Non communist, socialist countries.

[Robo the Hobo]

There are many countries that consider themselves to be (and I would in many ways agree) socialists. The examples I could pluck from the air right now would be: England (in some ways,) Sweden (although the right block of parties is running things at the moment,) and probably norway. I have lived in both england and sweden, and from my admittedly extremely limmeted knowledge of marxist theory, I would say that they are not realy at the class situation they once where. I will use England as my example as it is the country I am currently living in. I would say that the traditional idea of the two classes, the bourguaosie (or however you spell it) and the proletariat, are not actualy fully correct in todays england. (Mainly because of the actions of 'socialist' governments, but the situation stands.) If I, or anyone else where to get a decent education and work in the right job, and save enough money, and invest in the right things, they (or I) could effectively become a captilist. Virtualy anyone could do that. This is mainly becuase of the socialist idea of free comprehensive education, and also partialy because of the NHS.

Another thing that needs to be remembered in these countries is that the people who are actualy the capitalists in these countries are generaly there because that is how society is, even if at heart they may either think they are doing the right things and/or possibly be 'socialists' in their beliefs (and possibly have it reflected in their actions.)

In these kinds of countries, I believe that we are nearly half way through the things that need doing to before a communist society could be implememted (other than changing the rest of the world.) The traditional idea of the class struggle may not be the thing we need to focus on hear, but sollidarity between all, and through that dissolvement of all. Sure, some hard core cappitalists may not want to change, but many would actualy join the revolution if it where presented in the right way. A violent revolution will never win in these countries, because there is not enough poverty, and most people actualy have decent living conditions. But a slower democratic process could work to keep the revolution going in these places.

That does not though meen that we can be complacent. There are problems resulting from a far more globalised form of capitalism, that is causing people from other, poorer countries and the environment to suffer. But it is still not in the same a single class in those countries being exploited.

What are your views in general to these kinds of countries? Have their parties betrayed socialism?

Your answers to these questions and your resonses to these views would be apreciated.

[Sentinel]

Aargh. Being sa worker in Sweden I always get so upset when I hear the Sweden is socialist claim. I'll start with your last question:

What are your views in general to these kinds of countries? Have their parties betrayed socialism?

Reformists have absolutely and utterly betrayed socialism, yes.

There are many countries that consider themselves to be (and I would in many ways agree) socialists. The examples I could pluck from the air right now would be: England (in some ways,) Sweden (although the right block of parties is running things at the moment,) and probably norway.

Sweden is by no definition I am aware of, socialist. Socialism in practice is defined by common ownership of the means of production, in theory the aim to reach such a situation. Sweden is a capitalist country with somewhat better social security and a somewhat higher tax rate than the average. That's it really.

I would say that they are not realy at the class situation they once where. I will use England as my example as it is the country I am currently living in. I would say that the traditional idea of the two classes, the bourguaosie (or however you spell it) and the proletariat, are not actualy fully correct in todays england. (Mainly because of the actions of 'socialist' governments, but the situation stands.) If I, or anyone else where to get a decent education and work in the right job, and save enough money, and invest in the right things, they (or I) could effectively become a captilist. Virtualy anyone could do that. This is mainly becuase of the socialist idea of free comprehensive education, and also partialy because of the NHS.

And now what actually has happened, and how things are at least here in Sweden:

During the cold war the ruling/owning classes of many a European capitalist country were scared shitless with the fear of a communist revolution. Therefore they negotiated with the reformist left and made many compromises. Wages were raised, working and living conditions raised markantly as the Social Democrats were allowed to raise the taxes and the workers were allowed to organise in reformist, centralised trade unions.

These so called 'victories' for Social Democracy (in reality alms for the poor meant to ease the tensions between classes) brought them a lot of popularity, which proved to be a serious blow to the revolutionary left. So many were ready to settle for so little! The world lay at their feet, but many workers were satisfied with a few extra coins in their pocket, thanks to the deceit from these class traitors, who naturally acquired huge wages (compared to the the best of raises they have ever gotten for a worker) for themselves in the process.

