortgage on it. If there is new housing done (and no doubt some will have to be done), my guess is that it should be accounted for from those liquidated assets as much as possible. That is, essentially I think housing will be completely free.



I can understand ending exploitation that exist under capitalism. But to force people to give up their spiritual beliefs is authoritarian. You can separate religion and state which is fine to do and abolish organized religion. But even after the revolution people will still meet in houses to do their rituals and such.

I should have been a bit more careful in my wording. Perhaps most here have the "hope" that the day after the revolution their hard work would pay off and that many people would have the desired mindset for a "free access" society. Yes, there will be people with that desired frame of mind but I don't believe that the entire work force will have it. There will be those who will be confused and those who will still side with the capitalist class. The capitalist class and their allies would be still be around. There will still be conflict in some places more than others. A tug of war will continue so to speak. Hope and superstition are not related.

I don't know how you could force someone to give up their spiritual beliefs. Beliefs are pretty tough to control. Either way, I think you missed my point.

The idea that everyone will be on the same page and have the same exact mindset is indeed something to be skeptical of. My point is, in order for everyone to have that sort of same idea, it would have to be a miracle. That is, those people who believe such will be the case believe in miracles. Very few people say they "hope" that will be the case. Who wouldn't "hope" that would be the case? Some people think it will be the case, others (such as me and you) do not. Those who think it will be the case, believe in miracles.... and you are quick to tell them why it won't happen, why their miracle is unreal.

I don't see how you cannot be equally critical of religion, something even far more unreal and impossible than the miracle we just spoke of. There are even some out there who think the two are intertwined, that God will "watch out for us" once we have achieved socialism..... they quote some bullshit about the meek inheriting the earth and a lot of nonsense that revelations is an alegory for socialist revolution.

Some people believe in the miracle of instant universal brotherhood, others believe in the miracle of virgin births and ressurrection. Some believe in both. If you ask me, they're all quite obviously superstitious in nature.

[Kropotkin]

As I understand it, communism seeks to abolish all forms of oppression and exploitation. Which means Capitalism and with it private property and wage-slavery. The State and with it the military,prisons and police. The Church and with it the influence it holds over The State and the people.

Should the people ever rise against their oppressors, it will mean that they have accepted communist principles, and will no longer view religion, at least organized religion with it's churches and clergy, favorably. Europe is a good example of where religion is dying out. Not because it was suppressed with force but because the people have seen discarded it of their own free will.



That's what I see communism as seeking to abolish.

[Social Greenman]

I have read that socialism is a way things are structured, i.e., the means of production being organized for the greater good. People will continue to agree or disagree with each other. No one will always be on the same page. My superstitious beliefs are of my own chosing and I do not force them on anyone. What I do with the mundane and spiritual I do with those with consent.

[oldunion]

Religion is highly effective at establishing warring factions within any society, multinationally of course is likely.

You have the christian, who likes to believe in christian things and he is happy. Then you have christianS who dont like the Muslims who dont believe in what they do....and because both of them are not right, one of them must be destroyed. Warring factions.

People use religion all of the time as a justification for this or that; it is a reason to give money, it is a reason to invade the middle east, it is a reason to kill someone, it is a reason to indoctrinate someone, it is a way to get people to fall in line with what some book says is valid.

The only guidelines for how a person should act, are to be dictated by the norms of the time...nay, by the unpredictable developments of the chaotic nature of life. Thats what capitalism is all about you see, trying to predict and understand things that may in fact be unpredictable and inexplicable, so all it ends up being is indoctrination.

Religion knows what indoctrination means. If people want to individually believe in some transcendental omnipotence, thats fine with me, it is my opinion that they are wasting their minds natural ability to reason logically. But when people get together, things turn bad because two people cant be right on the same issue. Thus when ones personal belief, solidified through years of reinforcement and rhetoric, is put under attack, it is attacking someone on their core value level....almost like racism.

Thus, by proper education and the offering of alternative methods of spirituality, popular religion as we know it today will dissolve. However, any attempt for theocratic resistance en masse must be destroyed.

[Floyce White]

Lazar, I was responding to Anomaly, but if the shoe fits.

Very odd indeed that you do not have time to read eleven one-sheet leaflets. Even stranger that you did not read the brief post I made earlier where I defined property as the relation of violence.

It is very humble of you to look at my grey beard and imagine yourself so experienced that you can dismiss whatever I say. It is very comradely to brag that you have "set a trap." What a fine example of a serious working-class attitude!

[Winter]

So, I see the opinions about property are widely varied. It's impossible for me to imagine a society without private property. I mean, someone can just be an asshole to you for the hell of it and want to use the car the same time you need it. It just seems you need private property. The means of production must belong to the people, yes, but private property would more likely still exist.
~ Winter