Communism on small scale- communal farming?

[Motochi]

Hey i'm looking into joining a few other people in a communal farming adventure near where i live, and i was wondering if anyone's had any experience with something like this! I'd love farming tips, as well as general stories about small-scale communism experiments.

I was thinking about it earlier today and i think i realized it's more of "collective capitalism" as i've heard the case in Cuba to be described. Would that fit a smaller, intentionally willingly organized communistic society such as ten or twenty people living and/or working together?

What are your suggestions for the population of such an experiment?

thanks.
pax.

[#FF0000]

Generally, these little communes aren't looked upon favorably by Communists. Going off and starting a little commune like that isn't revolutionary. People involved are just attempting to remove themselves from the capitalist system, not to mobilize other workers to change it.

My suggestion? Don't do it, if you're doing it in an attempt to be revolutionary.

[Plagueround]

Watch as Prairie Fire destroys the small commune as revolutionary action! I generally don't repost other people's posts, but this is such an excellent critique I feel not much more needs to be said:


I am writing this piece mostly in frustration over a growing ideological tendency that I am encountering frequently. It is not one incident that has prompted me to write this, but the general drive of large sections of the political left towards this erroneous dead-end.

In the political left-wing, dead-end ideologies and Utopian rubbish are cheap and plentiful (anything to keep tangible revolutionary models at bay). The particular ideological tendency/movement that I’m speaking of does not have a name, but it centers around a common theme of “escaping” from, or “walking away” from , capitalism. For lack of a better term, I’ll refer to this tendency as ” Social-Escapism“.

I hear it everywhere; it is on the campuses, it is in the lyrics of socialist music, and recently it has infiltrated my own organization and work. This widespread theory keeps popping up, stating that class-war, that a revolution, is “not necessary”; capitalism “doesn’t need to be overthrown”. The answer, according to these ideologues, is simply “walking away” from capitalism; choosing “not to participate” in capitalism, via commune living, sustenance farming, forming a movement that is “so large in numbers, that the capitalists won’t even be able to take up arms against it”. These deluded petty-bourgeoisie believe that you can “ween yourself off of capitalism”.

See, this is an incredibly dangerous tendency. I’m not saying it is dangerous because I’m afraid of it; that isn’t the case. I’m saying it is dangerous, because it leads otherwise well- informed, politicallly active comrades away from class-struggle, and into the rural areas to grow beets and carrots; away from revolution, and into the abyss of this social-escapism.

Speaking for myself, I have only voiced support for commune living on one occasion, in my early political development; even then, I believed that the commune was simply a tool of organization, a way to get all of the political forces together, rather than as an alternative to capitalism. Utopian commune-dwelling has never appealed to me, possibly because of my up-bringing around the local Hudderites of Alberta, and other failed Utopian experiments.

Anyways, to get back on topic, I would like to propose a scenario to try and counter these notions of social-escapism. In this particular analysis, I’m focusing on the situation of our Victorian/British Columbian social-escapists in particular.
Okay, let’s say that some of these social-escapists did band together, and do what they are keen on doing: going out to the rural areas, getting some land with dwellings, and starting to grow their own food. Perhaps they also raised their own bees for honey, (an idea from a Victorian social-escapist) and possibly livestock. As for electricity, solar panels for all! A form of anarchist councilism somehow prevailed as the organizational/legislative model, and the people are blissful.
This is the vision. Now, here are the stumbling blocks of reality, to pop the bubble.

First of all, under a system of capitalism, it is not possible for an individual, or even for a collective of individuals, to purchase a single plot of land in perpetuity. Even if this group of Utopians “owned the land” that they were cultivating and living on, they would still have to pay property taxes .

Now, this insight throws a giant stick into the spokes of this Utopian theory by itself. The taxation levied by the capitalist government on these social-escapists, you would think, should be enough to jar them back to reality, a reminder that they have not “severed” themselves from capitalism, no matter how rural their surroundings.
Although property taxes can be quite low (especially for uncultivated land,), this introduces a new variable into the lives of those who are trying to avoid “participating” in the capitalist system : expenses.

Now, these expenses give rise to a necesity for currency, in order to continue the upkeep and operation of the commune and farmlands. Now, the social-escapists may deal with this problem in many ways. In the event that some (or all) of their membership have to resume wage labour employment to raise funds, well then I think that their whole attempt at ”waling away” from capitalism becomes moot. If this does become the case, the commune dwellers are as dependent on selling their wage labour as ever, and still firmly tied to the capitalist world and system.

More likely, as I have been told by social-escapist ideologues, the commune dwellers would sell part of the fruits of their labour. For the sake of argument, lets say that these fruits would include vegetables, honey, unique crafts, fresh bakery products…

Now we see, in reaction to the taxes levied by the capitalist system, the rise of another fatal error on the commune: commodity production. All of the sudden, rather than selling their surplus at their own leisure and discretion, the social-escapists start to produce products and designate entire sections of their garden produce as commodities, to be sold for profit (supposedly to help keep the commune going.).

