Establishing a Marxist Commune

[Skull]

Would Anarchists, Marxists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Social Democrats etc be interested in working together to establishing a Marxist community. it would be a good chance to put our ideas into practice. As well ass a community center for local radical movements. It would help increase dedication to revolution.

We could buy up some property and create a Marxist commune.

[Cult of Reason]

What would that achieve, exactly, apart from encouraging lifestylism?

[Bilan]

Testing theories in practice?

[Pawn Power]

Testing theories in practice?

It would be very difficult today to have a substantial sustainable community (where the people didn't have to labor ten hours a day) without economic connection to the outside capitalist world.

Communes do exist, notably more popular is the 60's and 70's, however they do not appear to work towards revolutionary change and are moreover a hell of a lot of work to be in when you are surrounded by capitalism!

[Comeback Kid]

Can we drink some cool-aid.

Jokes. Segreating ourselves from society just makes us look like weirdos and does nothing for the plight of the working men and women of the world

[which doctor]

Such a commune would not be very Marxist, however. If we really wanted to put our ideas into practice we should start by organizing the international proletariat.

[Cmde. Slavyanski]

It is a good idea to put some ideas into practice, but for that what you would really need to do is have a revolution in some region, a commune won't do. In Eastern Europe for example, one should look to autonomous regions within countries, such as Tatarstan or Chuvashia. They can link with former Soviet republics as well. In some cases, due to the extreme corruption, small size, and other problems, a relatively bloodless revolution could be affected(at least bloodless initially, until reaction comes knocking) via the normal bourgeois democratic means.

[Nusocialist]

What would that achieve, exactly, apart from encouraging lifestylism?
Well it would be a better place for one to live for a start and I don't think it would encourage lifestylism, it would create more of an ideological atmosphere.

And it is not like we are gaining in leaps and bounds in the west anyway.

[followthemoney]

Starting a commune is a lot of work. I would recomend that you begin by talking to people already in the communities movement to find out how they did it. Why reinvent the wheel when there are like minded folk out there ready to give you an internal combustion engine?

I can't post links, but you'll find the right ones if you google for Federation of Egalitarian Communities.

[Holden Caulfield]

Such a commune would not be very Marxist, however. If we really wanted to put our ideas into practice we should start by organizing the international proletariat.

that is one fucking huge step in one very small sentence,

"first we will fix all the wrongs in the world, then, if we have the time, we can make our commune"

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

A communse is a pointless thing...we would be regarded as weirdoes, we would seem irrelevant and offer nothing for the workers by buying a few houses.
If we want to do something then we should organise in our woklplaces for a start; let that serve as a center for the radical movement.

Althought it is a "cool" and romantic idea to have an estate with hammer and sickle flags flying and all the rest of it...its a pointless task at the moment.

[Die Neue Zeit]

This "reeks" of economist defeatism, if you ask me. :(

[And why the hell should revolutionary Marxists work with anarchist obstructionists? :glare: ]

[jacobin1949]

One of MIM's splinters set up a rural commune in South Carolina. i just found out on the MIM thread. I don't know how serious they are with their support of Jim Jones and Pol Pot. But they do have a South carolina PO BOX.
http://www.freewebs.com/ruralmaoism/

[Niccolò Rossi]

Wow, I'm really, really shocked by the OP's suggestion and also by what other posters have overlooked thus far, that being, the establishing small socialist communes is an utterly Utopian Socialist idea!

One only has to look so far as the Communist Manifesto and Socialism: Utopian and Scientific to realise the utter failure and madness of "small scale experiments" and the Utopian Socialist movement as a whole.

I quote Marx: "The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own surroundings, causes Socialists of this kind to consider themselves far superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class. For how can people, when once they understand their system, fail to see it in the best possible plan of the best possible state of society?. Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary, action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social Gospel."

