Constant Revolution

[victim77]

In my opinion any political/economic system will eventualy become currupt and it is the job of the revolutionary to keep the masses aware of this curruption. In the future we will see something overpower Capitalism much the same way Capitalism overpowered Feudalism. This future system (be it communism or something new) will eventualy develope currupt tendencies and people will find a way to exploit the system and oppress the masses much like is being done with Capitalism and Democracy today. Therefor we must be in constant revolution and keep ahead of the curruption. We must continue to progress past communism and Anarchism until we can not progress any further. We must move past just Communism and constantly reform our ideas and theorys until they are at there purist form. We are following doctrines that need revising. It is time for us to crush the current view of communism and re-define it. Lets turn this dusty old ideology into a shinny new methodology.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

This belongs in Theory, I think.

[mykittyhasaboner]

how do you suppose we start that?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Will Modern Communism suffer the same fate as primitive communism? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/modern-communism-suffer-t67009/index.html)


But there are naturally uncontrollable threats, too (not just mile-long asteroids):

Supervolcano (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supervolcano)

I surmise that it's possible, and such is based on the phenomenon of plate tectonics. My only hope is that, if true, we won't repeat the slave and feudal modes of production.

[Kitskits]

In my opinion, future communism will not suffer the same fate as primitive communism for the following reasons.

1) The future classless society will be industrialized and very fullfilling for everyone in a way that people won't need to work hours and face huge dangers so they will not want to engage in private enterprise simply because they wouldn't have the incentive to escape from the dangers of work that were clearly present in primitive communism.

2) Through education people will understand what is it like to be in a society with classes and as bourgeois individualism will be destroyed they will think for the good of everyone and thinking about only the good of their biological offspring or adopted child etc will be absurd so no-one will want to re-establish inheritance laws.

3) Materialism will prevail so there won't be no 'God' who will command a new establishment of private property or the destruction of industry or any other destabilizing reactionary things.

[victim77]

In my opinion, future communism will not suffer the same fate as primitive communism for the following reasons.

1) The future classless society will be industrialized and very fullfilling for everyone in a way that people won't need to work hours and face huge dangers so they will not want to engage in private enterprise simply because they wouldn't have the incentive to escape from the dangers of work that were clearly present in primitive communism.

2) Through education people will understand what is it like to be in a society with classes and as bourgeois individualism will be destroyed they will think for the good of everyone and thinking about only the good of their biological offspring or adopted child etc will be absurd so no-one will want to re-establish inheritance laws.

3) Materialism will prevail so there won't be no 'God' who will command a new establishment of private property or the destruction of industry or any other destabilizing reactionary things.

What makes this so sturdy? What happens when greed prevails and people feel the need for more? We can not escape the exploitation. You can not expect every one to love communism and by brain washing children to hate capitalism we would just be sinking back into the currupt Capitalist system we escaped just with a new face.

[Black Cross]

What makes this so sturdy?

You're being idealistic. There's never gonna be some utopian society without its flaws.


What happens when greed prevails and people feel the need for more?

We tell them to stop being so spoiled and greedy or they can pack their bags and get the hell out.

besides, this would only be a problem during revolution and for a short while afterwards, since it is not human nature to hoard wealth.


We can not escape the exploitation.

Then what are we doing here? Why are we politically active? I, for one, am not so pessimistic as to believe that people are just stuck in a rut, and the only way they will be well off is to conform to the capitalist system of exploitation. As long as there is no ownership of the means of production, how will their be any "social mobility"? Seems to me the only way we would move back to capitalism, is by force, the same way we will escape it. And if some tries to organise a coup (for lack of a better term) are we just gonna stand for it? If that happens, ima go grab my AK and make em earn it.


You can not expect every one to love communism and by brain washing children to hate capitalism we would just be sinking back into the currupt Capitalist system we escaped just with a new face.