So, now the commune-dwellers sell some of their fruits, perhaps at local farmers markets and whatnot. Now they have acquired a limited income for the commune.
Well, with income comes income tax; More taxes. Once again, the capitalist class (whom the social-escapists didn’t think it was necessary to defeat,) levies taxes from the commune dwellers.

More taxes become more expenses. More expenses lead to the commune-dwellers being forced to sell more of their produce (which was formerly geared towards the needs of the commune,) to continue the upkeep of the commune.

Perhaps to accomplish this, the commune dwellers purchase advanced machinery to help increase the harvest (which turns out to be yet another expense, especially when fuel and insurance are concerned.).The commune dwellers are forced to expand gardens, and produce more home-made products( the materials needed to produce these, may bring another expense), solely for the purpose of commodity production. They also are forced to find more outlets to sell their wares. Ah, the increase in commodity production, and the beginning of their expansion into as many markets as possible. More and more, the commune acquires symptoms of capitalism, from the ground up.

Of course, it is also reasonable to assume that the commune would have a vehicle of some sort, almost definately gas powered. Even though social-escapists are typically life-stylists, who prefer bicycles (and other emision free modes of conveyance,) , bicycles are impractical for long range travel (remember,they are living in a rural area), for transportation of goods, and especially impractical in the winter, in most of the northern hemisphere. Because of these factors, they are most likely to have a vehicle to start with, or the commune will purchase one when the necessity of commodity production forces them to adopt one (The very act of purchasing a vehicle may place more weight on the budget of the commune.).

Vehicle ownership leads to (you guessed it,)…Expenses! Fuel, repairs, and of course Insurance! The commune dwellers will require a street-legal vehicle to use (even if they only have one,), so they will accept all of the costs that go with it. More costs, more expenses. The strain on the commune may force a member to have to take a job, in which case it is quite clear that they have not escaped capitalism. At this point, they also need to do things for the capitalist authorities, like possess a valid driver license ( How can any person claim to not be reliant on the system ,when you are subject to it’s rules and regulations?).

I know from experience, it is very difficult to feed a whole family on only what you produce, let alone a group of people, big or small. Now, by this point in time, the commune is producing largely for profit, trying to juggle the needs of the membership, with the demands for currency. During this time, the availability of food becomes more and more scarce, as it has to be sold to pay for upkeep;this leaves commune members hungry. How are they going to feed their members? Well, I guess they could buy groceries… another expense!

Take into consideration also that people get sick. What are these social-escapists going to do if one of their number gets sick or injured, especially seriously so? Herbal teas and home remedies only go so far; if you have appendicitis, you need surgery. Now, assuming that everyone on the commune has the possibility to get sick or injured, that would mean that every person would require a health care card, which is yet another monthly expense! If they didn’t live in a country that had socialized-medicine, it would be even worse, because they would have to pay even more for an HMO or insurance.

More expenses, more demands for currency ( health-care for upwards of ten people can really add up,), and yet another bond forged to the very world and social system that they are trying to “ween themselves off of”.
In actuality, the sheer weight of the contradictions and financial demands on the commune would have forced the social-escapists to either become wage-slaves (and defeat the whole purpose of the commune), or devote the overwhelming majority of their productive forces to commodity production, for profit.

Now, even if hypothetically they are able to maintain a level of commodity production, in exchange for currency, and cover their operating costs, by that time capitalism has triumphed. The goal of the commune has shifted overwhelming from self sustenance to profit, and the commune members are not only completely subject to all of the rules and regulations of the capitalist state, but they are tax-paying citizens of it. What began as a self-sustaining commune has become a commercial farm; the social-escapists, in the eyes of the capitalist state that they reside in, are simply farmers, economically indistinguishable from other farmers enthralled by the system.

Now, keep in mind that this is a very austere estimate; I didn’t factor in any miscellaneous expenses, or ”habits” that the commune members may nurse, all of which lead to miscellaneous demands upon the commune for currency. My estimate assumes that the social-escapists do not smoke, drink, or engage in any other form of leisure that would require repeat purchases of commodities ( a cigarette habit alone consumes ten dollars a day from most smokers. If the commune has ten smokers out of the whole, that’s one hundred dollars a day. That’s a lot of potatoes that they have to sell!).Even assuming that these social-escapists live a minimalistic, utilitarian lifestyle, they are still doomed.

In the event that the social escapists abandon the law-abiding road, they may prolong their existance in a valiant “robin hood” style, but they are still doomed. Whether they evade taxes, poach wild-life, squat on property, grow illegal crops like Marijuana (for profit and/or personal use), or engage in any other type of illegal activity, they guarantee that their commune will be stamped out by force, and that their membership will be arrested. Even if they initially manage to evade notice of the illegal activities committed by their commune, it makes little difference; the longer that they continue the existance of the commune (and these illegal activities along with it,), the more certain the reality that they will be caught, and eventually the day will come when capitalist police forces will ”remind” these Utopians who is really in charge; capitalists don’t fuck around when it comes to tax evasion. Anyways, even being a bandit upon the system is still a form of reliance and dependency.