We Marxists can not possibly hope to achieve our aims, or even test our hypotheses, via small scale Owenist experiments. This is because they can only exist completely divorced from the reality of modern day capitalist society. Our aims can only be achieved by revolution through the class struggle, within capitalist society. Anything but, is utopianism!

[AGITprop]

Wow, I'm really, really shocked by the OP's suggestion and also by what other posters have overlooked thus far, that being, the establishing small socialist communes is an utterly Utopian Socialist idea!

One only has to look so far as the Communist Manifesto and Socialism: Utopian and Scientific to realise the utter failure and madness of "small scale experiments" and the Utopian Socialist movement as a whole.

I quote Marx: "The undeveloped state of the class struggle, as well as their own surroundings, causes Socialists of this kind to consider themselves far superior to all class antagonisms. They want to improve the condition of every member of society, even that of the most favored. Hence, they habitually appeal to society at large, without distinction of class; nay, by preference, to the ruling class. For how can people, when once they understand their system, fail to see it in the best possible plan of the best possible state of society?. Hence, they reject all political, and especially all revolutionary, action; they wish to attain their ends by peaceful means, and endeavor, by small experiments, necessarily doomed to failure, and by the force of example, to pave the way for the new social Gospel."

We Marxists can not possibly hope to achieve our aims, or even test our hypotheses, via small scale Owenist experiments. This is because they can only exist completely divorced from the reality of modern day capitalist society. Our aims can only be achieved by revolution through the class struggle, within capitalist society. Anything but, is utopianism!

took the words out of my mouth. And anyway, this would accomplish nuthing. WE would need thousands of people, prety much as many people as it takes to run a city to have our own means of production and labour power. Otherwise wed just be hippies gowing our own potatoes. Im sorry.I'de rather build a revolutionnary party.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Wow, I'm really, really shocked by the OP's suggestion and also by what other posters have overlooked thus far, that being, the establishing small socialist communes is an utterly Utopian Socialist idea!

Actually, I did hint at this above, but since the u-word tends to be used too much, I used "economist defeatism."

[jetpen]

Would Anarchists, Marxists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Social Democrats etc be interested in working together to establishing a Marxist community.

Sure! A community generates social energy. A prosperous community would provide a model for how society could improve. Miniaturization of industrial technologies means that a small group of people wouldn't be doomed to be merely hippies growing potatoes. I've been researching how to create a very small industrial base, similar to the Chinese Circular Economy, and perhaps most quickly grasped by googling "in-situ resource utilization."

[Sleeping Dragon]

If a commune was designed well enough perhaps it could outcompete other companies through sheer superiority. You would need to make enough money to pay property taxes and the only way you could get it is by manufacturing commodities, so it would still be capitalist in reality. Still I would rather work with people who are socialist than some extremely procapitalist corporation.

I don't agree that it would be pointless. It could be pointless if it was inherenlty unstable. If such a commune could be established however it would be good for children to grow up in a place that wasn't dominated in every way by capitalism. The education systems manifested by capitalist economics and these underling authority figures bothering the youth, this could all be bypassed if a stable community was created. The only way to change peoples minds is to correct the flawed education system that creates these fools who don't know any economics.

It would be a bad idea if a stable food supply wasn't created. Also how would medical needs be provided and if these are to be provided by capitalism where would the money come from to pay for this? Would it be paid for by the individual or the society or what? It would be interesting to live with other communists however.

[MarxSchmarx]

I don't think the OP meant for this hypothetical town to be isolated from capitalism, as other posters have insinuated.

The promises of bourgeois life are a powerful buffer against developing class consciousness. Rejecting as much of capitalist life as we can afford to is not "economic defeatism".

Extricating people from the capitalist stranglehold on everyday life, by living in a community of like-minded leftists, is an intriguing approach to the class struggle.

More generally, blanket denunciation of "utopianism" is not helpful. Communes can take many forms, all with varying degrees of integration with the broader capitalist society. Indeed, much has changed since Marx's time. For example, in the global north, improvements in communications technology and transportation mean it is easier for "small scale Owenist experiments" to sell their products.



