Revolutionary socialism: Seperating socialism from communism

[redguard2009]

In my few months here, observing all the goings-on and random tripe people whip around the forums, I've settled into a little niche of an idea and/or problem.

That being, I don't really give a shit about communism.

Alright, that's actually not true, but I wanted to make a dramatic statement.

What I mean is, the issue of communism -- that being, the issue of how a classless, stateless society will look far, far into the future -- really doesn't seem all that important to me, or to the "here and now".

Don't get me wrong. I want communism. I want it bad. But I also don't see the benefit in focusing on it as much as it has been focused upon. The way I see it, communism as a reality won't really happen for quite some time -- possibly hundreds of years -- as it first requires the complete abolishing of the current way-of-things, the restructuring of society and the quite enormous task of withering away all of the old social and economic traditions which have prevailed in human civilization for sometimes hundreds of years.

That said, I've come to view myself as more of a revolutionary socialist than revolutionary communist; as in I believe more focus must be given to "ironing out" the theory and science of the transitional phases of socialism: How will we get there? Once we're there, how will we maintain it? History has shown quite well that these are questions that need dire attention; the ultimate failures of the revolutionary movements in Russia and China are the biggest reasons I can think of. It just seems somewhat premature to be discussing what communism will look and feel like when we've got too much of a problem addressing what socialism should look and feel like.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I've set as my goal the establishment of revolutionary socialism, not communism. It's very unlikely that during my lifetime, or any of our lifetimes, we will ever see any serious attempt at a classless, stateless society. Leave the theorizing and calculations to those generations who grow up within socialism; they, afterall, will have a much more broadened sense of the issues of class struggle than we, by virtue of simply having been born, raised and educated under socialism rather than capitalism as we have all been. Let us focus on the immediate steps before us, and not peer into the distant, hazy future which none of us can ever possibly hope to predict.

[Cumannach]

Comrade the problem here is that certain other comrades have got it into their heads that there must be an immediate transformation of capitalism into communism after the conquest of state power by the working class. Although this would in fact simply fail, and allow the bourgeoisie to regroup and build anew their state power, preventing the commencement of socialism, and by consequence the full development of socialism (which is communism), our mistaken comrades do not see this point, and will actually oppose socialism and the struggles of socialists, due to their mistaken belief. I think this is why their mistake must be pointed out.

[Pogue]

Comrade the problem here is that certain other comrades have got it into their heads that there must be an immediate transformation of capitalism into communism after the conquest of state power by the working class. Although this would in fact simply fail, and allow the bourgeoisie to regroup and build anew their state power, preventing the commencement of socialism, and by consequence the full development of socialism (which is communism), our mistaken comrades do not see this point, and will actually oppose socialism and the struggles of socialists, due to their mistaken belief. I think this is why their mistake must be pointed out.


Who are these people?

[Dóchas]

I don't really give a shit about communism.


was that really necessery?? :crying:

[redguard2009]

Who are these people?

Anarchists, Left-Communists, and their affiliated sub-types. :D


was that really necessery?? :crying:

:( Yes.

[Omi]

Comrade the problem here is that certain other comrades have got it into their heads that there must be an immediate transformation of capitalism into communism after the conquest of state power by the working class. Although this would in fact simply fail, and allow the bourgeoisie to regroup and build anew their state power, preventing the commencement of socialism, and by consequence the full development of socialism (which is communism), our mistaken comrades do not see this point, and will actually oppose socialism and the struggles of socialists, due to their mistaken belief. I think this is why their mistake must be pointed out.

Thanks for throwing 200 years of Anarchist thought and theory into the garbage bin, for here is the correct analysis of revolutionary history and theory: it will simply not work!
Thank you very much, I am convinced and astonished by the fact my belief was actually mistaken!

But wait, are there not libertarian socialists? How can this be!
Well, maybe socialism doesn't mean a worker state, (this is called the dictatorship of the proletariat), but the control of the means of production by the workers?
What if the state apparatus and the class society are not two diffrent unlinked ideas, floating around in space, but inherently linked? Now, how would you achieve a radical revolution by preserving the state apparatus, but not the class society? This attempt has lead to an opressive beurocratic class in the past, how do you think it will in the future?