The only reason why social democracy has been tolerated and given political power in Sweden is because it didn't aim to overthrow the capitalist class, merely to keep the status quo and give workers 'rights' in the capitalist society, and because it stole the support of the more moderate elements within the working class movement from the revolutionary left. Upon founding their first government they solemnly promised not to try change the Swedish constitution -- an act that should have rang a few bells if you ask me.

Education was never equally comprehensive in Sweden; there is Education and education. The kids of the ruling class go to private schools where they are raised to lead, the children fo the working class go to public ones where they are molded into new workers. Albeit it is in theory possible for an individual, either ruthless or genius of a person, to raise into the ruling class after a public education it could never so be for all; In a capitalist society there by definition must be class division. In other words it's not possible for everyone to become a capitalist, and never can be -- someone has to work, to be exploited!

This is something the Social Democrats have not managed to change after decades of rule. Why? Because it is impossible within a capitalist society and they aren't striving for a socialist one!

But enough of 1900's Social Democracy, how do things look today? How does the future of reformism look, and can the situation go on like this? Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war, the charade of being a workers party has been totally dropped by the Social Democrats. In the nineties they sold out to private companies all public property there ever was to begin with: telecom, railways, postal services, electricity, the list goes on.

The bourgeoisie no longer feels the need to negotiate or to put any strains to it's chauvinism. And the Social Democrats? Well as they never had any power of their own but merely the crumbs from the table of the Bourgeoisie to operate with, they are quite impotent now with the pressure from international socialism upon the capitalists weakened.

All they can do is try to justify and apologise for the worsened situation for the workers while executing the will of the economic ruling class -- the true holders of power in a capitalist society. So they have been pushing for the moving away of political power from local organs into Bruxelles since the EU was founded, lowered the taxes for the rich and generally supported any whim of the bourgeoisie including the privatising of virtually everything, while doing very little to lower unemployment.

They have sold out even their reformist paradigm!

Another thing that needs to be remembered in these countries is that the people who are actualy the capitalists in these countries are generaly there because that is how society is, even if at heart they may either think they are doing the right things and/or possibly be 'socialists' in their beliefs (and possibly have it reflected in their actions.)

Wow. No, capitalists are capitalists because 'that's how society is', naturally, but they are hardly socialist in any way, anywhere. The only situation when a capitalist allows his personal scruples to affect his decisions is when he feels he can 'afford' it. And even then he gets something out of it, it's just a way of buying positive PR really.

But would a capitalist be directed by any real socialist motives in his actions he'd very soon be an ex-capitalist. The swedish bourgeoisie holds the political organs hostage by threats of exporting their capital, and thus holds the ultimate power. If that's how socialist their actions are, who gives a shit about their 'beliefs'.

The traditional idea of the class struggle may not be the thing we need to focus on hear, but sollidarity between all, and through that dissolvement of all. Sure, some hard core cappitalists may not want to change, but many would actualy join the revolution if it where presented in the right way.

A violent revolution will never win in these countries, because there is not enough poverty, and most people actualy have decent living conditions.

Communism isn't solely about living conditions, far from that actually. It's about equality and worker's empoverishment. It's about control and power over our lives, and it's about implementing a more efficient form of society and production. Improved conditions will follow as a natural result. Why would people in a long run accept a 'decent' prison when they could have the direct control over their lives?

If they were even allowed to, that is. The age of Social Democracy is over in Europe, and the workers will become radicalised as a result. The 'rights' the reformist left once acquired are being systematically stripped from the working class and the results can already been seen -- more evident in the some countries, less in some -- but they are there. Look at the events in France lately for an example. This process is slower in countries with a few pieces of social security remaning, like Sweden, but far from non-existant, I guarantee you.

But a slower democratic process could work to keep the revolution going in these places.

Impossible, because like I have already explained, the capitalist class is firmly in power and won't allow it.

There are problems resulting from a far more globalised form of capitalism, that is causing people from other, poorer countries and the environment to suffer. But it is still not in the same a single class in those countries being exploited.

Yes, it is. These countries have a native upper class collaborating with international capitalism and guarding it's interests. While the working and peasant classes are exploited.

You really should get off the reformist racket asap, mate.