communism dead as an ideology?

[black magick hustla]

Is communism--as an ideology--dead?

I mean, it has been slandered, surpressed, and attacked by the ruling class which such scrutinity that communism is seen as a great evil, etc.

Communist "ideological vanguards", by this, I mean explicitly communist groups and parties, are really very small.

However, we have seen that today, that there are revolutionary movements--however its members do not sing the internationale or carry red flags. One of those examples right now is the whole turmoil going in Oaxaca right now.

We have seen also throughout recent history, spontaneous organization of workers--that while such workers may not be ideologically communist, they are communists in practice. Some recent examples could be the seizing of abandoned factories in Argentina through cooperatives and what is happening in Oaxaca right now.

So, do you think communism as an ideology is really dead?

[atlas]

People claiming to be communist are mostly gone. (due to it's reputation)

Most everyone these days is either a socialist or an anarchist, even if some of their ideals are more communist than what they claim to be.



At least that's how it seems to me.

[Cryotank Screams]

Communism as an ideology and political philosophy? No, never, it only becomes increasingly relevant.

Communism the ideology in modern practice? Not fully, just needs to be revamped, and to be purged of liberals, revisionists, and crypto-bourgeoisie, and go back to revolutionary roots, then the people need to be educated through various mediums of what true Communist and Marxist theory is, and then there needs to be unification of the parties in a respective nation, and then mobilization, and be dead set and serious on revolution, and not just use Communist/Marxist as a title, and sit by, and be cynical and do nothing.

It would take sometime, but if this were to happen I guarantee you Communism would become a powerful force yet again.

[VukBZ2005]

Communism is not meant to be an ideology and is not political nor it was meant to be such. It is the real human society. The reason why people think of it as an ideology and as a form of politics, not to mention, summarize it as an ideology and as a form of politics in their minds is because of the fact that it has been fetishsized and has been transformed into an ideology and into something political by those who think that there must be a state in which the bureaucracy controls the means of production before everyone takes control of it and by those who glorify the craft and mass industrial worker.

Thus, my view is this, what I believe is dead is the image of Communism as a instrument of heirarchy and opression. The death of this image leaves us with a potential that did not exist in the mass revolutionary struggles of the 1960's and the 1970's - the potential to demonstrate what Communism actually is and what makes it distinct from that image.

[Sentinel]

I think the name 'communism', communist rhetoric and symbols have been stigmatised to the degree that they might be. But Marx' 'predictions' and historical materialism are far from 'dead'. They simply must be looked at and applied to thought from a modern perspective.

Perhaps vanguardist forms of communism are indeed outdated, especially in the 'first' world, but maybe also parts of the 'second' and 'third' ones. Their failure in the last century is fresh in people's memories. Instead different types of de facto left communism, characterised by more direct worker's power seem to be coming in a big style. :)

It was quite funny to see the reactions of some to the Oaxaca insurrection; 'Hey, wait, you need a vanguard party dammit!' :lol:

[VukBZ2005]

Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2006 07:35 pm
It was quite funny to see the reactions of some to the Oaxaca insurrection; 'Hey, wait, you need a vanguard party dammit!' :lol:
I agree. I think that this is the past speaking to us. We should take such tendencies and challenge them.

[which doctor]

Most popular revolutions have not been led by single dogmatic ideologies but by unified tendencies. Most "plans for revolution" are widely outdated and unrealistic for the masses. "Communism" may be dead, but the possibility of a stateless, classless society is not.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Democracy was considered dead after it's failure in Rome and Greece...

[black magick hustla]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2006 01:09 am
Democracy was considered dead after it's failure in Rome and Greece...
the thing is, i dont think there was any coherent ideological dogma for democracy.

it was just something that sprung out. there wasnt a "democracy theorist" in athens or rome. in fact, philosophers despised democracy.

[PRC-UTE]

Don't think of communism so much as an ideology. Focus on the class and the practical aspects of building solidarity. The ideology without a strong workers movement is just meaningless.

"I owe my allegience to the Working Class."
-Seamus Costello.

[angus_mor]

I myself do not see communism as an ideology, to me it is a tendency which arises from a dialectical conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie tends to exploit the proletariat, who in turn tend to revolt against the class antagonism at fault, and thus property as an institution. Since communism is a mechanistic interpretation of capitalism, it's about as dead as capitalism today.

[LoneRed]

Marmot is this thread a joke?

If communism "Was dead" then why are there so many people that identify themselves as "communists"? The theory is becoming increasingly relevant not the other way around.

[Zero]

Because it depends on where in the world you are. In the United States we just got over the Cold War era and all the bullshit that entailed. We're just getting back into gear.

