Cyclical society based on Anarch, Communism, and Democracy?

[Elzon]

I had an intresting idea for a new society to better humanity. My idea was to combine Anarchy, Communism, and Democracy. I include Anarchy so there wouldn't be a centralized ruling power. I include Communism so that the entire society publicy shares all the work and the production of that work. I include Democracy so that all the people in the society hold the supreme power and is retained and excised by the people. The Society would be cyclical because the entire society would circulate the work force based on the needs of the society through democratic desicision. Of course there can't be predetermined specilization, but personal specilization mindset will be allowed. Specialization mindset would allow for people to work on what they wanted to work on on top of what was required of them by the society.

I will include more specifics on this society upon reaction to this thread and I see questions on this post.

[Dros]

It seems to me that you are talking about a version of Communism.

[Red_or_Dead]

It seems to me that you are talking about a version of Communism.

Agreed, that is pretty close to how I picture communism in function.

Not to mention that at least mixing communism with democracy doesnt make any real sense, communism is democratic by itself.

[Bilan]

What you're referring to is anarchist communism.

Check out Malatesta, Kropotokin, etc.

[Raúl Duke]

Sounds like anarchist communism, comrade!

FTW!

[NoGodsNoMasters]

Sounds like anarchist communism, comrade!

FTW!

I agree that this sounds like a type of anarcho-communism.

[Q]

What is "anarchistic communism"?
I thought that for all intents and purposes anarchy and communism are the very same thing.

And yeah, communism is a direct democracy... so the OP is hardly making sense.

[apathy maybe]

Well, not all anarchistic systems are communistic, and not all communistic systems are anarchistic.

I've written something on the second bit (I'll try and find it and post it), and for the first bit, I refer you to "individualist anarchism" and "mutualism".

[BIG BROTHER]

yep, it does sound like anarquist-communism

[Elzon]

It seems to me that you are talking about a version of Communism.

Yes I am talking about a form of Communism, the form being that of Pure, simple, Communism.

[Elzon]

Agreed, that is pretty close to how I picture communism in function.

Not to mention that at least mixing communism with democracy doesnt make any real sense, communism is democratic by itself.

Yes, this is the only way I see Communism working in practice(especially being cyclical, because specialization would cause a centralization of power). Yes, I know combining Communism and Democracy doesn't make much sense, I'm just drawing out my idea so it can be more easily understood. By the way, I think America's "Democracy vs. Communism" thought didn't make much sense either. I think the real issue was Capitalism vs. Communism.

[Elzon]

What is "anarchistic communism"?
I thought that for all intents and purposes anarchy and communism are the very same thing.

And yeah, communism is a direct democracy... so the OP is hardly making sense.

Yes, I agree for all intensive purposes Anarchy and Communism are the same, I was just drawing out my idea so it could be more easily understood for those who otherwise. In other words, for the minority of this website who don't understand.

[Red_or_Dead]

Yes, this is the only way I see Communism working in practice(especially being cyclical, because specialization would cause a centralization of power). Yes, I know combining Communism and Democracy doesn't make much sense, I'm just drawing out my idea so it can be more easily understood. By the way, I think America's "Democracy vs. Communism" thought didn't make much sense either. I think the real issue was Capitalism vs. Communism.

Not that Americas "Democracy vs. Communism" didnt make sense, American democracy by itself doesnt make sense, or better said, its not very democratic. Idk about specialization, tho. Imo, people should always specialize for something, even in communism. There are certain jobs that require it, and we need people to do those jobs.

[Elzon]

Not that Americas "Democracy vs. Communism" didnt make sense, American democracy by itself doesnt make sense, or better said, its not very democratic. Idk about specialization, tho. Imo, people should always specialize for something, even in communism. There are certain jobs that require it, and we need people to do those jobs.

I certainly agree that American "Democracy" isn't very democratic, but then again America was never a Democratic state to begin with, it was a Constitutional Republic. Democracy seems to be only a small part of the American system. Unfortunately though, specialization in an communistic society can cause the communistic society to dissolve. See, when someone becomes specialized they are in a position in which someone else looks to the specialized person for a certain good or service. Depending on the good or service it gives the specialized person power for what they do. I this way a single or group of individuals can gain a greater portion of the production of the society, making a divide in the society. A divide in the society has the potential to create a class society. When a divide occurs in the society it can no longer be called a Communistic society because work and production is not being evenly shared. Also, since there is a power division there is a heiarchy, which throws out any possible anarchistic society. In addition, those with greater portions of the production gain increased influence in the society, affecting decisions. When they gain greater influence they could change democratic desicions to an extent, possibly destroying the democratic part of the society just like what happens in America!
Besides with most things in the society being publicly owned, the possibility of specilization decreases greatly.