Tweet
It wouldn't contribute to an easy understanding, comrade Haus. 
-
Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... -
In my opinion, thats the way the word is generally used in pragmatic political discussions. If you believe in the Leninist approach, you are a Communist. If you dont, youre not a Communist. All the discussions about how "communism" is the end state desired by Marxists, whereas "socialism" is an intermediate step on the path, are about as useful to non-Marxists, or even to those people who accept parts of Marx's social analysis without getting all theological about it, as, say, a discussion of the relationship being Christ's two natures is to the ritual committee at my Synagogue.Originally posted by Cort Haus
I believe that LotM is describing Leninism.
As an example, I point to the fact that in Marx's own time, the international organization of socialists was the "socialist international" while it was the USSR that organized the Communist International. AFAIK there isnt a single 20th century political party that called itself Communist that didnt consider Lenins works "canonical"."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
[QUOTE] Originally posted by chegitz guevara
heterosexism, and all other forms of oppression are abolished, humanity ceases to be alienated from itself and from nature and
Thats only in Communism 3.0. I doubt its in any of the cannonical works. The part about heterosexism, I mean.
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.
No sir. At least not if you mean to imply that this is Marxism in general. IIUC Marx in his own time allowed for the possibility of success within existing democratic states - dictatorship of the proletariat meant merely the social state when the proletariat ruled (including by bourgeois legal means) but had not abolished property relations. It was a term describing a social state, NOT a statement about political forms. You sir, are giving, AFAICT, a basically Leninist interpretation of Marx, one that, again AFAIK, has not been universally held among Marxists since it was proclaimed. If you mean to say this is what differentiates Communist Marxism, from other views of Marxism, as well as from other views of socialism, that would be more correct.
As for your historical drama, you might consider that the actual numerical position of the working class, as well as its own internal divisions, had a substantial impact on the need of socialists to compromise. This is not to deny that in a few instances (generally not in the most advanced countries though, but rather in barely post-feudal latin america) where Marxist socialists with radical agendas were close to achieving power, they were denied by force. But its equally true, that where they achieved power by force, rather than by bourgois legal means, the net result was NOT working class rule, but dictatorship by a new class vanguard.Last edited by lord of the mark; December 7, 2007, 17:24."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
" 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."
Thats the way good violence should work, youre so strong that no one will defy you. In Petrograd the Petrograd military garrison supported the bolsheviks, and the opponents had no effective military force, so there was little immediate bloodshed. A bloodless coup, like lots of coups. Not some Gandhiesque victory through people power."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
How much blood is shed is not so important as the support of the people.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
which in the polity that Bebro was asking in reference to, goes more for the SPD than for the PDS-Der Linke, and more for the PDS Der Linke than for the kind of thinking Guev is espousing. As is pretty much always the case in the developed world. As Walt Whitman Rostow said, Communism is a disease of the transition (to a modern mass consumption economy)Originally posted by Kidicious
How much blood is shed is not so important as the support of the people."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Originally posted by lord of the mark
which in the polity that Bebro was asking in reference to, goes more for the SPD than for the PDS-Der Linke, and more for the PDS Der Linke than for the kind of thinking Guev is espousing. As is pretty much always the case in the developed world. As Walt Whitman Rostow said, Communism is a disease of the transition (to a modern mass consumption economy)
What does what I said have to do with some vision of a futuristic capitalist utopia?
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
something about support of the people. I dunno, were you talking about the Bundesrepublik today, Russia in 1917, or Venezuala tomorrow?Originally posted by Kidicious
What does what I said have to do with some vision of a futuristic capitalist utopia?
"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Unfortunately with Communist approaches so far, the lack of attention to trees has resulted in quite a few collisions...Originally posted by Kidicious
Try looking at the forest instead of the trees.<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.Comment
-
Which by the way, most internet discussions are not. Of course the word "Communist" has been loosed from its real world moorings since 1991. Its become as loose as fascism. To folks who like it, "Im a communist" means "I am socially idealistic in some fashion, and not like all the greedheads at my high school waiting for the next PS3 pricecut, and, Im against the guys who beat up on gays, and Im an atheist" To the folks on the right "Hillary's a communist" means "Hillary supports something my dad says will make his taxes go up, shes some kind of lesbian, and I dont like her" (of course folks on the right have been playing loosey goosey with left wing terminology for a long time)Originally posted by lord of the mark
In my opinion, thats the way the word is generally used in pragmatic political discussions.
Kind of the way fascist has come to mean "Something on the right, that I dont like"
None of which has anything to do with mature political discussion."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Ok, I was responding to your post which refered to teh bolsheviks. I'm just unclear what you meant with the Rostov quote. I don't get the connection. Honestly I haven't read any of his work, but I'm familiar with his theory.Originally posted by lord of the mark
something about support of the people. I dunno, were you talking about the Bundesrepublik today, Russia in 1917, or Venezuala tomorrow?I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
You know you're posting on Poly, right? Reasonable expectations and all that...Originally posted by lord of the mark
None of which has anything to do with mature political discussion.
<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.Comment
-
One chapter of his work on stages of growth discusses communism. His theory is that the communist revolutions generally occur only at the transition to sustained growth, not later (he also gives a theory of fascism) My link was to use that to support a return to topic in this thread, which was about political terminology in the first world, and has gotten somewhat offtrack to discussing Chavez. Now I think the situations of Venezuala and Russia 1917 are rather different. From what I can gather the Bolsheviks never came close to a majority of the people - the people were mainly peasants, the Left SRs outdrew the Bolsheviks among the peasants, and the the working class wasnt all pro-Bolshevik either. The victory of the Bolsheviks was heavily dependent on other factors than the support of the peopleOriginally posted by Kidicious
Ok, I was responding to your post which refered to teh bolsheviks. I'm just unclear what you meant with the Rostov quote. I don't get the connection. Honestly I haven't read any of his work, but I'm familiar with his theory.
Chavez, however probably does have the support of the majority of Venezualans, in part because his populism has broader appeal than Marxism, in part because it ties in with racial issues, in part because of the oil based economy (though I would still insist that support is maintained by govt domination of the broadcast media, and that the opposition to Chavez, even if its a minority, is a large minority, not a tiny elite of authoritarians). Ergo many of the folks who voted against him on the referendum, still broadly support his goals and aims. Though Im not sure that current economic difficulties (despite the high price of oil) arent eating into his support."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
'Originally posted by snoopy369
You know you're posting on Poly, right? Reasonable expectations and all that...
WTF is reasonable expectations?"A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
I disagree. The opposite is true. Lack of attention to the forest has resulted in failure.Originally posted by snoopy369
Unfortunately with Communist approaches so far, the lack of attention to trees has resulted in quite a few collisions...I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
Comment