View Full Version : Losing faith - Has Communism ever actually existed?
Hesh
15th June 2003, 06:37
I entered the community too late. The facts pile onto me and what I see is a (filtered) source of information denouncing the ways of socialism. I need some reassurance.
Help a drowning comrade.
Emmanual Goldstein
15th June 2003, 10:11
Don't worry Hesh, we all feel this way at times. What you must keep in mind, however, is that even though at times it may seem like socialism may not be right, a world of starvation and inequality is so clearly wrong that the fight for a better world MUST continue.
With that in mind, many of the most articulate voices for social change have been socialists. The most penetrating analyses of economic problems are usually socialist analyses. So Marx and many of those who followed are still worth reading after a century and a half.
And if you think that the current topics of the board are depressing, you should have seen it 2 months ago, when it seemed that everyone decided to time travel 80 years into the past to relive the Stalin-Trotsky feud.
CruelVerdad
16th June 2003, 00:53
Long life to socialism! Fights the current capitalism, and the horrible imperialism that USA is creating on us... The rest of the world!
Live your ideals, live for your ideals!! Itīs the only thing that you really have!
YKTMX
16th June 2003, 01:51
At the risk of sounding harsh. I find all this moaning about, "oh it'll never happen" a bit tedious. If you have ever actually looked at history, the only certain thing is, THINGS CHANGE. That is the only constant. Industrial capitlism has existed for a 150 years MAX. That is a tiny percentage of history. Have some vision, comrades.
mentalbunny
16th June 2003, 15:28
Hesh, read some marx, at least read "Introducing marx" by Rius (it's all I've read so far and it's really helpful). I went through a phase like yours but it's ok, really. Things seem to take a long time to happen, or never happen at all, but eventually it will all change. We can already see that the rot is beginning to set in for capitalism, it will take some time but eventually the circumstances will be right and we can make the move to socialism, then to communism and finally to anarchism.
UnionofSovietSocialistRepublics
16th June 2003, 19:00
U can see the potential for change is comming, i mean the rich are getting richer and the poorer are getting worse off, thanks to things like inherited wealth and private tuition. Hang on to your dreams, people can take everything away from you, but they cant destroy your vision of paradise.
Politrickian
16th June 2003, 21:36
Quote: from Hesh on 7:37 am on June 15, 2003
I entered the community too late. The facts pile onto me and what I see is a (filtered) source of information denouncing the ways of socialism. I need some reassurance.
Help a drowning comrade.
Could anyone that lived a 100 years ago expect the capitalist system to work the way it works today?
mentalbunny
16th June 2003, 21:48
El Marko, just wondering, how does private tuition make the rich richer and the poor poorer? It's cos the best teachers are attracted to the private money? Or is it something else. I don't know.
El Barbudo
16th June 2003, 22:52
fondamental asking...
UnionofSovietSocialistRepublics
16th June 2003, 23:03
mentalbunny (if that is ur real name :P), the poor generally dont have the money for private tuition, it helps the rich get money because they get a better education than the average joe, therefore probably better grades, so its an unfair advantage.
Socialsmo o Muerte
16th June 2003, 23:40
Many of you will slaughter me, but I think Britain in the 40's was very close to being a real Socialist country. Atlee's government established a Welfare State in a country blinded by the ideology of laissez-faire. It wasn't revolutionary, it was evolutionary. Which is why most of you will disagree with me because of your revolutionary preference. But Britain came close,
mentalbunny
17th June 2003, 18:17
Hm, yes. I just wanted to see what you thought. I get really confused by the idea of private tuition, since I'm at a private school, and I definitely think they should be abolished but I have to keep that quiet.
Socialsmo o Muerte
17th June 2003, 18:59
I don't blame the people who use the system. I have 4 or 5 friends who have been through the Private system. If it's there, you cannot blame people for using it.
It's the system's fault. The governments fault.
Reuben
17th June 2003, 22:19
Quote: from mentalbunny on 9:48 pm on June 16, 2003
El Marko, just wondering, how does private tuition make the rich richer and the poor poorer? It's cos the best teachers are attracted to the private money? Or is it something else. I don't know.