All we really need to do is make a functioning model of communism/anarchism, and people will see that it is not only functional, but preferable. And as for brainwashing children, there's no need for that. It's the capitalists that need to brainwash, or else everyone would see the truth, that the system cannot survive without exploiting. All we need to do is teach the children the truth, and not put a spin on education. Hell, most of the people i know (who are capitalists) think communism is morally better than capitalism, they just don't believe it works; all we gotta do is prove to them otherwise.

However, i am not opposed to making our ideas more solid and workable; so if anyone's got any constructive criticism, i more than welcome it.

[Dros]

Let's try and maintain some Marxism here.

It's not idealistic to say that Communism won't suffer from the same ails as Capitalism has. That said, Communism is not a Utopia. It is a social system. I see no reason why a revolution would be necessary. There will be problems and struggles under Communism but there won't be a state and there won't be any classes so unless you're an ALF fucker (in which case skrew you), you have nothing (that I can see) to revolt against on that level.

[victim77]

Let's try and maintain some Marxism here.

It's not idealistic to say that Communism won't suffer from the same ails as Capitalism has. That said, Communism is not a Utopia. It is a social system. I see no reason why a revolution would be necessary. There will be problems and struggles under Communism but there won't be a state and there won't be any classes so unless you're an ALF fucker (in which case skrew you), you have nothing (that I can see) to revolt against on that level.

What about the right-wingers? What makes you think they will all of the sudden change they're minds and agree with communism? Also what happens when people turn to the black market to make money? This will eventualy create a new elite and we will slip into the same curruption. Also meany leftists are still using the Communist Manifesto as there 'bible'. I think we need to use more recent doctrines to educate.

[Black Cross]

What about the right-wingers? What makes you think they will all of the sudden change they're minds and agree with communism?

pull out the 9, pop in the clip, and let some slip into those crazy fools.


Also what happens when people turn to the black market to make money? This will eventualy create a new elite and we will slip into the same curruption.

Well, that would mean that something is illegal, or unavailable in our hypothetical society. What is this product that would make them a new elite, as you put it?


Also meany leftists are still using the Communist Manifesto as there 'bible'. I think we need to use more recent doctrines to educate.

Do you suggest writing one? Or voting that one be officially used (or something like that)?

[Dros]

What about the right-wingers? What makes you think they will all of the sudden change they're minds and agree with communism?

They won't do anything "all of a sudden." That's why we have socialism and the Dictatorship of the Proletariat to suppress the Bourgeoisie while Communists transform society.


Also what happens when people turn to the black market to make money? This will eventualy create a new elite and we will slip into the same curruption.

Two things:

1.) Communism doesn't have "laws" or "illegality" in the traditional sense because there is no state. So what will be on the black market and what will create the demand for this?
2.) This argument presumes a system of commodity exchange which won't exist in a Communist society. The death of the commodity means the end of this kind of exchange and the end of all forms of profit.


Also meany leftists are still using the Communist Manifesto as there 'bible'. I think we need to use more recent doctrines to educate.

Here you go. (http://marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/index.htm)

[ckaihatsu]

Modern communism would solve the outstanding question of surplus -- this was something that primitive communism (hunter-gatherer societies) did not have to deal with.

The transition from feudalism to mercantilism, and then to capitalism, was carried out by the newly emerging merchants, whose trade routes created a new mobility that cut against the static power of the royalty and clergy.

Likewise the catalyst for a transition from the current imperialist capitalism to revolutionary socialism (worker-led planned production), and then to global communism (full automation, I would argue) must be led by those who do actual labor -- not finance, not management, not government.

Those who labor would have to be revolutionaries, and those who are revolutionaries would have to labor. This would be the catalyst for overhauling society away from the dictates of the bourgeoisie. This would also be a powerful enough force to overcome the forces of counter-revolution, like claims to vast family fortunes, factional competition, jockeying for status, and coups.

During the revolution any remaining claims to private property -- beyond what one uses personally, for living -- would have to be denied as corrupt and counter-revolutionary. As long as people don't feel taken advantage of, and as long as they can see the benefits, they'll be fine with the changes.

