Results 1 to 19 of 19
Naïve comrades?
I am young. I am often anti-authoritarian. I am idealistic. I am a dreamer. I am so very often told that I am Naive.
Still, there are people here who strike even me as terribily naïve.
Many anarchists but also communist who think that 'after the revolution' everything will automaticly be fine. Almost religiously, they forget that the revolution is a means to change society, and seem to think that there's no reason to actually think about what happens after the revolution.
I see this most often when people ask questions like 'how will a communist/anarchist society deal with *insert problem*?'. How often have I not seen the answer 'In the post-revolutionairy society, nobody will want to cause *insert problem', or 'There will be no illegal production of *insert problem*' and 'everybody will be decent human beings, thus there will be no........', you catch my drift.
I've seen people insist that after the revolution there will be no laziness, there will be no demand for porn, no sexual abuse, there will be no pro-ana materials, there will immedeatly be the technical sollutions for world hunger etc, etc, etc.
The problem is, that through revolution, we can change the way society is organized. In the long run, this will change the way people are on a certain level, but it does not miracilously chance people instantly, and only on subjects related to whatever the revolution is about. That is why we've had a sexual revolution, an industrial revolution, and are still fighting for a political and economical revolution: these revolutions stimulate each other, but they are not automatically the same.
I don't know why, but I just wanted to throw in my 2p.
Whenever 'realism' is posed as antithesis to idealism, disasters are bound to happen.
Gobierno Negrín: ¿dónde está Nin? - POUM (Partit Obrer d'Unificació Marxista)
Communism will deal with problems in a different way anyone who says treats a post revolutionary society like Heaven or anything equally absurd is quite frankly stupid and saying "Under Communism there wont be any crime" addresses peoples concerns about as well as shanking them and taking there wallet for the revolution.
PETER
Human beings weren't meant to sit in little cubicles, starring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about mission statements.
MICHAEL
I told those fudge-packers that I like Michael Bolton's music. God.
All reasonable socialists and communists do not pretend that revolution will instantly make society better, or that all of societies ills will naturally go away. The only people claiming communism is a purely idealist ideology that, isn't willing to problems in a realistic fashion, are pro-capitalists. However they've created so many strawman arguments that sometimes they don't know which strawman they are arguing against. They have no clue about what is really going on ideologically on the left.
You'll find that most people here aren't arguing that everything will be "utopian" after the revolution. The democracies we will set up after a revolution will be tasked with dealing with everyday problems as well with economic issues. People will steal and people will be lazy but socialist democracy will have to find real and practical ways to deal with those problems.
Utopian Socialism died as a large socialist current over a century ago. Socialists, communists, and anarchists today offer solutions that try be realistic in both there goals and implementation.
Everything above is open to criticism. It's the only way to learn.
"everything will automaticly be fine."
"'In the post-revolutionairy society"
Well, many anarchists would suggest that the "revolution" is not going to be an over-night thing. Many anarchists would use the term "revolution" interchangeably" with "transitional period".
As such, while during the revolution, during the transition from capitalism to (for example) anarchism, of course there will be problems. And it is acknowledged that this period may be on the line of years, rather than months.
Anyway, when talking about an anarchist society, it is generally meant that it is after any transition, and that the person is talking about the utopia they hope for.
Is that clear?
I also dislike it when they say that. They do it because,historically, the original socialist thought was influenced by a number of ideas from the 18th century Enlightenment -- in this case, Rousseau's belief in "the perfectibility of human nature." It's an unscientific approach. The real answer should be that the post-revolutionary society will have a formal structure that won't establish opportunities for people to cause *insert problem*. In cases when some people will want to behave in unacceptable ways, the institutions will be such that those people cannot materialize the desire. For example, power-hungry people will continue to demand special privileges, but the population will say no to them, and, if necessary, restrict their movement.
even in the best posible anarchist society there will still be problems though. When people refuse to acknowledge that just makes them look delusional.
Anarchist Federation|afed blog
libcom.org - Libertarian-Communist website with excellent library
The Anarchist FAQ
Sure. However, many of the problems that exist now, won't exist in the most perfect anarchist society.
I can't imagine what the biggest problems would even look like. After all, talking about the most perfect anarchist society, we are talking about something that we can't even blueprint!
We can, however, assume that most "crime" as it exists now, will not exist. Without property, what is there to steal? Without racism, and homophobia (etc.), what hate crimes would exist?
When we no longer have to worry about hunger, there won't be hunger.
Crime will be easy to eradicate, racism and homophobia, not so much. I've heard people say that once the workers gain class-consciousness they will realise that the problems are caused by capitalism, as opposed to blacks, gays and Jews, but there are of course still a great number of people who hate just to hate.
Without racism, and homophobia (etc.), what hate crimes would exist?
When we no longer have to worry about hunger, there won't be hunger.
Exactly. The hate that there is now against these people, makes absolute sense. If the organisation of society is better, still nothing stops these people from just hate without a reason like now.
Whenever 'realism' is posed as antithesis to idealism, disasters are bound to happen.