[ComradeR]

Communism is far from dead, but it will take quite awhile to recover from the image of the so-called "Soviet Communism" especially in the US. But if you actualy look at the world described by Marx and Engels is recognizably the world we live in today. With capitalism as a world system capable of marshalling production on a global sacle; its devastating impact on all aspects of human existence, work, the family and the distribution of wealth; and the understanding that, far from being a stable, immuntable system, it is, on the contrary, susceptible to enormous convulsions and crisis, and contains the seeds of its own destruction. This has become extremely evident in the last 20 years, and the system continues to deteriorate, it is begining to near its collapse. So it seems the communist revolution predicted by Marx and Engels is not all that far off.

[bcbm]

It probably isn't, but I think the ideological-pimping and infighting that have become associated with it, not to mention all of the would-be managers of revolution, could certainly do the world a favor by taking a trip into the dustbin of history. I agree that many modern revolutionary currents are based in autonomous struggle by under-class groupings, not ideological struggles with their prophets as in the past and this is certainly a good thing. The last thing the exploited and oppressed need are more middle-men to try and channel their rage against society.

[KC]

The day communism as an ideology "dies" is the day that we will see proletarian revolution.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 23, 2006 10:24 am
The day communism as an ideology "dies" is the day that we will see proletarian revolution.
Elaborate.

[KC]

Marxism isn't an ideology; it was (mistakenly) made into an ideology.

[Cryotank Screams]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 23, 2006 04:00 pm
Marxism isn't an ideology


Ideology-i·de·ol·o·gy-

The body of ideas reflecting the social needs and aspirations of an individual, group, class, or culture.

How is it not?

[razboz]

I think that virtually all communist parties in europe that i have heard of a redundant and defunct as political forces. I think any change will come from relatively moderated organisations without too many megalomaniac ambitions seeking to change things on a local level, with a global perspective, without advocating too much radical change at one time. i think that right now this is what most leftists want to hear about. Moderate but definite change, with a revolutionary focus and outlook, but without this tiresome, tiresome rethoric about "class struggle" and "Marx this, Marx that" and "Bourgeois this" because its mostly boring stuff. Great ideas but terribley dull. The word communism brings up either baby-eating stalinists or dusty old men in knit sweaters with goaties talking in some tearoom somwhere about the details of dialectic materialism.

Now im not saying that all communists are like this. Very, very far from it. Im just saying this is how communists are perceived. The COmmunist image is broken. ANd when somethin is broken, best get rid of it and start anew.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

However, we have seen that today, that there are revolutionary movements--however its members do not sing the internationale or carry red flags.

Yeah, except for the comrades in Colombia, the Philippines, Nepal, India, Turkey, etc...

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by black banner black [email protected] 23, 2006 03:11 pm
It probably isn't, but I think the ideological-pimping and infighting that have become associated with it, not to mention all of the would-be managers of revolution, could certainly do the world a favor by taking a trip into the dustbin of history. I agree that many modern revolutionary currents are based in autonomous struggle by under-class groupings, not ideological struggles with their prophets as in the past and this is certainly a good thing. The last thing the exploited and oppressed need are more middle-men to try and channel their rage against society.
Excellent post. That's similar to what I was trying to say, comrade.

[workers unity]

This question was answered 150 years ago.


Where is the party in opposition that has not been decried as Communistic by its opponents in power? Where the Opposition that has not hurled back the branding reproach of Communism, against the more advanced opposition parties, as well as against its reactionary adversaries?

Two things result from this fact:

I. Communism is already acknowledged by all European Powers to be itself a Power.

II. It is high time that Communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the Spectre of Communism with a Manifesto of the party itself.

If communism were dead, the ongoing onslaught against it would dissolve.

[bezdomni]

The fact that you are able to ask that question proves that it isn't dead.

[Messiah]

It isn't dead, but it is hopefully evolving. The dogmatic, Cold War era preaching of Marxism and communism as some sort of religious ideology that has an answer for everything, is IMO hopefully, dead.

The communism that will remain and then build has to be a modern one. A communism that needs to distance itself from anyone person, and embrace the working class once again. "Leninism", "Trotsykism", "Marxism" -- this sort of demagougery is only hurting the movement. It reeks of nostalgia. People who cannot move on from the writings of any one person, no matter how good or bad.

Communism will be back. I have no such desires for Leninism or Trotskyism and the like. They need to take a firm back seat to the new generation.

[Clarksist]

Communism will be back. I have no such desires for Leninism or Trotskyism and the like. They need to take a firm back seat to the new generation.

Communism is back. It's a groundswell of a movement. Look at Venezuela, Oaxaca, Chiapas, and Nepal.

It is only western first worlds which gave up on communism. However, let's hope these pinko movements become real advances for the working class.

[Messiah]

We can debate on how "communist" the said movements are but I take your point. I may not agree with everything Chavez and Morales are doing, but they are forging their own path. And for that I can respect at least some of what they do.

The neoliberal, end of history experiment has failed surprsingly quickly. While the hegemonic power it posses is still very strong in the West, I think it's safe to say, that some brewing and stirring is happening.