new capitalism vs communism thread

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor, what Stalin created was a dictatorship of the Communist Party. That is common in ALL communist countries, and I submit, inevitable when a revolution takes place and the Communist Party takes over.

We agree on that, and it is the very reason why I oppose a revolutionary rise to power.

Marx, in describing his utopia, could not have intended true democracy where the workers actually get to vote on their leaders. Besides, why would any Communist Party cede power once they have it and can live like kings?

I don't know how Marx envisioned the political system of the Proletariat under socialism. The marxist tradition is to advocate direct democracy, with elected people being accountable all the time, but I don't know if ti comes from Marx himself.
But democracy becomes a moot point when the conditions for communism are reached, and the State (hence institutions that go along, democratic or not) becomes useless.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I didn't see it with my own eyes, but my mother did, before leaving the stalinist Romania in 1960. She even had a friend from the Nomenklatura. Even today, one of her most vivid childhood memories is the mindboggling amount of butter this nomenklaturist friend put on her bread, whereas butter was a rare commdity for the common folk.

And I'm not even mentioning datchas (summer houses), and the fact that almost any non-essential consumer good was destined to the nomenklatura alone.

Damn, your denial of stalinist horrors and treason is truly beyond me

Im sorry. But Romania is not the USSR.
I could say that the United States was a horrible country
by pointing to Batistas's Cuba then.

But Spiffor, have you ever seen a real documnet describing so and so many Soviet Citizens killed? Have you seen photage of emasculated people?

Don't you agree that the Nazi horrors are far better documented than the Russian one.
You can't see how it was in the interest of the West during the Cold War to portray the USSR in a bad light?

[JohnT]

... I thought the purpose of this thread was to NOT bring up historical developments.

[Tripledoc]

Sorry.

You are right.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, Spiffor, et al., you and many other Communists have repeatedly stated that Stalin's USSR was not true communism. From a casual comparison between the Communist Manifesto and the structure of the USSR, one sees many parallels, if not congruency. Could you tell me, and the rest of Apolyton, why Stalin's USSR was not true communism?

First off, the CM was a propaganda piece, a tract for explaining the theories of communism, and why it was superior to other brands of socialism then in existence. Nowhere in Marx's writings does he ever lay out a blueprint for a future society (which is to say exact plans). He wrote that making such predictions would be pointless, because history cannot be predicted. In one work, The Critique of the Gotha Programme he makes a few comments about some of things that define a communist society, such as: taking care of those unable to care for themselves, the whithering away of the state, etc.

Based on what Marx wrote a communist society would broadly look like, it's easy to see that the USSR desn't meet the test. It wasn't democratic. The state didn't whither away. It claimed to be building sociaism-in-ine-country, in contradistinction to Marx's claim that communism could only be a world system. Class society still existed, and so on.

One of the best ways to look at the USSR is to imagine it as a country run by the Teamsters, complete with mafia thugs at the helm. Despite the fact that the mob ran the Teamsters largely for its own benefit, it didn't change the fact that they were a working class organization whose primary goal was the the protection of its members. This didn't stop the mob from cuting sweatheart deals with company bosses which screwed the members over, even trying to break its own strikes There was a limit, however, to how far those deals could go. Without the rank and file, the bureaucrats couldn't live high on the hog, so they had to defend their members interests up to a certain point. Teamsters were at one and the same time, oppressed and protected by the union. The USSR under Stalin was the Teamsters under Hoffa Sr.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by JohnT
... I thought the purpose of this thread was to NOT bring up historical developments.

That was Azazel and Skywalker's thing.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Don't you agree that the Nazi horrors are far better documented than the Russian one.

The USSR has had more time to cover its own crimes up . . . though, in the 13 years since the fall of the USSR, there's been more than enough time to start uncovering the necessary mass graves. So far, all I know is the one of the massacre of Polish officers. One should think that the US media would be trumpeting the discoveries of Soviet mass graves. This should be especially easy in a country that regularly pulls ten-thousand year old mamoths out of the ground.

On the other hand, there is still Krushev's secret speech dealing with Stalin's crimes that needs to be considered. If even the USSR admitted it committed terrible acts, then we need to take that seriously.

[Ned]

Well, let us say that the USSR was the communism described in the Manifesto.

Also, the continued dictatorship of the Communist Party was necessary to make this "communist manifesto" society work because look what happened when the Communist Party finally allowed people to vote. The people elected Yeltsin and others like him who soon made the Communist Party illegal and who also ended the communist system.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Well, let us say that the USSR was the communism described in the Manifesto.

Communism wasn't described in the Manifesto. As long as we are saying that the USSR was the society that was described in the CM let us also say that black is white, up is down, and God is the devil. Please take your Satanic rantings elsewhere devil-worshipper.

Also, the continued dictatorship of the Communist Party was necessary to make this "communist manifesto" society work because look what happened when the Communist Party finally allowed people to vote. The people elected Yeltsin and others like him who soon made the Communist Party illegal and who also ended the communist system.

After Stalin and after decades of bad management, after Yeltin's coup, after the people of Russia were so demoralized and dispirited that voting didn't matter, and the former Communist Party is still the biggest party in Russia.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Ned
Well, let us say that the USSR was the communism described in the Manifesto.

Communism wasn't described in the Manifesto. As long as we are saying that the USSR was the society that was described in the CM let us also say that black is white, up is down, and God is the devil. Please take your Satanic rantings elsewhere devil-worshipper.

Che, the Communist Manifesto does not describe communism?

Well, at least Spiffor will agree that what it does describe, whatever the words, is what the USSR was except to the extent that the workers as a whole had no right to vote in the USSR or for that matter in any Communist Country.

What you seem to not recognize, Che, is that no one likes the totalitarian state that is described in the Manifesto and will not vote to keep it if and when they are given the opportunity to vote.

The Communist Party in China might be the sole exception to the general rule of being tossed out on their ear if the workers have a right to vote because the Communists are doing a good job on the whole. But, the reason they are popular is because they are moving away from the radical economics of the Manifesto.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

This just in Christianity was not described in the New Testament.

[The Andy-Man]

After Stalin and after decades of bad management, after Yeltin's coup, after the people of Russia were so demoralized and dispirited that voting didn't matter, and the former Communist Party is still the biggest party in Russia.

full of old people to conservative to change. And it nevers does anygood at elections either.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, the Communist Manifesto does not describe communism?

Why don't you read it sometime and find out. It's free online @ www.marxists.org.

Well, at least Spiffor will agree that what it does describe, whatever the words, is what the USSR was. . .

I doubt he will since what the CM describs is 1) capitalism 2) the communist movement 3) other socialist movements. It describes no future society. At best it gives ten demands that the Communists make as a start.

What you seem to not recognize, Che, is that no one likes the totalitarian state that is described in the Manifesto

Again, no state is described in the Manefesto. Try reading it sometime.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Well, at least Spiffor will agree that what it does describe

Actually, I was more speaking of Marx' vision of a future society in general, not strictly limiting myself to the manifesto.

[Ned]

Che, I quoted it abve, in an earlier post, to make my point that the USSR was the state described in the Manifesto.

You can contend all you want that that is not communism.

However, that is clearly what the Manifesto advocates.