A Model Communist...

[R_P_A_S]

From the short time I've been frequenting this forums and reading up on communism I guess is safe for me to assume that a model communist has this traits he must or has to abide by such as. not being homophobic, supporting gays rights and also none racist. and for some reason they seem to be against christianity or having a god? jesus, church? and the big one for me, abortion. seems like they support it. so basically my question is a model communist man or woman supports abortion, doesn't believe in god, or atleast no christianity or other religion, not racist, and it's all for homosexuals. among other things.

is this correct?

and if it is. not that is wrong. but why the symphaty or support for gays?(i dont have a problem with them. im just asking)
AND why no religion? a faith in your god. who ever you think it might be.

thanks!

[TC]

If your male, you're required to have unusual facial hair...

Either drab, vaguely factory worker type clothing, or hippie revival clothing, your pick...but you can never wear more than 100$ USD worth of clothing at a time, so buy second hand.

If you're a heterosexual white male, its considered fashionable to find a way to reconceptualize your identity as somehow not-straight, or not-white, like, you thought some guy was a little cute once or discover that you have a native-american great great great grandmother.

Also you can't wear your hair short. Thats definately counter-revolutionary, although it might be acceptable if you're a girl, provided its not a natural looking color.

Odd peircings are a plus.


The most important thing to remember though, is that you have to be very offended by everything. EVERYTHING! Except the things that the christian right is offended by, they have them covered, oh but, if you can figure out how to make it into some kindof a critique of corporate western culture, the patriarchy, or urban degeneration, than its still good to be offended by it.

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 12:32 AM
If your male, you're required to have unusual facial hair...

Either drab, vaguely factory worker type clothing, or hippie revival clothing, your pick...but you can never wear more than 100$ USD worth of clothing at a time, so buy second hand.

If you're a heterosexual white male, its considered fashionable to find a way to reconceptualize your identity as somehow not-straight, or not-white, like, you thought some guy was a little cute once or discover that you have a native-american great great great grandmother.

Also you can't wear your hair short. Thats definately counter-revolutionary, although it might be acceptable if you're a girl, provided its not a natural looking color.

Odd peircings are a plus.


The most important thing to remember though, is that you have to be very offended by everything. EVERYTHING! Except the things that the christian right is offended by, they have them covered, oh but, if you can figure out how to make it into some kindof a critique of corporate western culture, the patriarchy, or urban degeneration, than its still good to be offended by it.
??????????????????????????????? :blink:

[TC]

Lol i was giving the traits and guidelines for a model communist.

[More Fire for the People]

Communists tend to ignore or condemn so-called 'virtue' ethics. If you want to be a model communist: love your comrades, condemn discrimination, understand the proletariat, and shun arrogance.

Also, check this (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/ho-chi-minh/works/1948/04/05.htm) out.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Ignore TragicClown's post; it is nothing more than a critique of corporate western culture and I for one am VERY offended by it.

You would be hard-pressed to find a description of a so-called 'model communist' here, or at least one that more than one person agree on. So it's best to stop looking and be yourself. You'll know whether or not you're a model Communist when the revolution comes; if you're thrown against a wall and shot, you're not :lol:

And as regards to sympathy towards gays thing, Communists believe in the universal equality of mankind, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation. As for religion, it is considered to be reactionary (or, as Marx put it, 'the opium of the people'). Religion leads the working class to believe it is okay to suffer needlessly at the hands of the capitalist oppressors in this life, because they will be rewarded in the next life. Which, in the humble opinion of myself, as well as many other Communists, is bullshit.

[CCCPneubauten]

Model Communist; Be yourself.

[kaaos_af]

To be a model communist you must be prepared to-


~sit through endless speeches calling for the liberation of the Upper Mongolian tye-dyers and other such topics so totally irrelevant to your local situation.

~ignore local issues (such as nuclear power-plants, police brutality, injustice to the homeless etc.) in favour of DPRK/Cuba/Venezuela/China/Nepal/Vietnam solidarity.

~struggle against your organisation's dreaded enemies in the in heart and deed, never failing to deliver a crushing blow against their interpretation of Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution.

~get up in front of 10 000 people at a rally and deliver the most boring speech possible.

