Communism: Is it Pro-Individual or Anti-Individual?

[The_Professional]

So I was browsing one of this forums and saw this guy who remarked how great Communism is. He was saying how Communism is pro-individual and Russia was a left wing poser. Can somebody enlighten me on why Communism is good or bad? what are your thoughts on this?

Personally, I've always thought of it as Anti Individual and Anti Freedom.

 

[russ_watters]

Marx's theory really is a perfect society - unfortunately, it requires perfection from everyone who participates in it, otherwise it fails.

 

[Adam]

Think of the word itself. Communism. Communal. Community.

Although common use these days has distorted it completely, the idea behind communism is that the state assets are owned and controlled by the people. That's all. This does not exclude democracy, a private economy, or any such things. You can have a communist state (the people own and control the state assets) which is a democratic republic (they vote for representatives) and has a private economy.

The USSR was not communist. China is not communist. The ridiculous idea that the USSR was communist was nothing more than bollocks propaganda.

Communism does not require that everyone be perfect. The only thing it requires is that the people have control of the state assets. That's all communism is.

PS: Do not mistake "communism" for "Marx's theories of social development".

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Adam
PS: Do not mistake "communism" for "Marx's theories of social development".

I hope this doesn't degrade into another lame argument over definitions, but when most people talk about "communism," they are referring to Marx's "Communist Manifesto."

 

[selfAdjoint]

My take on the Stages of marxism.

Early Marx, the Manifesto. The most "bourgeoise" of Marx's thoughts. Dismissed by true marxists.

Late Marx, with Engels. Das Kapital. The bible of marxism.

Lenin. Marxist theory of imperialism. Communism in one state.

Stalin. Tyranny in the name of Marx. Lenin's mummy in the Kremlin.

Mao et al. Marxism as anti colonialism. Folk marxism (The Little Red Book).

Lacan, Zizek, et al. Marxism combined with psychology. Criticism of modern life without much revolutionary energy.

 

[Zero]

Communism in practice fails for the same reason that pure capitalism fails...both systems ignore human nature.

 

[Adam]

Communism is about public control of state assets. It does not in any way restrict people from having their own possessions and wealth.

If, however, you're talking about a state in which everyone is supposedly economically equal and all, then yeah, it doesn't work.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Adam
Communism is about public control of state assets. It does not in any way restrict people from having their own possessions and wealth.

If, however, you're talking about a state in which everyone is supposedly economically equal and all, then yeah, it doesn't work.

Andy...that's what everyone is talking about.

 

[Adam]

Hmph. Confused for the other chimp again!

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by Adam
Hmph. Confused for the other chimp again!

LOL... sorry about that ADAM!

 

[The_Professional]

Is freedom of speech encouraged in a communist society.

Thanks for the reply guys, I'm glad this didn't turn into an all out flame war.

 

[selfAdjoint]

No, freedom of speech is regarded by died-in-the-wool Marxists as so much bourgeoise hokum. "The press is free if you happen to own a press". They hold that democracy and all the things we treasure about it are a sham put up by the corporations so that they can own and run everything.

 

[Loren Booda]

Is there a stage in the evolution of governments most likely occupied by communism? Wasn't communism thought to be ultimate government by communists, but what have recent events revealed otherwise?

 

[fffbone]

Communism has always been thought of as the ultimate form of government (by the communists), in which equality and freedom are direct, all oppressions are dissolved. USSR and China PR were not communists, they were socialists, there is a major difference between these two.

And yes, you are allowed to say whatever you want in a communist state (assuming there ever will be one).

 

[The_Professional]

Out of curiosity, would it be safe to say that Russia was a Stalinist Socialist? and what form of Socialism is China now considering they've adapted some capitalist policies?

 

[selfAdjoint]

Russia just after the bolsheviks took over was on the point of becoming a socialist (not communist) state. Technically communism was to be the end of the socialist program not its beginning. But Lenin found he couldn't really make a fully socialist nation work - at least not in Russia. So he recreated the secret police and started on a series of non socialist programs to ty to win against the armies that were trying to defeat the revolution (the US, along with UK and other countries all had armies in Russia for this purpose). He did beat the armies but by then any dream of pure socialism was long gone. When Lenin died, Stalin created a classic oriental tryranny, with a lot of red flags and a mummy of Lenin to prove it was communist. What Stalin's government was was party-centric state capitalism. And it repeated every injustice that Marx had ever shown to be associated with the primary acquisition of capital. And genocide too, of course.

 

[fffbone]

The Chinese made a lot of changes in the last decades, their socialism is a mixture of Marxism, Leninism, and the teachings of several other Chinese Socialist leaders. However, I would say that they've adapted a quasi-capitalist economic policy (most credit goes to western economic influence), note that this is very different from the quasi-capitalist economic policies Lenin adapted. The people there also have a lot more democratic rights than they had during the 40s-60s.