Well, there you have it; from the best of intentions to probable dissolution within less than a decade. the commune is doomed to failure (not a single one of these communal social-experiments attempted in the past have survived.).
See, the most important point to expose about the flawed nature of this social-escapism is that it actually doesn’t aim to “escape” capitalism; it aims to co-exist with it. Perhaps this is the fundamental flaw of the whole notion.

See, it is not true escapism, as escape from global capitalism would require nothing less than a space faring vehicle ( and given that there are no known inhabitable planets other than earth in this system, you would actually still be dependant on earth for the import of vital commodities.).

What the social-escapists aim to do is occupy a plot of land/geographical area (which is already claimed by capitalists,), and try and survive there, without being bothered by any of the forces of capitalism. For their part, the self stated ambition of the social-escapists is not to make any effort to defeat capitalism, so therefore the true aspiration of the social-escapists is hermit-like co-existence of their own socio-economic system with that of the global capitalism.

Now, this is a large part of where the theory falls flat, as historically speaking , at no point in history has capitalism ever co-existed with a separate economic system. Capitalism brought about the defeat of feudalism in the advanced colonial countries (the American revolution ,the French revolution, etc), swept away tribalism in colonial nations, and fiercely sabotaged all past experiments in the building of socialism. By their very nature, with their lust for new markets to expand to, as well as new sources of capital and resources to exploit, capitalism can never co-exist, side-by-side with any other system, and from it’s place of global dominance, it will allow no up-starts. If there is only one lesson to heed from the revisionist Soviet premier Nikita Kruschev, it is the fallacy of his attempts at “peaceful co-existence”, which majorly contributed to the ruin and defeat of socialist countries/organizations everywhere.

In addition to this naive and erroneous desire to co-exist, and be left in seclusion as social hermits of this earth, among all left-wing political tendencies, this social-escapism is a current that is the bringer of revolutionary defeatism: ” We will never win against capitalism, things will never change; fuck it. Get the kids, an axe, and some camping supplies, we are going to live in the woods.”

Now, don’t misinterpret what I’m saying. I am not suggesting that the commune system is inherently reactionary and doomed to failure (peoples communes actually functioned quite well in the PR China, as part of their grand efforts to build socialism and self-sufficiency.); what I am saying is, quite simply, you can not “escape”, “walk away from”, “ween yourself off”, nor co-exist with the likes of capitalism.

The only way to end the tyranny of this capitalist system is to cast it down from it’s perch, and the only way to that is, and always has been, by awakening the masses to assume political power in their own interest. Utopian escapism and naive, hermit individualism will only lead in circles, back on your knees to the very system you boasted of “escaping”

[Motochi]

No, i'm planning on doing it with my girlfriend and a woman who's recently bought a parcel of land she wants to farm herself, and have the communal direct involvement of other folks, like myself and my girlfriend.

it's not an attempt at being revolutionary, rather than an attempt to be more self-sustainable. my girlfriend and i are vegan and we would rather buy organic fruits, vegetables, and other foods that we trust, or simply buy our own.

we've realized that if people just learned to be more self-sustaining, we could slowly break away from the consumerism of this country's mentality. that's really all it's for. and i think the "mini-communism" ideal of it would simply come from the inner workings of such a community, rather than its interactions with others. it wouldn't directly benefit workers, so i'm not sure it could be called communism, i guess, but i'm pretty sure it at least fits into some form of common anti-capitalism. does that make sense?

thanks for your comments!

[Drace]

I think its a great idea. Good luck with it.

[Motochi]

thanks, Drace! i'm hoping it'll work out! the sole aim of it is primarily just to sustain ourselves, not to escape capitalism so much as to make a tiny dent in our own consumerism, and see if our [hopefully] success can encourage others to do this elsewhere.

i'm in the middle of reading the Prairie Fire's huge post, so maybe my coming question is answered therein, but i wonder, if communism of sorts is not taken on in small groups, what will the masses do in the meantime, until they are able to take on the larger mechanisms?

isn't it better to try to make little differences along the way rather than to simply talk about a bigger coming revolution without any real hope of such a revolution occurring?

[Tatarin]

The key point here is to educate people. In any case, together or not, in the country or in the city, people can not just escape capitalism.

The only other thing is to move underground, like into cave systems, and somehow live on whatever can be "lived on" in there. How that is supposed to work is beyond me. :)


isn't it better to try to make little differences along the way rather than to simply talk about a bigger coming revolution without any real hope of such a revolution occurring?

But the thing is that whatever you are planning to do won't actually do much. The only thing that really can be done is to educate people on why this system must change, and how. Either that, or get a life like a sorts of "outlaw" (which will require you to get food, money, eventual medicines etc), or somehow "vanish" from the system (like the cave example).