~surrender all personal opinions concerning the Party line. "Comrades- we must all abide to the Party line. Any contradiction in our beliefs publicly is a sign of weakness that can be exploited by our enemies in the bourgeois press and [insert rival Trotskyist group here]." On a similar note, you must also be prepared to be shouted down by your branch's star member for expressing any opinion contradicting the Party line (i.e.- questioning the Cuban regime or the Party line on the Soviet collapse, having anarchist sympathies, etc.).

~never, under and circumstances, make any comment that could be regarded as sexist, racist or homophobic. You are, however, encouraged to make snide comments to the Vegetarian comrade, as clearly animals are a resource to exploited, as one would exploit a piece of wood. Vegetarianism promotes the destrction of the meat industry, which would put thousands of meat workers out of work!

~never question the effectiveness of Leninist party building techniques when applied to the conditions inherent in modern first world countries. This is clearly a lapse in discipline.




Sorry, comrades- I am an anarchist and I still accept many of Marx and Lenin's ideas, but after years of putting up with 'model communists', I have had enough. To be a model communist, my suggestions are-

-if your group starts to exhibit any tendencies described above, QUIT, before you are demoralised, and either join another group or start your own.

-always be accepting of other's ideas, even if these ideas weren't written about by Marx or Lenin.

-local issues always MUST come first. maybe do the occasional solidarity effort in support of foreign comraes, but solidarity work must never take priority. I am sure the Nepalese guerillas will survive on their own steam without the help of the St. Kilda Nepalese Solidarity Worker's Alliance.

-never tell other people their ideas are wrong. This only puts them on the defence. Instead, say you disagree and put forward your opinion. If you present your side not as an argument or a debate but simply a different persepctive, people will be far more interested in what you have to say. If someone comes to you looking for a debate, it usually means they are smart arses determined to shout you down.

-don't swear excessively when making a speech. You run the risk of looking like a comic book character. I have seen countless Trotskyist speeches in which a comrade jumps up and shouts "that fucking Liberal government has to be fucked up and thrown out the fucking window by the united workers and fucking students! Fuck yeah!" only to met with an impressive silence. Similarly, when making speeches, make them short and to the point, without any exaggerations. If they're too long, you kill the energy created by the rally, and people drift. If they're too over-the-top, people roll their eyes. Also, judge the situation carefully. I went to an East Timor memorial vigil once, for all the people killed in the conflict, and Socialist Alternative turned the thing from a touching expression of solidarity with East Timor to a semi-Stalinist screaming match, with five of them on mega-phones yelling at everyone. It just pissed everyone off, and SAlt was left to do its thing while everyone left (much to SAlt's confusion).

~don't be sectarian! Maybe the other group has a good point or two! I'm sick of hearing one group of eight people declaring a group of nine people "incapable of leading the revolution because they have misinterpreted Lenin and Trotsky." So what!? You're both so small you're irrelevent! Merge- you'll have 17 people and be on the way to becoming a proper group.

~don't become emotionally attatched to Lenin. He was cool, yes, but he was wrong many, many times. If you're reading this and are getting real uptight, reading 'Lenin was wrong' and preparing to deliver a long message on Lenin's correctness on everything, this allies to you. People who become attatched to leaders emotionally run the risk of becoming incapable of seeing any flaws in these leaders, and when contradictions occur, it often leads to disillusionment. One comrade in one of my local socialist groups even expressed her desire to have an affair with Lenin. That is getting far too cultish for my liking. People should read John Zerzan's writings on Lenin- they are not a critique, but a basic understanding that while Lenin was wrong about many things, his writings are still very important and must be examined by all revolutionaries- anarchist, Marxist, liberation theologist etc.