It would be a bad idea if a stable food supply wasn't created. Also how would medical needs be provided and if these are to be provided by capitalism where would the money come from to pay for this? Would it be paid for by the individual or the society or what?

Here's one way to think about this: the success of such an enterprise depends on growth. A commune must attract like-minded individuals/groups. If it is an attractive enough environment, sooner or later it will attract people with the requisite skill sets.

Another long-term solution is to develop a network of such communities, that preferentially trade with each other.

[Niccolò Rossi]

The promises of bourgeois life are a powerful buffer against developing class consciousness. Rejecting as much of capitalist life as we can afford to is not "economic defeatism".

Your first sentence here is correct. However, how can any proletarian who has not attained class consciousness possibly divorce themselves from capitalism or take part in a commune? And just as equally once one has attained class consciousness why is there a need to reject capitalist life when it is not longer acting as a buffer, as you suggest, to what is already attained?



More generally, blanket denunciation of "utopianism" is not helpful. Communes can take many forms, all with varying degrees of integration with the broader capitalist society. Indeed, much has changed since Marx's time. For example, in the global north, improvements in communications technology and transportation mean it is easier for "small scale Owenist experiments" to sell their products.

My apologize for coming across as a little too hostile and dogmatic, but I don't think any "Marxist commune" can further our aims, that being proletarian revolution. This is because the sort of commune being suggested would simply collect like minded individuals and would not further the class struggle.



Here's one way to think about this: the success of such an enterprise depends on growth. A commune must attract like-minded individuals/groups. If it is an attractive enough environment, sooner or later it will attract people with the requisite skill sets.

Another long-term solution is to develop a network of such communities, that preferentially trade with each other.Again to me this sounds just like you hope to achieve communism from outside capitalism. The only way to achieve our aims is through the class struggle within the capitalist system. We can not possibly hope to pluck communism out of thin air.

[MarxSchmarx]

I don't think our views are all that far apart. You are right, excising ourselves from capitalism altogether is an ineffective short-term strategy.

But there is propaganda value in building liveable communities that embody leftist values. If we can show that life in these communities are more attractive than what is available elsewhere, these communities will grow.


the sort of commune being suggested would simply collect like minded individuals and would not further the class struggle.

This is a genuine risk. However, burn-out and attrition are serious problems in our movement. By establishing a commune we provide crucial community that supports fellow travelers. People give up for all sorts of reasons, but if their daily lives revolved around practicing leftist virtues I think they'd be less inclined to throw in the towel.


However, how can any proletarian who has not attained class consciousness possibly divorce themselves from capitalism or take part in a commune? And just as equally once one has attained class consciousness why is there a need to reject capitalist life when it is not longer acting as a buffer, as you suggest, to what is already attained?


Broadly speaking, I see two ways to awaken class consciousness. One is to convince others how shitty the current arrangement of things is. This is not trivial as we are up against advertisers, pop culture, not to mention bourgeois democracy and hedonism.

The other approach is to show others, by example, precisely how it is we build a new society "from the shell of the old". Radical unionism does this in our workplaces, but people also live a life outside of work that is centered around the home. Here is where I see a role for "utopian communes".

Part of the class struggle is to create alternative social institutions. Not just in our workplaces, but also in the places we live. A "utopian commune" allows us considerable flexibility in designing these institutions from the bottom up.

Sooner or later, people will abandon capitalism. The more experience we have with building institutions that foster leftist values within our communities, the more successful the transition out of capitalism will be.

[Vanguard1917]

What would that achieve, exactly, apart from encouraging lifestylism?

Nothing.


Testing theories in practice?

Which theories? Socialist/communist ones? If you can't build socialism in one country, you certainly can't build it in a little hippy camp.

[cb9's_unity]

As already said Marx dismissed the idea of small scale experiments, so good luck getting many marxists to join. He recognized tiny idealist communes and nothing after Marx has shown anything that would contadict that.