[Vanguard1917]

If socialism can't be built in one country, it certainly can't be built on a little hippy farm. I think Prairie Fire's 'social escapism' is a good label for all such projects. The point is to change society, not retreat from it.

[Drace]

This is not 'building communism'. Its just a farm that are shared between a few peeps. Whats wrong with that? Surely a few people working together on a farm is better then 1?

[Vanguard1917]

This is not 'building communism'.

The OP views it as a communist experiment, an 'intentionally willingly organized communistic society'.

[Motochi]

yes, i see it as a partially communistic experiment, but rather an internal experiment, not an outward or revolutionary attempt at change.

small-scale communism, within a small group, is really the only way the communism stands a chance, at least in this country. even with the economy seeming to be tanking, i don't think there's enough of a collective working class mentality that's going to organize.

i'll be working with the wobblies this spring to try to establish a union or to in my region of Indiana. but aside from little strides like that, i seriously question the willingness of most people who are fighting for class equality.

i'm not a communist. i don't easily fit into a label. i feel there are tenets of shared wealth that would fit well in a small grouping. i have a lot of other specific causes that i deem worth living, fighting, and dying for, but not all of them fit into one single category.

i really wanted to know if anyone's had any similar experience in a communal farming setting. all of us involved will likely still have jobs out in the "standard" workforce.

i believe that whether or not one is aiming for a political goal, communal living is one of the wisest and most human reactions to ridiculous lifestyles and over-zealous consumerism in a given society.

is that a fair desire, or do i need to re-explain and defend my motives further?

[ZeroNowhere]

Well, communism on a small scale ('dictatorship of the proletariat') is possible, for example, the Spanish communes.
Anyways, do it if you want to. It seems that you do, in which case you should do it.


small-scale communism, within a small group, is really the only way the communism stands a chance, at least in this country.
Right now, perhaps, if the small group can even manage to get away from capitalism, which is doubtful. Otherwise, name the best music album that will come out in 2018.

[manic expression]

Communism, by its very definition, cannot be practiced on a small scale. It necessarily encompasses the complete absence of class society, and that cannot be accomplished by creating a commune. Escapism is not revolutionary because revolution means changing the status quo entirely.

[Drace]

The OP views it as a communist experiment, an 'intentionally willingly organized communistic society'.Even so, so what?
Prairie Fire'sarticle just says that it would fail economically. I'm not really convinced of his point though.

[Motochi]

thanks Drace, it looks like you're the only one who reads my posts! :) if everyone else would maybe people would stop bringing up me trying to be "revolutionary" and stuff like that! :)

i'm also not an escapist, just aiming for self-sustenance and a deviance from consumeristic culture.

[freakazoid]

Communism, by its very definition, cannot be practiced on a small scale. It necessarily encompasses the complete absence of class society, and that cannot be accomplished by creating a commune. Escapism is not revolutionary because revolution means changing the status quo entirely.By complete do you mean the whole world or within the group practicing it? I am going to assume you mean the world, and if so then does that mean that if half the world achieved communism it wouldn't really be communism and it is only a "hippie farm" It's not escapism. It can be used as a model of how communism works, just like we often point to things like the Paris commune, although I guess that was just a "hippie farm" too right? :rolleyes: That is BS! Within the communty you have the complete abolishment of class society.

We can use these things as a way to create a communist/anarchist society of like minded individuals and as a place we can talk freely throughout and use it as an example that it works. You don't just start up something like that and live separate from everything else. You use it as a sort of base of operations for spreading our communist propaganda. And when it gets bigger you can set up things like the free stores, free clinics, and whatnot. And doing that does at least three things. 1, It helps people in need who would otherwise not receive these things. 2, It gets people directly involved in direct action and politics instead of burning out do to inactivity. 3, It helps throw off the curtain to the world showing that there is a problem, and that there is a solution that works because we are living proof that it works.

[Vanguard1917]

It can be used as a model of how communism works, just like we often point to things like the Paris commune, although I guess that was just a "hippie farm" too right? http://www.revleft.com/vb/communism-small-scale-t96418/revleft/smilies/001_rolleyes.gif That is BS! Within the communty you have the complete abolishment of class society.

You're comparing the Paris Commune to a hippy get-together?

The Paris Commune is an example of workers taking power over society. A hippy commune in the middle of a farm somewhere is an example of people hiding away from society, retreating from it. Like the OP puts it, 'i'm...just aiming for self-sustenance and a deviance from consumeristic culture.'

[Plagueround]

You're comparing the Paris Commune to a hippy get-together?

The Paris Commune is an example of workers taking power over society. A hippy commune in the middle of a farm somewhere is an example of people hiding away from society, retreating from it. Like the OP puts it, 'i'm...just aiming for self-sustenance and a deviance from consumeristic culture.'