The reason so many communists fall into the trap of behaiving like this is because we revolutionaries are [i]always on the defence. We are always being verbally attacked at school, university, on the streets, on television, in the newspapers and so on. It leads to a siege mentality, that leads to group paranoia (for example- the endless accusations of Trotskyist groups against one another of being Stalinist, the Spartacist League's belief that all other groups are a blockade to the revolution, the Socialist Labor League's accusations of all other groups being CIA backed), an ulhealthy faith in ideology with a refusal to accomodate the idea that there may be flaws and to investigate alternative theories (which doesn't mean you have to abandon Marxism- Marxism is a very correct ideology!) and the total worship of already existing 'socialist' regimes such as the ones in Vietnam, China and the DPRK (sorry, guys, as much as 'we must defend the gains of the socialist revolution', I'd still rather live in France to the DPRK!). Unhealthy behaiviour in revolutionaries must be overcome by the understanding that open-mindedness is the key to the future. Without open-mindedness, socialism woul never have caught on in the first place. Without it, none of the comrades in the movement would have overcome bourgeois lies and become socialists.

I can make a long critique of the anarchist and libertarian socialist movements on request as well. Many people have to realise that they are coming across to everyone as assholes.

[LSD]

I really hate to get involved in this, and I'm certainly not one to "defend" Leninism, but a couple comments there jumped out at me especially:


never, under and circumstances, make any comment that could be regarded as sexist, racist or homophobic.

Because, honestly, I don't see the problem there.

Is an anti-sexist, anti-racist, anti-homophobic line "cramping" your "style"? Is there some pressing reason why you wish to make biggoted comments?

There are a lot of critisisms that you could rightfuly make of the Leninist paradigm, but I would hardly say that "too strong a line" on opposing prejudice is one of them!

If anything, we need to be stronger on these issues! Leninism has a disturbing history of sucking up to social oppressors when it suits their political needs. A truly progressive communist movement not only needs to oppose discrimination when its "convenient", but also when it's horribly unpopular.

You call yourself an "anarchist". Well anarchism is about liberation just as much as communism is. And liberation has nothing to do with "sexist, racist or homophobic" comments! :angry:


You are, however, encouraged to make snide comments to the Vegetarian comrade

I don't know about "snide comments", but "moral" vegetarianism is idealist crap which can lead to a disturbingly quasi-primitivist approach to food production.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with informing vegetarian "comrades" that their animistic "principles" are not compatible with an advanced materialist class-conscious position.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

So long as you dont own a business or employ people then you can be a communist.

But you do have to be anti-racist, anti-homophobic, anti-religion etc.

You must always support the working class to be progressive, and condemn anything that you see as anti-working class.

This includes denouncing all the old "communist" states, like USSR and the rest.




About the abortion thingy though, is there another thread on this?

[EusebioScrib]

There is no "model" for being a communist. Doesn't exist, never will.

Basically to be a "good" revolutionary one must: refuse, resist, and rebel. The three r's. Other than that, just drink, fuck and have fun! Who cares about stupid ideological masturbation (although it can be fun). It doesn't matter if you agree with this or that, just as long as you want workers power, then your my comrade.

[kaaos_af]

Originally posted by [email protected] 17 2006, 05:04 AM


Is an anti-sexist, anti-racist, anti-homophobic line "cramping" your "style"? Is there some pressing reason why you wish to make biggoted comments?

There are a lot of critisisms that you could rightfuly make of the Leninist paradigm, but I would hardly say that "too strong a line" on opposing prejudice is one of them!

If anything, we need to be stronger on these issues! Leninism has a disturbing history of sucking up to social oppressors when it suits their political needs. A truly progressive communist movement not only needs to oppose discrimination when its "convenient", but also when it's horribly unpopular.

You call yourself an "anarchist". Well anarchism is about liberation just as much as communism is. And liberation has nothing to do with "sexist, racist or homophobic" comments! :angry:


You are, however, encouraged to make snide comments to the Vegetarian comrade

I don't know about "snide comments", but "moral" vegetarianism is idealist crap which can lead to a disturbingly quasi-primitivist approach to food production.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with informing vegetarian "comrades" that their animistic "principles" are not compatible with an advanced materialist class-conscious position.



On abortion- isn't this all about a woman's right to control her own body?
And there you have it boys and girls, exactly what I was attacking.



Perhaps mant comraes believe they are in a dream world in which 99% of the working class does not make sexist, racist and homphobic comments from time to time. Unfortunately, this is not so. Many working class people frequently make remarks that could be regarded as such, and as such a genuinely suprised when some student teenager attacks them as being chauvanist pigs. Throw away comments are often taken as being chauvanist, and yes, it is right to challenge such comments, but not in a confrontational manner, such as the one just displayed by Comrade LSD.