Gobierno Negrín: ¿dónde está Nin? - POUM (Partit Obrer d'Unificació Marxista)
It is easy to fall under the illusion that we think communism is somehow perfect. The real error has happened in the question itself. Most questions address the issues dominant in the capitalist society, communism being the diametrical opposite of capitalism the capitalist problems have been completely removed... to be replaced by other ones.
No one claims communism is heaven/utopia without problems. Communism is "heaven/utopia" with different set of problems. Communism does however prioritize humans, as opposed to capitalist prioritation of consuming.
I would say a lot of hate crime is to do with Capitalism, when we reach true Anarchism/Communism I don't think there will be many who hate just to hate. We have to ask if they hate just to hate why they do such things and where have these beliefs risen from, I think you will find that even these people are a product of their society.
"Direct Action is a notion of such clarity, of such self-evident transparency, that merely to speak the words defines and explains them. It means that the working class, in constant rebellion against the existing state of affairs, expects nothing from outside people, powers or forces, but rather creates its own conditions of struggle and looks to itself for its means of action. It means that, against the existing society which recognises only the citizen, rises the producer. And that that producer, having grasped that any social grouping models itself upon its system of production, intends to attack directly the capitalist mode of production in order to transform it, by eliminating the employer and thereby achieving sovereignty in the workshop – the essential condition for the enjoyment of real freedom.” Emile Pouget
Capitalism prioritizes profits, not consumption. Effective demand, not demand.
I never became a communist because I thought that it is perfect and faultless. Nothing ever is. Problem is though, when capitalism has a problem, people say nothing and get on with it. When things go wrong with communism and socialism, people think its the end of the world and want capitalism back.
The main reason I became communist was because I could see the ever eradicating values of kinship within modern society. Its like we are getting bred to hate each other, and constantly compare ourselves with the person next to us wanting to be superior in someway to them. If not, than its like we have something wrong with us.
Also, i hate the way people have zero respect for good work ethic, and want loads of money for nothing, just so they can sit on the fat arses and laugh at the toilers and hard labourers. This is what I see today. That as well as the constant championing, yet at the same time genocide of culture, due to privitisation.
In my view it is double standards to accuse communists and anarchists of being naive, as it is the libertarians and conservatives who are the worst for it. They really believe that they can privatise everything on earth and make everyone in someway, there own buisnessman, and the everyone will be nice to each other and get on with things. They are the ones who need a reality check in my view.
I hear what the OP is saying. We have a long, long, road ahead of us, the end of which most of us will most likely never see.
But I honestly believe that if society was actually geared to help people, fulfill their needs and not rape them for profit that crime will go down, but certainly not be eliminated. But transitioning to that type of society will be a gradual process. A vibrant civil society is undoubtedly a very, very good way to begin to change people's thinkings, break down barriers of alienation and develop class consciousness.
we must remember that racism and the xenephobia etc are often used to divide the working class. when cappitalsim ceases to exist people will come to the obvious conclusion that we are all equal and there will be nothing to blame on other races or ethnicities.
^^ you are talking about a very important point...
Many problems are directly caused by capitalism (let me referr to the "lumpenproletariat"-discussion), and it's a direct consequence of the metamorphosis in a better society that they are eleminated.
Let me explain: Let's just suppose, after long struggles in the underground, or a last final crash of the world economy (take whichever scenario you like best) the people are able to organize an international revolution...
Now we have: basical democratic states, at first, later a transformation from national organized into internationalistic, worker-controlled production and the process of the real developement of poor countries.
The problem poor proletarians, unemployed people: solved pretty soon (because all this is a product of capitalism...this is what communism is all about, isn't it?)
The problem crime: won't be solved in the beginning, it's a process of educating people that greed is not necessary, and not everyone is able to understand it. But, as people's social behavious are the outcome of their education, it can be put down on a minimum. Of course there will still be mentally ill, or people who kill in affect, these are criminals that won't cease to exist, but the major reason for crime which is greed is no part of the human nature.
We should not forget that revolution is a process, a transformation not so much of the society as a whole but more of every individuums mind.
And, to quote Robert Kurz: there will be assholes and lovesickness after the revolution.
capitalism do not create racism, igorence of one another cause racism
Having a revolution will not slove anything, there always gonna be crime and there always gonna be hunger, there always gonna be racism and there are cases where nations had a revolution and that leader became just a bad as the last one. we need to based our revolution on the voice of the people instead of the voice of the leaders of the revolution. there should be a way where we make sure we can trust a leader who is not a power hungry person.
For a Votoms allusion that will be wasted on the vast majority of you: You can kill God, but still have wars. The difference is that now you have a framework in which you can solve these problems. Perhaps some problems could not be completely eliminated, but they can be minimized. However, wild-ass speculation (to borrow a phrase) about what the effects of socialism will be is just that, wild-ass speculation, and it is indeed annoying how many people seem to discuss how things will be run in socialism in a framework of unwarranted assumptions about how human behaviour would change in a communist society. This applies to ultimate goals as well as immediate changes. I have no problem with something being striven towards, I do with it being treated as somehow inevitable.
Perhaps become more servile.
