REAL communist countries

[Inquisitor]

I'm just wondering what countries you think are truly communist, past or present, and why. I'm particularly interested in your feelings on Russia.

[Sandanista]

There never has been, Russia and all the others were state capitalist, cuba, china, vietnam, north korea and th whole eastern bloc

[Guardia Bolivariano]

russia was never communist not even in the CCCP times.

[Rock1Renegade3]

In my opinion, no country has or is a communist. I believe that people are too full of ego to actually make it work.

[CubanFox]

Quote: from Guardia Bolivariano on 1:02 am on June 12, 2003
russia was never communist not even in the CCCP times.


<nitpick> Just pointing out that it's SSSR in the Roman alphabet. CCCP is Cyrillic. </nitpick>

There haven't been any true commie countries, IMO.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Actually it's USSR

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

[CubanFox]

In Russian it's abbreviated to SSSR; it looks like CCCP in the Cyrillic alphabet.

[mentalbunny]

According to Rius in Introducing Marx, which is a very good book for beginners like me:


COMMUNISM/The doctrine of Marx and Engels founded on the basis of the materialist conception of history. Communism is the stage following after socilaims and when social classes cease to exist. The Soviet Union, China and other socialist countries are still in the phase of socialism where class struggle has still not terminated.

Well I'd pretty much agree with that, except i'm not sure if China is socialist.

[Kez]

i think i reaad that book to bunny, good book, i liked it.

anyway, USSR was becoming communist during lenins time, then became a deformeed workers state, not "state capitalist"

some would say the paris commune for all its worth

[Sandanista]

It didnt become a deformed workers state, the state controlled all, the worers controlled fuck all, fair enough trotsky may have called the ussr a deformed workers state when he was alive, but nowadays he'd say it was state capitalist

[Vinny Rafarino]

That's what communism is. The state owns everything and distributes as needed. It is a neccessary stage to democratic socialism. The Ideal is the people are not yet ready to accept the responsibility and discipline of total economic ownership/freedom.

Please post your views as to if you agree or disagree.

I expect Redstar to write a bleedin' novel on this one.

From there we can then determine if there are any states throughout history that qualify as true Communists societies.

(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 3:23 am on June 13, 2003)

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 9:16 pm on June 12, 2003
That's what communism is. The state owns everything and distributes as needed. It is a neccessary stage to democratic socialism. The Ideal is the people are not yet ready to accept the responsibility and discipline of total economic ownership/freedom.

Please post your views as to if you agree or disagree.

I expect Redstar to write a bleedin' novel on this one.

From there we can then determine if there are any states throughout history that qualify as true Communists societies.

(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 3:23 am on June 13, 2003)


communism is most certainly not when the government owns all. If you are referring to pahse between capitalism and a 'marxist utopia', that would be socialism.

[Camarade du Che]

"I'm just wondering what countries you think are truly communist, past or present, and why."

Spain during the civil war (1936-1939) and the Paris communes.

[Vinny Rafarino]

communism is most certainly not when the government owns all. If you are referring to pahse between capitalism and a 'marxist utopia', that would be socialism.

Simply not true VC.

4 entries found for communism.
com·mu·nism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kmy-nzm)
n.
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
Communism
A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

I would like to get everyone's opinion before I make a statement in the forum Comrade Du Che.

(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 5:13 am on June 13, 2003)

[Invader Zim]

The basic ideal's for socialism is a community where all means of productionare owned by the state or the system rather than by individuals.

Communism is an authoriative version of this using specific political ideals, as Comrade RAF's dictionary shows.

[Camarade du Che]

"I would like to get everyone's opinion before I make a statement in the forum Comrade Du Che."

What do you mean?

[smoer]

in the very beginning i think russia was communist and during the frenche revolution in paris it was REAL communism for about 3-4days!

[Kez]

this is good article on the theory of state capitalism
i actually enjoyed reading this what are your comments?

http://www.tedgrant.org/works/4/9/reply_to...tony_cliff.html (http://www.tedgrant.org/works/4/9/reply_to_tony_cliff.html)

[sc4r]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF
(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 5:13 am on June 13, 2003)


Look up communism in Marxist writings or in almost any halfway decent POLITICAL encyclopedia.

What you have got hold of is a standard dictionary definition which defines the term as it is commonly [mis]used in The US and UK.