Exactly. There is a huge difference between taking control of the society that should belong to the workers in the first place, like the Paris Commune and other such attempts, and buying a piece of land, buying the supplies, continuing to buy what you need to survive, and continuing to interact with capitalist society in the hopes that they'll leave you alone. If your group does not interact with capitalist society at all, they are, as PF calls them, social escapists, and if they do, they are merely a part of capitalism as much as the rest of us. If you wish to participate in such an experiment for the experience and a want to "live differently", then by all means. But do not consider it to have anything to do with the liberation of the workers or a promotion of communist principle.

[Motochi]

As i've tried to re-explain several times, i'm not trying to start a revolution, be revolutionary, or escape anything at all. i'm aiming to vaguely "live differently", to be more self-sustained and learn to do things for myself. i'm not aiming to make money in the venture--i love how some assumed that this was a total separation from capitalism.

i'm not exactly sure what political ideology this would be, as i said in the first post:




I was thinking about it earlier today and i think i realized it's more of "collective capitalism" as i've heard the case in Cuba to be described. Would that fit a smaller, intentionally willingly organized communistic society such as ten or twenty people living and/or working together?



most of us in this farming experiment (which probably won't, for a while, include actually living on the new property) will have jobs in the normal available workforce. this is meant for the time-being, as i understand it from the woman organizing it, as a venture in community organic farming, plain and simple.

i'm not leading the charge so i can't speak for really anyone but myself. i want to know if anyone else has tried this, if anyone else has tried to live in a commune of any kind, and what your stories are. i want to know what people think an actual commune could fit, ideologically speaking, if employed centered around a non-separatist communal farm.

i'm a very early student in philosophies and ideologies, with very limited specific knowledge of communism, and other socialistic experiments.

i posted this in the "Learning" boards because i want to learn. anyone got anything to teach me? :)

[Drace]

I still don't see the problem with "running away from capitalism". Unless your argument is that it will fail economically, and if it is, explain.

Its just moving away from the city to live on a hippie farm. If that's his preferred lifestyle, go head.

[freakazoid]

You're comparing the Paris Commune to a hippy get-together?

The Paris Commune is an example of workers taking power over society.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter because apparently it communism can't be practiced on the small scale and has to completely abolish the class society, so all that makes it is a "hippie farm":glare:

But anyways like Motochi said, he isn't doing it to be revolutionary to begin with, although like I had explained it can be used in that manner.

Anywhoo, for info that would be useful to communal farming and stuff I suggest looking into magazines like Backwoods Home, http://www.backwoodshome.com/ which also has a forum, and also The Backwoodsman, http://www.backwoodsmanmag.com/

[Revy]

Who am I to judge his decisions? If he wants to have a communal farm or even live in a commune that's his choice. I don't think it's dangerous because I don't think many people would even do it. Again, the majority of the working class needs to become socialist for a socialist revolution to work in the first place. A few people living in communes isn't going to change that need.

[Motochi]

A few people living in communes isn't going to change that need.

Stancel, i whole-heartedly agree! i'm not trying to change the status quo, per se... now if our experiment gains recognition in any form (although it's not like we're trying anything terribly out of the ordinary) maybe more people will realize they can do something similar, as well! it'll be beneficial hopefully in many ways, stretching beyond just ideology.

Stancel, as far as your statement, i wonder what it would take to awaken for the masses in the working class a sense of comraderie, in order to establish more unity, as opposed to chasing the failed "American Dream".

i have no answers, i don't expect you or anyone else to have those answers, but we may as well focus on more important matters! i've gotten some helpful websites and the sparked "debate" has died down on my thread...
it's time to ditch this one, ladies and gentlemen, and move on to something far more important: a practical solution to injustice and inequality!

thanks for all your help!
pax.:)

[Charles Xavier]

I fail to see this any different than being a small-business owner. The Hippie Farmers hope to be good capitalists.

[Vanguard1917]

[/b]Yeah, but it doesn't matter because apparently it communism can't be practiced on the small scale and has to completely abolish the class society, so all that makes it is a "hippie farm"

But it hasn't abolished class society, has it? Class society still very much remains intact.



I still don't see the problem with "running away from capitalism".

Because the point for radicals is to change society, not run away from it.



Its just moving away from the city to live on a hippie farm. If that's his preferred lifestyle, go head.


Yes, lifestylism as politics. Motochi sees his planned hippy farm as a viable alternative to organising society:



i'm not trying to change the status quo, per se... now if our experiment gains recognition in any form (although it's not like we're trying anything terribly out of the ordinary) maybe more people will realize they can do something similar, as well! it'll be beneficial hopefully in many ways, stretching beyond just ideology.



Good luck convincing the urban working class that it would be better off going back to the farms. What kind of alternative is that?

[freakazoid]

But it hasn't abolished class society, has it? Class society still very much remains intact.

And? Communism hasn't abolished class society, so I guess we shouldn't try it then right? Are you trying to say that since one battle didn't abolish class society then it is failed?


Good luck convincing the urban working class that it would be better off going back to the farms. What kind of alternative is that?

You mean people like farmers? ZOMG! Holy cow people will still have to grow food and we will still need farmers.

[gla22]

I still don't see the problem with "running away from capitalism". Unless your argument is that it will fail economically, and if it is, explain.