I am not some sort of distorted anti socialist primitivist nutjob who just doesn't see the wrongs of his ways and will actively sabotage any attempts at a working class emancipation. We are socialists to! Just not a Marxist-Leninist kind of socialist...;)

[Kassad]

Thanks for throwing 200 years of Anarchist thought and theory into the garbage bin, for here is the correct analysis of revolutionary history and theory: it will simply not work!
Thank you very much, I am convinced and astonished by the fact my belief was actually mistaken!

But wait, are there not libertarian socialists? How can this be!
Well, maybe socialism doesn't mean a worker state, (this is called the dictatorship of the proletariat), but the control of the means of production by the workers?
What if the state apparatus and the class society are not two diffrent unlinked ideas, floating around in space, but inherently linked? Now, how would you achieve a radical revolution by preserving the state apparatus, but not the class society? This attempt has lead to an opressive beurocratic class in the past, how do you think it will in the future?

I am not some sort of distorted anti socialist primitivist nutjob who just doesn't see the wrongs of his ways and will actively sabotage any attempts at a working class emancipation. We are socialists to! Just not a Marxist-Leninist kind of socialist...;)

You are no socialist I know! :D

But directed towards the original post, I think it's great that you want to focus on the present. If we look too far ahead, we will lose sight of what we need to do now. Still, the revolution requires balance. We don't want to destroy the corporate capitalist system and realize... we have no idea what the fuck to do next! We need to be organized and prepared for all potential outcomes, resistance and setbacks.

[Cumannach]

Thanks for throwing 200 years of Anarchist thought and theory into the garbage bin, for here is the correct analysis of revolutionary history and theory: it will simply not work!
Thank you very much, I am convinced and astonished by the fact my belief was actually mistaken!

But wait, are there not libertarian socialists? How can this be!
Well, maybe socialism doesn't mean a worker state, (this is called the dictatorship of the proletariat), but the control of the means of production by the workers?
What if the state apparatus and the class society are not two diffrent unlinked ideas, floating around in space, but inherently linked? Now, how would you achieve a radical revolution by preserving the state apparatus, but not the class society? This attempt has lead to an opressive beurocratic class in the past, how do you think it will in the future?

I am not some sort of distorted anti socialist primitivist nutjob who just doesn't see the wrongs of his ways and will actively sabotage any attempts at a working class emancipation. We are socialists to! Just not a Marxist-Leninist kind of socialist...;)

Well of course I wasn't trying to convince anybody that anarchism can't work- although I don't believe it can- I was pointing out to the OP that conflicting theoretical viewpoints can cause harmful discord among socialists (in the broadest sense of that word, comrade, to include yourself).

[RedSonRising]

I agree with you assertions, Communism and its evolution into a stateless society is something very into the future, and the here and now must contain the focus of transitions into socialist economies...I could not have put my own sentiments better myself. and while I do feel for the far left anarcho-communists and die-hard marxists leninists, I think this is a very valid point; we want it bad, but we have to wait, though not idly. Hopefully enough people can come around to this for united leftist action and our ideals dont drown in factionalism.

[Omi]

While your points are valid, we must focus on the present, and act on it, we must also speculate about the future. Why? Have you ever had a worker you were actually convicing of the need to a radical revolution ask you: What next? That is also a very valid point! I wouldn't want to risk my life for the russian revolution just to find out that it would turn into a dictatorship and a new kind of class society would arise afterwards... That is why it is important, we want a revolution, but how to achieve it, is very important. That is actually the point most leftists disagree on, and why there are so many currents;).

[RedSonRising]

Good point, speculation is necessary, but we must be flexible, otherwise a strict view on future transition into stateless classlessness could result in too strictly and flawed planning.

[Omi]

That flexibility is needed speaks for itself. Rigidness and strict planning almost always flaw or don't work out the way it's supposed to.