Standard dictionaries are of little use in defining ideologies , particularly ones that are unpopular. In this case what the dictionary has done is define the USSR and simply assumed that because the party in power was called Communist then therefore what was being practised must be communism. It isn't so.

Spreading confusion about terminology and meanings is a mighty effective weapon; and it's employed all the time by both the media and popular reference sources in our society. Whether it's actually deliberate and malicious or not I'm not sure, but it is certainly pernicious.

(Edited by sc4r at 12:34 am on June 14, 2003)

[WUOrevolt]

Russia Vietnam and all those other countries were socialist. mentalbunny china is not socialist seeing that they have allowed capitalism.

[mentalbunny]

I know leftistmarleyist, I said I wasn't sure if it was socialist because it was pretty capitalist.

[Communist Superhero]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 6:12 am on June 13, 2003
communism is most certainly not when the government owns all. If you are referring to pahse between capitalism and a 'marxist utopia', that would be socialism.

Simply not true VC.

4 entries found for communism.
com·mu·nism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kmy-nzm)
n.
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
Communism
A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

(Edited by COMRADE RAF at 5:13 am on June 13, 2003)


This definition of Communism was takenb from www.dictionary.com, the ultimate in Communist literature.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Please advise as to how this definition is incorrect boy.

[Gregorio Allemagna]

This will set off a keg of gunpowder, but it is true.
The closest thing there ever waqs to a true Communist state was the Christian community of the first thru third centuries.

[Iron Star]

no true communist nation has ever existed as far as im concerned. cuba and the others are socialist or state capitalist.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Boy oh Boy..You blokes haven't figured me out yet huh.

Now, if we remove the entry by Communist SuperZero as his post was simply made to try and annoy me, we can see that everyone has their heads so firmly lodged in their rectums it's amazing. You guys just don't get it. You cannot simply rely on one version of anything anymore. What you have to rely on is perception. Now from a purist's standpoint since no communist nation has ever abolished the state there has been no true communist countries. However what is not realised is that perceptions of "what is true communism" will change from nation to nation...from class to class. As I have proven in the above definition from the dictionary. Whomever reads that description has that impression of communism...I see different descriptions on web sites all over the world. These are all sociologically accepted definitions. Why is there so many? Because we have been beaten so badly we are reaching for any fucking light at the end of the tunnel. Now is the time to stop with the endless babbling and actually begin to increase operations within the major cities of the US and Europe.
Our organisations are here lads, you just have to look for them. Now is the time to cast out old bonds to purist ideals that have been proven unfruitful and use whatever ideal works at the time. We all have one overall goal. Who gives a fuck how we get there as long as we get there eh?. Why does anyone care if you are an "authoritarian" a "totalitarian" a "Leninist" a "utopian" etc. There will be plenty of time for governmental debate once a actual government has been established. Quit whining like children and either do what is necessary or admit you are not willing.

Comrade RAF- BR

[mentalbunny]

Comrade RAF, as great as that post was, it's not what we were talking about! We're not talking about the future etc, we're clarifying the past.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I'm aware of what the conversation is about. That post was clarifying my goals here for everyone...I reckon you may have missed the aim. No worries though...it's not for everybody. The set-up was the first post on page two.

Trust me love, I'm more concerned about the future than anyone.

[mentalbunny]

Well fine, we should all be concerned with the future, you're right.

[Xvall]

Sandy, Vietnam was not a 'capitalist state'. I can understand if you don't like the way they went about things, but I'm sure a lot of people here will disagree with you in that Vietnam is 'capitalist'. Myself included.

As to communism; no, a moneyless, classless, and stateless society has not existed. Socialist states have, but no individual has yet to claim that they have to achieve communism.

[Palmares]

The fact that all so-called 'communist' countries had or have governments is proof enough that they are not 'communist', but possibly 'socialist'.

Anyone remember that 'communism' has an unstructured government, or literally no government, true communism is close to anarchism.

[apathy maybe]

true communism is close to anarchism.
or even anarchism. The lines blur.

[redstar2000]

As some of you may already know, I've gone out on the proverbial limb and attempted to define "socialism"...

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...um=13&topic=900 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=13&topic=900)

and "communism"...

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/top...um=13&topic=895 (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=13&topic=895)

To answer the historical question, there have been brief revolutionary periods of what we could call "proto-communism"...but nothing stable or long-lasting enough to really be called "a communist country".