Its just moving away from the city to live on a hippie farm. If that's his preferred lifestyle, go head.
:thumbup1:

[Prairie Fire]

Respect to Plaugeround for re-printing my document, although I wish he would have used the version that apathy maybe submitted in a related thread (less spelling errors).

Anyone can submit and re-post that text so long as they credit me as it's creator.

Anyways...

Motochi:



it's not an attempt at being revolutionary, rather than an attempt to be more self-sustainable. my girlfriend and i are vegan and we would rather buy organic fruits, vegetables, and other foods that we trust, or simply buy our own.



Aw Comrade, that was painful to read. This takes me back to a former good Comrade of mine, a British Columbian social-escapist, who was one of the key inspirations for me to write that paper above.

He was formerly a good Marxist, a revolutionary, a comitted materialist socialist. Then, he got these ideas about growing organic fuits and vegetables, being more Self-sustaining, and ideas about forming a commune with his Vegan girlfriend. Now, this former pillar of Marxist activism has (or had) a "community garden" plan, that I'm pretty sure never took off, padded with vague anti-corporate, pro-organic sentiments.
He abandoned scientific socialism and the class struggle for a Petty-bourgeois, utopian, urban gardening project

I am watching history repeat itself in your posts, comrade Motochi


we've realized that if people just learned to be more self-sustaining, we could slowly break away from the consumerism of this country's mentality.

(Sigh) Please re-read my paper, as posted by Plaugeround. I have covered that sentiment, and given a point by point analysis of the degeneration of utopian socialism into capitalist restoration.

Also, vague "anti-consumerism" sentiments are a hallmark of petty-bourgeois ideology. To the petty bourgeois, ownership of their own chunk of land, of private property, is the solution to all problems.

Very rarely, in my experience, do grumblings about "consumerism" lead a persyn to "workers of all countries, unite!". Usually, they lead to "let's go out in the woods and grow our own food!", "We don't need electricity", or
"There are too many damn people in the world! Humyns are like a virus!" :rolleyes:.

Vague "anti-consumerism" sentiments are the first step on the cobblestone road of primitivism, utopian idealism, and all kinds of other distasteful "theories", that masquerade as radicalism, and that have never yielded any successes.

A scientific communist, on the other hand, understands that "consumerism" is not the issue. Only the most foolish persyn would deny that the working class (and all humyn beings, in general,) require food, clothing,medical supplies, and other items. Under capitalism, these items, and all fruits of social production, are manufactured by private companies and distributed through private retail outlets.

Now, the conclusion that the petty bourgeois comes to is that it is the fault of the workers, for gathering the goods that they need in this way, and that the "solution" is limited to life-style choices: boycotts, gardnening, and of course the commune.

The conclusion that the revolutionary workers and communists come to is that the blame lies upon the ruling class, the bourgeoisie, for appropriating the products of social production and distributing them in this way, and that the solution is to mobilize the working class to overthrow capitalism, and replace it with a new kind of socio-economic mode of production and distribution.



it wouldn't directly benefit workers, so i'm not sure it could be called communism, i guess


Good; at least you recognize that your experiment is not scientific socialism, does not challenge class relations, and is not a viable form of socio-economic organization.

As long as you aknowledge that you will not defeat capitalism (or "consumerism", as you call it,) in this way, then do whatever you like.


guess, but i'm pretty sure it at least fits into some form of common anti-capitalism.

It strikes me as "anti-capitalism" in a pseudo-feudalist sense of the term.
You are opposed to capitalism based on conceptions of moralism, the quality of the food you eat, and "anti-consumerism", and would like to return to a mode of production and distribution without "consumerism" (aka, Feudalism).

You are "anti-capitalist" in a regressive, not revolutionary,sense.



he sole aim of it is primarily just to sustain ourselves, not to escape capitalism so much as to make a tiny dent in our own consumerism, and see if our [hopefully] success can encourage others to do this elsewhere.


Again, this is almost identical to the sentiments expressed by my lost comrade.

Also, again, "Consumerism" is not the problem.

It is as I said in my above thesis: you are not trying to "escape" capitalism, you aim to Co-exist with it, in an idealist manner. You hope to extinguish your petty-bourgeois guilt from "buying things", while visions of idealized survival agriculture dance in your head.

If you believe that small-scale survival agriculture is an option for 7 billion humyn beings, maybe re-think it as an alternative to capitalism. There are reasons that the modes of production that we have today arose (read some Friedrich Engels to find out more.).



i'm in the middle of reading the Prairie Fire's huge post


:D.

Not to be condescending, but please tell me that this is not the heaviest text that you have read in recent days.



so maybe my coming question is answered therein


All of your current, and future, questions are answered within. I thoroughly debunked social-escapism in this thesis (not to be boastful :blushing:).



what will the masses do in the meantime, until they are able to take on the larger mechanisms?