Lets not talk communes, lets talk soviets/workers councils where I can work with all class conscious proletarians. Communes focus so much on ideals they are bound to be sectarian, working class councils fight for proletarian power so I can productively work with any non-sectarian anarchists to Stalinists (well hopefully).

[jetpen]

What exactly is there to salvage from the existing capitalist economic system? Factories, farms, insurance corporations? The industries that produce the physical goods needed for life are a small fraction of the economy. So why not build a new system as a new economy must be built anyway?

A century ago people were controlled through physical goods, "work or starve," but nowadays the profits come from marketing, legal services, patents, all the tools of mental control and institutional power. What need is there to seize the means of production if the products are trademarked logos & marketing mindshare?

Dogmatic Marxism is so ironic because Marx's key innovation was the philosophy of radically challenging all conventional beliefs. New strategies are needed and ecocities, virtual states, positive power (alluring versus threatening), local currencies, and economic autonomy are strategies for our time.

[MarxSchmarx]

nowadays the profits come from marketing, legal services, patents, all the tools of mental control and institutional power. What need is there to seize the means of production if the products are trademarked logos & marketing mindshare?

We will always have a use for desks, copiers, coffee makers and other office furniture.

Except cubicles. Those will be converted into shacks for the rich after we evict them from their mansions.

[Asoka89]

One of MIM's splinters set up a rural commune in South Carolina. i just found out on the MIM thread. I don't know how serious they are with their support of Jim Jones and Pol Pot. But they do have a South carolina PO BOX.
http://www.freewebs.com/ruralmaoism/

Kool-aid will definately be served

[dez]

We will always have a use for desks, copiers, coffee makers and other office furniture.

Except cubicles. Those will be converted into shacks for the rich after we evict them from their mansions.


So, basically, after the revolution the rich will live in shacks and the rest of the population won't?

Instead of a drive for a revolutionary change in society, isn't that just an inversion of the status quo?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Your first sentence here is correct. However, how can any proletarian who has not attained class consciousness possibly divorce themselves from capitalism or take part in a commune? And just as equally once one has attained class consciousness why is there a need to reject capitalist life when it is not longer acting as a buffer, as you suggest, to what is already attained?

My apologize for coming across as a little too hostile and dogmatic, but I don't think any "Marxist commune" can further our aims, that being proletarian revolution. This is because the sort of commune being suggested would simply collect like minded individuals and would not further the class struggle.

Again to me this sounds just like you hope to achieve communism from outside capitalism. The only way to achieve our aims is through the class struggle within the capitalist system. We can not possibly hope to pluck communism out of thin air.

One more thing about this utopian proposal of the OP: it completely ignores the fact that all historical successes of the Marxist movement have been dependent on the revolutionary merger between Marxism and the workers' movement, and that all historical defeats of the Marxist movement have started with the detachment of Marxism from the workers' movement.

[ckaihatsu]

One more thing about this utopian proposal of the OP: it completely ignores the fact that all historical successes of the Marxist movement have been dependent on the revolutionary merger between Marxism and the workers' movement, and that all historical defeats of the Marxist movement have started with the detachment of Marxism from the workers' movement.



But there is propaganda value in building liveable communities that embody leftist values. If we can show that life in these communities are more attractive than what is available elsewhere, these communities will grow.


I think both Jacob and MarxSchmarx have valid points here. I wouldn't *recommend* the "Marxist commune" idea, for all the reasons that people have listed here, but there may be a tiny place for it as a sort of showcase against the market-entwined, nuclear family norm. It would have to be explicitly done *as* a showcase, and limited to that purpose, which would be as a publicity campaign. In practice it would be similar to the 'Biosphere' project from the early '90s:



Pilot experiments

Prior to the closure of the Biosphere, three mini-missions were carried out in the Test Module (TM), a much smaller enclosure. The objectives of these tests were quite modest — an important one was to test the waste-recycling system.