If that seems discouraging, ask yourself how many capitalist countries there were in 1600 or 1700...that is, countries where the capitalist class actually ruled in its own name and the debris of feudalism had been more or less completely cleared away.

Back in those days, most educated and uneducated people alike thought that capitalists were little more than well-organized thieves and the true "greatness" of "civilization" was to be found exclusively in the nobility and among royality.

They've come a long way, baby.

Meanwhile, a few "provocative" remarks were passed along the way here that, as you anticipated, I cannot let pass without comment.

This will set off a keg of gunpowder, but it is true.
The closest thing there ever was to a true Communist state was the Christian community of the first thru third centuries.

No gunpowder, no truth. If the "Book of Acts" is to be believed, the Jerusalem "proto-Christians" (they still considered themselves to be Jews) practiced "communal sharing" among themselves from the time of the execution of "Jesus" (33CE?) until, at the latest, the destruction of the Jewish Temple (70CE). It is thought that the "Jerusalem Church" abandoned that city in the early days of the Roman seige and was not re-established there until much later. There is, to my knowledge, no other evidence that any Christian community practiced "communism" except that first community in Jerusalem. In the authentic letters of Paulos of Tarsus (48-60CE?), he had many opportunities to refer to "Christian communism" if he had wished to do so and if it had existed in the congregations he founded...he is silent on the subject.

And, of course, nowhere in the "New Testament" will you find any words directly attributed to "Jesus" suggesting that living a communist life was necessary or even helpful to attaining "salvation". Yeshuah ben-Yosif was a country-boy, a self-appointed reforming Jewish "rabbi". He was not a god, or the son of a god, or a prophet appointed by god, or a revolutionary, or a communist, or any of that stuff that was made up about him long after his death...which was just as real and permanent as every other human death.


The Ideal is the people are not yet ready to accept the responsibility and discipline of total economic ownership/freedom...I expect Redstar to write a bleedin' novel on this one.

That's why I have a website, RAF, so that I don't have to write that stuff over and over again. Now I can say to people who are interested: just click the link at the end of this post, go to the list of articles and collections of posts, see and evaluate the arguments and evidence for yourself.

RAF's summary of the argument for a "strong-state" version of "socialism" is accurate; it's validity, in my opinion, is nonexistent.

Now is the time to cast out old bonds to purist ideals that have been proven unfruitful and use whatever ideal works at the time. We all have one overall goal. Who gives a fuck how we get there as long as we get there eh?. Why does anyone care if you are an "authoritarian" a "totalitarian" a "Leninist" a "utopian" etc. There will be plenty of time for governmental debate once a actual government has been established. Quit whining like children and either do what is necessary or admit you are not willing.

Are you properly intimidated? Ready to wipe away those tears, quit that childish whining, snap to attention, and obey orders promptly and cheerfully? Yes Sir!

:cheesy:

Che-Lives is actually not a very good place to look for that kind of response, as you may have gathered. Most people here, I think, don't want to be soldiers...not even for the "revolution". Participants, yes. Conscious, autonomous subjects in the revolutionary process, yes.

But obedient pawns to be pushed here and there by some Lenin-wannabe? I really don't think so.

And the time to argue about the nature of the revolution that we want--and insist on--is before, not after the event itself.

Please excuse the "whine". :biggrin:

:cool:

[Sean ireland]

There was never a communist country and still isnt due to the fact of the definition of "communism".

Under real "communism" there would be no government...the people would rule themselves.

E.g. a Eutopia.

imho...it would take thousands of years before people were that advanced to rule themselves..ne need for a giovernment.

[Seeing Red]

My country will be next year... thats what we hope.

[rAW DEaL bILL]

theres never been a truly communist country.

[Kapitan Andrey]

I agree with mates, who said, that there were no communist states!

A-a-a-a-a-a-a!!! 666-th post!!!

(Edited by Kapitan Andrey at 12:28 am on June 30, 2003)

[elijahcraig]

No communist countries have ever existed. Russia was on the right road with Lenin and Trotsky, Stalin ruined it all. Cuba was also on the right road, but Castro got paranoid, mostly from CIA interventions, etc. China was also on the right road, but the interventions, authoritative rule ruined it all. At best, these were workers' states, Lenin has succeeded the best, though he died too fast to continue his work.

[Kapitan Andrey]

elijahcraig...agree!