Define communism.

[Serb]

Seriously speaking, my definition of communism is:

Communism is the inevitable future.

[onodera]

GJ Serb. I just hope we won't **** up the next time when we try to build a Communist state.

[Ramo]

[Kidlicious]

A system of government in which everyone is treated equally.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
A political vision, first developed by V. Lenin, which envisioned the achievement of a socialist society specifically by means of a revolution led by a vanguard party organized on the principles of "democractic centralism".

It is NOT a reference to Marxism, despite the title of the Communist Manifesto. That is Marxian Socialism, or just plain Marxism. The usage of Communism to mean the ideology of hte Comm Man and other docs by Karl Marx, was already anachronistic in Marxs own lifetime.

A fortiori, it does not refer to non-Marxist forms of socialism.

Yes, that's why the Russians created the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

[chequita guevara]

Maybe later.

[Cort Haus]

I believe that LotM is describing Leninism.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
I believe that LotM is describing Leninism.

Communism and socialism are concepts (or the same concept actually) more than political movements. Leninism and Marxism are political movements. Leninism is a branch of Marxism.

Che in 3.... 2.... 1.....

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Kidicious
A system of government in which everyone is treated equally.

So nothing to do with economy, ownership or production then. Pffft. Never mind, we've had this argument before, I can't be bothered to go through it again.

[Cort Haus]

A political vision, first developed by V. Lenin, which envisioned the achievement of a socialist society specifically by means of a revolution led by a vanguard party organized on the principles of "democractic centralism".

This was what I mean't by a description of Leninism - the use of the vanguard and the model of 'democratic centralism' were specifically Lenin's ideas.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
So nothing to do with economy, ownership or production then. Pffft. Never mind, we've had this argument before, I can't be bothered to go through it again.

Try looking at the forest instead of the trees.

[Cort Haus]

Try looking at the stars instead of the ground.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Communism and socialism are concepts (or the same concept actually) more than political movements. Leninism and Marxism are political movements. Leninism is a branch of Marxism.

Che in 3.... 2.... 1.....

[chequita guevara]

Communism is many things.

The easiest description to get out of the way is that communism is the first and last stages of human society, in which all property is communal, all contribute to society, and there is no state. Before humans created civilization, they lived in primitive communist societies of hunter-gatherers. Everything was shared, everyone contributed what they could.

Next, communism is a movement to bring about a commonly owned and run, stateless society, where everyone contributes what they can and gets what they need, production is at a very high level so that scarcity is abolished, racism, heterosexism, and all other forms of oppression are abolished, humanity ceases to be alienated from itself and from nature and religion whithers away. Most important, communism means free beer!

What differentiates Marxist communism from general socialism (communism being a subset of socialism) is that we believe that the working class must smash the organs of repression of the bourgeois state and create their own democratic state which represents their interests and prevents the return of the bourgeoisie. This is known as the dictatorship of the proletariat.

History tells us that socialism cannot be voted into power, as genuine socialists will be prevented from holding power by the machinations of the ruling state. From the Paris Commune on, every single attempt by the working class to take power peacefully has been met by violence and repression. Even in Venezuela, where only the personal relationship of Hugo Chavez with the military stopped a coup and has held the military in check, and then not even completely, as there have been several coup attempts, one almost succeeding (where the one day "president" immediately set about suspending the supreme court, the national assembly, the constitution, etc. -- but the Western media would have you believe that they represent democracy). Social democracy has only been allowed to hold office after it has assured the bourgeoisie that it intends to protect their property and privileges.

Communists thus see a necessity for a revolution. The revolution need not be violent. Anyone with fantasies of armed men and women storming the White House needs to have their head checked. Rather, the working people need to assert their power, go around the state, and organize alternative modes of power which render the bourgeois state unneeded and to do so in such a way that they are irresistible, that a counter-revolution would be futile. In fact, generally, workers' revolutions are noted for their lack of bloodshed. Its only when small groups think they can substitute themselves for the working class that violence and bloodshed are inevitable. When the Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, no one died when the Bolsheviks took Petrograd.

More later.

[Cort Haus]

Disappointed not to see the phrase "dialectical struggle" in there, Che.