They will live and learn from the daily struggle, and their legitimate vanguard party will articulate their concerns and provide leadership and orientation in their every struggle, building social-conciousness, for the realization of revolution, socialism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat.


isn't it better to try to make little differences along the way

Tactical gains for the working class are one thing;

what you espouse is individual-centric life-style actions, that don't really
challenge or question the status quo, the class relations to political power, the mode of production and distribution, class divisions, etc.

Baby steps towards a bright light are the path of social-democrats, and charlattans who have never done anything but re-route the ambitions of the working class, away from attainable modes of struggle, into their narrow parliamentary goals, and ultimately betray the workers and fail them. A prime example is the New Democratic Party (NDP) in my country, especially during the "Days of action", and when they formed government in Ontario.



rather than to simply talk about a bigger coming revolution without any real hope of such a revolution occurring?


If you believe that the revolution is not coming, that is your own viewpoint. Because all of your world outlook seems to be based on an intact petty-bourgeois conception of the world, and liberally padded with idealism, moralism and metaphysics, is it possible that you do not see the revolution coming because you are not analyzing the material conditions of your country, and the world?


yes, i see it as a partially communistic experiment, but rather an internal experiment, not an outward or revolutionary attempt at change.

Allright; we agree that your proposed venture is not a revolutionary attempt at change.

Carry on with your commune then, I guess.



small-scale communism, within a small group, is really the only way the communism stands a chance, at least in this country.


Erm, how did you come to that conclusion?

My thesis is correct ( as I said above, here we see the Social-escapist attempting to make his "communism" more tailored to the status quo, as he try's to co-exist with the dominant rival socio-economic system.).

Also, I see I was correct that social-escapism is the the bringer of revolutionary-defeatism :lol:.

Re-read my thesis a few times. What you are proposing is not communism, and though it is perhaps the only form of "communism" that could enjoy a brief stint in co-existance with capitalism, it is certainly not the only form of communism that can (and will) triumph in the US, or any other country.



i don't think there's enough of a collective working class mentality that's going to organize.


so your proposal, rather than taking a leadership role in mobilizing the working class, is "every man for himself" ?

Here is one of my quotes, mocking the social escapist rhetoric. It corresponds to your outlook, unfortunately:


"We will never win against capitalism, things will never change; fuck it. Get the kids, an axe, and some camping supplies, we are going to live in the woods.”

I told you, everything you are saying now, I've allready covered it in my text above. If you feel I missed something, PM me.


i'll be working with the wobblies this spring to try to establish a union or to in my region of Indiana. but aside from little strides like that, i seriously question the willingness of most people who are fighting for class equality.


Poor salesman blames his customers.:lol:

If the working people are not responding to your theoretical line and organizing tactics, why do you assume that the problem lies with them?


i'm not a communist

Obviously.


i don't easily fit into a label.

Sure you do: Social-Escapist.

Also, Primitivist, petty-bourgeois, hippy, utopian, idealist... so many labels come to mind.


i really wanted to know if anyone's had any similar experience in a communal farming setting.

(Sigh) If you are going to actually go through with this, check these guys out:

http://ruralpeople.atspace.org/



all of us involved will likely still have jobs out in the "standard" workforce.


Then what you are doing is not an alternative to capitalism, just superficial gestures to sooth your petty-bourgeois guilt.

Thank you for confirming my thesis, though.



communal living is one of the wisest and most human reactions to ridiculous lifestyles


I'm not even going to point out the irony...


and over-zealous consumerism

Take a page from Marx:


We by no means intend to abolish this personal appropriation of the products of labor, an appropriation that is made for the maintenance and reproduction of human life, and that leaves no surplus wherewith to command the labor of others. All that we want to do away with is the miserable character of this appropriation, under which the laborer lives merely to increase capital, and is allowed to live only in so far as the interest of the ruling class requires it.



Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labor of others by means of such appropriations
- Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party


is that a fair desire, or do i need to re-explain and defend my motives further?


Do whatever you please, but have no illusions about it.


if everyone else would maybe people would stop bringing up me trying to be "revolutionary" and stuff like that! http://www.revleft.com/vb/communism-small-scale-t96418/revleft/smilies/001_smile.gif
You pose a paradox:

You aknowledge that what you are doing is not revolutionary, but you come to revolutionaries, seeking advice on how to do it? :lol:


i'm also not an escapist, just aiming for self-sustenance and a deviance from consumeristic culture.

Right; escapism. You have given up on changing the society, so you simply try and make small changes in your persynal life, to try and minimize your connection to the world and relations of class and production.

That makes you an escapist, wether you care for the term or not.


As i've tried to re-explain several times, i'm not trying to start a revolution, be revolutionary,

Okay then. Carry on with your whatever leisure activites you choose, then.



or escape anything at all.

Yes, you are ( See above).



i'm aiming to vaguely "live differently", to be more self-sustained and learn to do things for myself


So... this is a self help undertaking? :lol:
A manifestation of petty-bourgeois guilt, perhaps (that you exist on the exploitation of labour) ?



i love how some assumed that this was a total separation from capitalism.