Most of the reasons why people cling to their arguments for private property is out of a sense of unease with how things could turn out *for themselves*. People have misconceptions about what revolution is, and about what revolutionaries want to do.

We almost need to have a simple, single-sheet pamphlet -- (not that any of us could legitimately issue it, as things are in the world right now) -- that says, "Please pardon our dust. We're currently renovating." It would then be a F.A.Q. going over common concerns like, "Will I be able to stay in my family home?", "What about my retirement funds?", and "Just who's in charge, anyway?"

Beyond the basics of personal property and life we should deal with the issue of the need for more -- what would we do about adults who, post-revolution, would want to be like kids in a candy store, looking for continuous self-gratification? Or what about innovation and the need to develop new inventions and machines?

Some people think of communism as being the end of the world, a clampdown on adventure and future pioneering.

As things are the elite is able to experience a great deal of individualism and freedom through their wealth. The wealthy are able to fulfill their adventurous mode of living by constantly acquiring new private property and enjoying the dividends -- ultimately the labor of others.

Instead of a revolution to usurp the lifestyles of the rich and famous perhaps we should think of it as a revolution to lift all of the other boats to that level.

As revolutionaries we should consider just how society *could* be tailored to provide utopia-like conditions to more and more people -- given a material society of abundance this might not be too big a stretch.

Certainly our *current* communications technology allows for continuous dialogue in realtime -- cell phones. Couldn't a communist society provide the logistics to allow a person to go on a lifetime shopping spree, if that's what they wanted?

There's always an upper limit to what *any one person* can do on their own -- keep in mind that under communism no one would be obligated to assist an individual or a group beyond the agreed-upon basic standard of living provided for everyone in common. If someone, or a group, wanted to trip out, 24/7, on a hedonistic, self-satisfying adventure, they could certainly do it, but their popularity might come into question with many others, depending on how far they take it.

As private property is being usurped the revolution would be all about re-distribution, to satisfy every person's needs for the basics of living -- but after all of humanity is liberated, what then? I would argue that the general standard of living could be continuously increased, based on available labor and energy, with some system for prioritizing the surplus -- probably on a first-come, first-served basis. Maybe not everyone could take a plane ride to space right away, but a few hundred could in the first year after the revolution -- then a few thousand the next year, and so on.

Ultimately people *would* have to see improvements, on a self-improvement / self-gratifying level, for post-revolution society to work -- if individual initiative somehow was able to be more effective than collective planning then there would be a serious problem. In other words the society should be as responsive to individual initiative as possible, the way the Internet is responsive to a person's web search -- or else people would have to search down books for themselves in a library...!

By the way, anyone who says that communism has the moral high ground is either taking a pass on the whole revolution thing -- at best -- or, more likely, is just being patronizing and condescending, in a polite way. No matter if we're bourgeois or revolutionary in orientation we know what it's like to live materialist lives in contemporary, usually urban, society. As revolutionaries we need to remind people that only improvements in the material situation of society will create improvements in the way we relate to each other, as people, in daily life ("spiritually"). Going backward should not be allowed as an option for anyone -- so why not just go progressive, faster, for everyone?


Chris




--
___

YFI S Dis cussion B oard
ht tp:// discussion. newy outh .com

Fa vor ite we b si tes: chica go.indym edia. org, wsw s. org, ma rxist. com, rwor .org, lab ourstart .or g, fightba ckne ws .org, lab oraction. org, ifam ericansknew .org, subst ancenews . com, soci alismandliberation .o rg, wh atreally hap pened .co m, ple nglis h. com, moneyfile s.o rg/temp .h tml, inform ationcl earingho use .i nfo, blac kcom menta to r. com, na rconew s. com, tru tho ut. org, ra ven1 .n et

Ph otoi llustr atio ns, P oliti cal Di ag rams by Ch ris K ai hatsu
h ttp :/ /co mmunit y.w ebsho ts. co m/u ser /ck aihatsu/

M ySp ace:
ww w. mys pace .co m/ck aihatsu

Co uchSu rfing:
htt p:/ /tinyu rl.c om/ yo h74u