Yeah pretty much what el marko said, there is an extremely strong correlation between class background and academic achievement suggesting that capitalism has not fulfilled by the dream of a meritocratic education system
Palmares
18th June 2003, 03:01
I hate to sound cliche, but Cuba is the closet we have ever come. Maybe there have been brief instances, but never anything that has lasted like Cuba.
sc4r
18th June 2003, 10:50
Quote: from Socialsmo o Muerte on 11:40 pm on June 16, 2003
Many of you will slaughter me, but I think Britain in the 40's was very close to being a real Socialist country. Atlee's government established a Welfare State in a country blinded by the ideology of laissez-faire. It wasn't revolutionary, it was evolutionary. Which is why most of you will disagree with me because of your revolutionary preference. But Britain came close,
Right up until the 70's britain was progressing quite nicely down a socialist path. It was still a long way off being fully socialist and had retained an awful lot of imperial and aritocratic attitudes but it certainly was progressing. An awful lot of that progress was towards the distracting and ultimately irrelevant 'nicey nicey' policies of social democratic liberals of course, but not all of it.
(Edited by sc4r at 10:52 am on June 18, 2003)
mentalbunny
18th June 2003, 15:57
Where did it all go wrong? I'm not very good at my British history!
Socialsmo o Muerte
18th June 2003, 21:06
It's simple, mentalbunny..
...two words...
Mrs. Thatcher...
Well, one abbreviation and one word.
CienfuegosJnr
20th June 2003, 14:44
NEVER-----
Don't forget 0.7c a day for Haitians, don't forget it used to bee chaeaper to let Guatemalan coffie workers die rather than buy a horse , the blokade kills Cubans .............
NEVER DOUGHT..........
People don't take up arms for nada-----
CienfuegosJnr
20th June 2003, 14:47
(wrong reply above)
Britain did that, so they wouldn't seam bad compeared to u.s.s.r
Reuben
20th June 2003, 14:56
Progress was also restricted by the limits of parliamentary politics. For example the labour government the 70s planned to nationalise the top 20 industrial companies but were scared off the poliy by the Confederation of British Industry, a group representing business interest who, while representing a small base of people, enjoyed vastly disproportionate due to the economic leverage of their members.
(Edited by Reuben at 2:58 pm on June 20, 2003)
mentalbunny
21st June 2003, 18:33
Thanks for the info, I dont' suppose you could recommend some books on the issue?
Socialsmo o Muerte
22nd June 2003, 00:27
There are plenty. The best idea is to read a brief overview about the whole process of industrilisation in Britain. You will be able top obtain that on the Net somewhere I'm sure, or alternatively, try this book:
- "Industrialisation and Society: A Social History, 1830-1951" Eric Hopkins
I've read 3 books on Britains industrialisation. One of which was kind of skimmed. Hopkins' book was by far the best.
This will give you the picture...set the scene. This is the time when Old Labour developed to become leaders.
Then, these books will then give relevance to the 70's. How Labour fell, how Thatcherism grew:
-Post-war British Politics in Perspective David Marsh
-Post-war Britain: A Political History: 1945-1992 Alan Sked, Chris Cook
-The Politics of State Expansion: War, State and Society in Twentieth Century Britain James Cronin
-Contemporary British Poltics Bill Coxall
These are all very good. There are others I've read which weren't that impressive. Clearly, these are recommendations based on my opinion.
(Edited by Socialsmo o Muerte at 12:31 am on June 22, 2003)
Vinny Rafarino
22nd June 2003, 01:41
As there has never been a nation that has completely abolished the state the answer is no. There has never been a complety communist nation.
Socialsmo o Muerte
22nd June 2003, 03:28
Thanks for that genius. But that has already been established.
We're talking about how close has the world come.
Gregorio Allemagna
22nd June 2003, 05:05
Even Karl Marx warned that a true communist state is impposible to achieve. see Collective Works of Karl Marx, First Chapter. I think he was forewarning the corruption and greed of Stalin (maybe?)
I am from Germany, like Marx. Before the advent of the European Union, about 10 years ago, Germany and Holland were perhaps the best examples of post-Industrial revolution Socializm. Today, it is being depleted just as Ronald Reagan destroyed what was left of the American Social Program.
Don't be distraught, things run in cycles and now it is OUR TURN!!!!
Viva la Revolucion
mentalbunny
22nd June 2003, 11:04
Thanks for the book titles S o M, and Comrade RAF, I think you're in the wrong thread mate!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.