The total destruction of Capitalism is our main pre-occupation and our current goal. If what you are saying doesn't tie into an end to the system of capitalism, and the exploitation of labour, then why are you even proposing it to those who are (or claim to be) devoted to revolution?

If you're looking for a cyber-space "pat on the back" ,go to 4chan.
If you are looking for advice, we are offering it to you; sorry if we do not look at your "experiment" with as much hope as you do.


most of us in this farming experiment (which probably won't, for a while, include actually living on the new property) will have jobs in the normal available workforce. this is meant for the time-being, as i understand it from the woman organizing it, as a venture in community organic farming, plain and simple.

Again, deja vu, in the worst way.

Re-read my thesis; you are heading for a brick wall.


i want to know if anyone else has tried this, if anyone else has tried to live in a commune of any kind, and what your stories are.

Many have tried it; the stories vary, but the ending is pretty universal:

The Commune dissolves.


i want to know what people think an actual commune could fit, ideologically speaking, if employed centered around a non-separatist communal farm.

That is social-escapism. Economically speaking, you will be indistinguishable from any other workers and wage labourers in the capitalist system, and your stated objective is to do nothing to challenge capitalism.


i'm a very early student in philosophies and ideologies, with very limited specific knowledge of communism, and other socialistic experiments.

If you are interested, send me a persynal message.


i posted this in the "Learning" boards because i want to learn. anyone got anything to teach me? http://www.revleft.com/vb/communism-small-scale-t96418/revleft/smilies/001_smile.gif


Yes, but you choose wether you take it with you or not.

Everything that we just said was educational on what you are trying to do.
For more info on Marxism-Leninism, PM me.


i'm not trying to change the status quo, per se...


Everything you are saying confirms my thesis, but still you resist.


it'll be beneficial hopefully in many ways, stretching beyond just ideology.

"Ideology" is not the basis of social antagonisms :rolleyes:; Class divisions are.


Stancel, as far as your statement, i wonder what it would take to awaken for the masses in the working class a sense of comraderie, in order to establish more unity, as opposed to chasing the failed "American Dream".


It would take a party, guided by the correct theoretical orientation, with the resolve to take a leadership role, and lead the working class to achieve victory in all endeavors (as opposed to those who shrug their shoulders and form communes when the workers reject your organizing tactics and theoretical outlooks.).


but we may as well focus on more important matters!

Somehow, "looking out for number one" is more important than mobilizing the proletariat for revolution?


it's time to ditch this one, ladies and gentlemen, and move on to something far more important: a practical solution to injustice and inequality!

Too bad I had to get this far, to realize you won't be reading my replies.

What we are trying to tell you is that the commune is not a solution to injustice and inequality. You keep saying you have no interest in challenging hte status quo or revolution, but then you posture your commune propostions as a "solution" to the problems of our society.

I hope you at least take my paper with you, and keep it handy for when your commune dreams face reality.


Tatarin:

The only thing that really can be done is to educate people on why this system must change, and how

Well, unfortunately comrade, that is not quite correct.

Yes the people need theory, and yes they need to be oriented on issues, but the real role of the communists in contemprary society is to take leadership in every struggle of the working class, help them to achieve their own objectives, and provide direction and information to build the working class into a force that can and will sieze power for themselves.

Vanguard 1917:

If socialism can't be built in one country, it certainly can't be built on a little hippy farm.

At least we agree about the inadequacy of communes.


I think Prairie Fire's 'social escapism' is a good label for all such projects.

:blushing:. Pass that phrase around, use it as you please.


The point is to change society, not retreat from it.

Word.

Drace:

This is not 'building communism'. Its just a farm that are shared between a few peeps. Whats wrong with that? Surely a few people working together on a farm is better then 1?

Comrade Motochi can do whatever he wants; we are simply informing him that it is not a viable alternative to capitalism.

Comrade Motochi can start a commune if he wishes to. He can also finger paint, do hand-stands and make a little drum out of an empty ice-cream bucket. His liesure time is his own time, to use as he pleases.

All we are saying is, don't tell us that these activities are revolutionary acts, or "anti-capitalist" alternatives.


I still don't see the problem with "running away from capitalism". Unless your argument is that it will fail economically, and if it is, explain.


I did explain, in detail. Re-read my thesis as necesary to comprehension.


Its just moving away from the city to live on a hippie farm. If that's his preferred lifestyle, go head.

Sure; just don't consume yourself with delusions of social rupture and radicalism in the process.


Prairie Fire'sarticle just says that it would fail economically. I'm not really convinced of his point though.

If you are not convinced, you either didn't read the thesis, or you are resisting the point. I can't see how, or what possible good argument you could make against my analysis.

Also, Prairie Fire (yours truly)is a She.

One year later, people still make that mistake.

Dimitrov II:

I fail to see this any different than being a small-business owner. The Hippie Farmers hope to be good capitalists.

You are correct that it is a petty bourgeois outlook, yes.