John Polk Allen spent three days in the TM, then Abigail Alling spent five days, then finally Linda Leigh set a new world record by being shut in for three weeks. These mini-missions were, of course, far too short to attempt any meaningful agriculture or animal husbandry. No data were gathered that might have been useful in estimating whether the Biosphere itself was capable of sustaining eight people for two years.

First mission

The first closed mission lasted from September 26, 1991 to September 26, 1993. The crew were medical doctor and researcher Roy Walford, Jane Poynter, Taber MacCallum, Mark Nelson, Sally Silverstone, Abigail Alling (a late replacement for Silke Schneider), Mark Van Thillo and Linda Leigh.

Bananas grew very well in the structure, and formed a significant source of food. Other crops included sweet potatoes and peanuts. But they were not able to grow enough food to satisfy the eight inhabitants with a very strenuous lifestyle, and they reported continual hunger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2



Broadly speaking, I see two ways to awaken class consciousness. One is to convince others how shitty the current arrangement of things is. This is not trivial as we are up against advertisers, pop culture, not to mention bourgeois democracy and hedonism.

The other approach is to show others, by example, precisely how it is we build a new society "from the shell of the old". Radical unionism does this in our workplaces, but people also live a life outside of work that is centered around the home. Here is where I see a role for "utopian communes".

Part of the class struggle is to create alternative social institutions. Not just in our workplaces, but also in the places we live. A "utopian commune" allows us considerable flexibility in designing these institutions from the bottom up.

Sooner or later, people will abandon capitalism. The more experience we have with building institutions that foster leftist values within our communities, the more successful the transition out of capitalism will be.


If enough alternative energy could be provided to run generators and grow food, etc., then it could be a sort of human-museum-of-the-future, showing what it means to live outside of the market system, on a sustainable basis.



The revolution, as a transitional period, would not be complete until every single last person on the earth had a standard of living of their choosing, up to First World standards. This would include water, food, clothing / toiletries, housing, gas / heat, sewage / waste disposal, electricity, telecommunications / Internet, health care, leisure / entertainment, education, maintenance of public areas, and transportation. (Please let me know if I missed anything.)

http://www.revleft.com/vb/communism-possible-without-t74901/index.html?p=1114679


Chris




--


--
___

RevLeft.com -- Home of the Revolutionary Left
www.revleft.com/vb/member.php?u=16162

Photoillustrations, Political Diagrams by Chris Kaihatsu
community.webshots.com/user/ckaihatsu/

3D Design Communications - Let Your Design Do Your Footwork
ckaihatsu.elance.com

MySpace:
myspace.com/ckaihatsu

CouchSurfing:
tinyurl.com/yoh74u

[Svante]

Here's one way to think about this: the success of such an enterprise depends on growth. A commune must attract like-minded individuals/groups. If it is an attractive enough environment, sooner or later it will attract people with the requisite skill sets.


j e consens que vous dites, but i cant find université to go.do you think i t would be easy t o find université befojr a commune?what happen t o liberal arts i n this country.

[bolshevik butcher]

I'm not sure if you have heard of the famous Scottish utopian socialist Robert Owen. He is famous for being the owner of the New Lanark factory mills in Lanarkshire, a traditional manufatcturing area in the west of Scotland. He attempted several socialist expirements before then going onto try and found a socialist commune in America.

Owen was an admirable and quite corageous individual, however even at this point in the nineteenth century, imagine trying this now in an age when impeiralism and domination of the economy by finance capital and the econoies interconectedness have reached such a high level. These projects were doomed to failure, and this expirience was actually quite important for other socialists in the following period. Engels refferenced Owen's expiriences as showing the need for the socilaist movement to appeal to the working class and to build for a socialist revolution.

The idea of running to the hills to live in peace and harmony is a fantasy and it certianly will not lead anywhere in the direction of socialism. If anything it will just isolate those that choose to follow this route from society and the working class.