Comrade LDS- that is the most vileist thing I have ever read on vegetarianism in this forum. You should take a good look at the meat industry- perhaps a visit to an abbatoir would do you some good, coupled with an examination of the resources involved in sustaining the meat industry- for example, the water and grain used to water and feed the animals could end drought and world hunger easily.

You have assumed I have a 'qausi-primitivist' approach to the matter of vegetarianism. This is not so. A society in which vegetarianism was encouraged would not only have a much more enlightened view of life, but would have much more resources in terms of food production in general.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 11:04 PM
their animistic "principles" are not compatible with an advanced materialist class-conscious position.
But supporting an extremely wasteful, destructive and exploitative industry is? :blink:

[Body Count]

I took LSD's comments on vegatarians to be aimed at those who don't eat meat because they "feel bad" for the animals or see something inherently wrong in slaughtering animals.

The argument that meat-eating is wasteful is a VERY GOOD AND RELEVANT, I just don't think LSD was talking about that, and truthfully, most vegatarians are so because either of health or because they care about animals.

[LSD]

Perhaps mant comraes believe they are in a dream world in which 99% of the working class does not make sexist, racist and homphobic comments from time to time.

Who's talking about "99% of workers"? We're discussing communists here; you know, people who ostensibly have an advanced material understanding.

It's one thing for a random worker to use offensive language because he doesn't know any better; it's an entirely different thing when a self-described "communist" does it.

If you don't understand that sexism, racism, and homophobia are not a part of revolutionary leftism in any way, then you are not the communist/anarchist/whatever you think you are.


Throw away comments are often taken as being chauvanist, and yes, it is right to challenge such comments

Then what's your problem?


A society in which vegetarianism was encouraged would not only have a much more enlightened view of life

:lol:

And what's so "enlightened" about not eating meat? As I see it, it requires a remarkable degree of confusion and self-deception to convince oneself that killing animals is "wrong".

True "enlightenment" would be realizing the fallacy of "animal rights" and adopting a strong humanist line.


But supporting an extremely wasteful, destructive and exploitative industry is?

First of all, I was specifically attacking "moral" vegetarianism; that is, not eating meat because "killing animals is wrong" -- a decidely idealist and antihumanist approach.

While "practical" vegetarianism has a number of problems, idealism really isn't one of them. Unfortunately, though, it's equally ludicrous as a dietary paradigm.

There are basically two kinds of "revolutionary" vegetarianism; the one that promotes it as an immediate solution to percieved problems in the food production industry, and the one that promotes it as a post-revolutionary to resource scarcity.

Both of these approaches, however, are wrong.

First of all, "not eating meat" in order to avoid "supporting" an exploitive industry makes absolutely no sense. All production in capitalism is exploitive, that's the way the system is designed; Agricultural workers are, for the most part, treated just as badly and paid just as poorly as meat industry workers.

If you purchase anything in this society, you are subsidizing exploitation, that's how the "free market" works. The ubiquity of capitalism cannot be defeated by "boycoots" or "organic shopping" because if it could, we wouldn't need a revolution.

The way to fight against exploitation in the meat industry is to fight against all industry in the bourgeois state: by organizing along strong proletarian lines and resisting bourgeois economic domination.

Changing one's diet, however, will do precisely nothing. If your money doesn't go to the meat industry, it's going to go to some bourgeois business. Capitalism can't be "directed", it needs to be overthrown!

And in terms of post-revolutionary society, a vegetarian "policy" is simply not feasible. People will want to eat meat, in the same way that they will want to drink and have sex.

The primativist idea that you can run a society in which everyone "abstains" from the pleasures of eating meat is just as ludcrous as the conservative idea that "sexual abstinance" is a viable policy.

It may be nescessary to control meat production, but abolishing it is simply not an option.

The resource problem in the world today is a distribution one, not a production one. There are enough resource on the earth to feed the entire planet, it's just that it's not getting to the people who need it.

Obviously communism will change that. What will not do is transform those people into "enlightened" angels who voluntarily abstain from the pleasures of fthe flesh.