They dont call it 'learning' for nothing...

[cbm989]

So i put this here becasue it seems an incredibly basic question but i didnt understand so here it is: Why are people so concerned with communist countries 'industrializing'? What significance does it hold and what are the reprecussions.

[Everyday Anarchy]

One reason I can think of is that if a Communist country isn't 'industrialized,' then it would probably depend largely on foreign trade. Capitalist countries would refuse to trade, however, causing the Communist country to sink low in poverty and possibly collapse.

[loveme4whoiam]

Indeed; self-sufficiency on a national scale is pretty important when a Communist country is isolated (although I'd say that a truly Communist country in a world of Capitalist countries is an impossibility, at least if that country wishes to exist for more than a day).

A good example of this is the way Hitler (although Goering managed the nitty-gritty) mobilised Germany in preperation for war with Europe. He knew that relying on foreign trade wouldn't work for him, so they national ecoomy was geared towards self-sufficiency. A Communist country would have to do the same, and for largely the same reasons - no-one would trade with it because everyone would see it as a thread. Industrialisation is an integral part of self-sufficiency.

[More Fire for the People]

Communism is the doctrine of the conditions of the liberation of the proletariat.
[...]
The Proletariat originated in the industrial revolution, which took place in England in the last half of the last (18th) century, and which has since then been repeated in all the civilized countries of the world.

This industrial revolution was precipitated by the discovery of the steam engine, various spinning machines, the mechanical loom, and a whole series of other mechanical devices. These machines, which were very expensive and hence could be bought only by big capitalists, altered the whole mode of production and displaced the former workers...
— Principles of Communism
A communist revolution cannot materialise without a population that is largely proletarian. The very prerequesite of large-scale capitalism is the industrial revolution.

[RedSabine]

Wasn't russia mostly agricultural before the revolution?

[RedSabine]

Wasn't russia mostly agricultural before the revolution?

[Everyday Anarchy]

I believe so. I've read that the revolution is one of the causes (or the cause) of the Industrial Revolution in Russia.

[cbm989]

But if the economy becomes industrialized...machines would take the place of many workers. So where do all those workers go?

[loveme4whoiam]

Well, if you are talking shortly after industrialisation, they'll be working in the industries themselves. Of course, as technology progresses further and automation becomes more profit-friendly *spits* the more the workers will be cast off into unemployment. It's this process that will eventually lead to the proletariat getting so damn fed up with the big bosses that they'll overthrow them.

Capitalism is self-destructive, it's only a matter of time :D

[More Fire for the People]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 10:35 PM
But if the economy becomes industrialized...machines would take the place of many workers. So where do all those workers go?Moreover, the further this process advances, the more new labor-saving machines are invented, the greater is the pressure exercised by big industry on wages, which, as we have seen, sink to their minimum and therewith render the condition of the proletariat increasingly unbearable. The growing dissatisfaction of the proletariat thus joins with its rising power to prepare a proletarian social revolution.
— Principles of CommunismPostindustrialism leads to communism in the sense that the proletariat is either forced to take jobs in the lowpaying service sector or forced into unemployment. This is because science is a product of the base — the material conditons of the mode of production — and is utilized by the capitalist to cut costs and maximize profits.

[Roses in the Hospital]

A good example of this is the way Hitler (although Goering managed the nitty-gritty) mobilised Germany in preperation for war with Europe.

When it came to the economy Goering was an incompetent fool, it was the previous economics minister - Shacht - who should have more credit for Autarky, even if it never was fully realised...

[Monty Cantsin]

The economic base for any class society is one marred with scarcity in resources thus increased industrialisation increases production levels leading further and further to an economic condition upon with a communist society could be based. Modern capitalism is moving further and further towards this situation and market economics based on the principle of scarcity are becoming increasingly irrational with advent of artificial scarcity.

Unemployment isn’t increasing there’s structural change happening within the labour market moving always from blue collar work towards white collar work in the high income economies. Which means more labour is being put into managerial and finance use with is really only useful in the sustainment of capital’s institutions.

[STI]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2006, 02:16 AM
Wasn't russia mostly agricultural before the revolution?
Indeed it was... and it also wasn't communist after the revolution!

[Connolly]

Nor was it even socialist!

Simply to answer the question.

[Initally], industrialisation/capitalisation of the means of production must come about for socialism to occur.

Should we support "Marxist" guerrillas, in underdeveloped countries, even though they will not achieve socialism?

Yes. Marxists should fight for the transition of the mode of production, be it from feudal to capitalist or capitalist to socialist. Fight to rid the world of the old.!

[More Fire for the People]

Should we support "Marxist" guerrillas, in underdeveloped countries, even though they will not achieve socialism?Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution, and through this, the direct or indirect dominance of the proletariat. Direct in England, where the proletarians are already a majority of the people Indirect in France and Germany, where the majority of the people consists not only of proletarians, but also of small peasants and petty bourgeois. who are in the process of falling into the proletariat, who are more and more dependent in all their political interests on the proletariat, and who must, therefore, soon adapt to the demands of the proletariat. Perhaps this will cost a second struggle, but the outcome can only be the victory of the proletariat.
— Principles of Communism
I *heart* Principles of Communism

Wasn't russia mostly agricultural before the revolution?
I had always thought this but in fact the Russian West the population was on the fast track to industrialization by foreign capital. West Russia was India, with its avant-garde corporations in the cities and the underdeveloped farmlands in the rural areas.The confluence of industrial with bank capital was also accomplished in Russia with a completeness you might not find in any other country. But the subjection of the industries to the banks meant, for the same reasons, their subjection to the western European money market. Heavy industry (metal, coal, oil) was almost wholly under the control of foreign finance capital, which had created for itself an auxiliary and intermediate system of banks in Russia. Light industry was following the same road. Foreigners owned in general about 40 per cent of all the stock capital of Russia, but in the leading branches of industry that percentage was still higher.
— The History of the Russian Revolution