I Have A Question About The Dialectic of History According to Marxists

[red_elk]

That's good! The Soviets would have more room to cut with their 16% of GNP spent on defense versus the decadent capitalist world and their 6%.

Just FYI, the Soviets did not consider USSR as a "communist state", or communist society.

 

[amadeus]

Just FYI, the Soviets did not consider USSR as a "communist state", or communist society.

I'm well aware of that; the CPSU considered the socialist state to be a precursor to communism and the "withering away of the state," as coined by Engels.

 

[Angst]

That's good! The Soviets would have more room to cut with their 16% of GNP spent on defense versus the decadent capitalist world and their 6%.

look ok but the argument was against states existing at all. something that i don't personally aim towards (since even if it's possible, it's far away), and i know the smiley implies your post is more about friendly mischief, but dude, come on

sovjets also completely collapsed before the issue of climate became pressing. for all the massive coal investments the chinese are doing atm, they are far outpacing the west in green investment to the degree of dwarfing a bunch of what many people see as green countries. china is a crap state, and i don't think we should emulate their government, so it's not a solution, but understanding the purpose of a long time presence, ie partly ditching wall street logic, is worth bringing up here. i've long lost belief that us "lobbyism" can be overturned at this point, but in the rest of the western world, there's still possibility for some crackdowns on dirty industries that are long overdue

if there was lead in my water pipes, i don't care one bit about the water distributing entrepreneur's right to earn money. the entrepreneur can't functionally run a business then and there should be a mandate for the government to stop it.

but there are no water pipes of lead in the west angst, it's not necessary anymore! yea and we have no necessity for dirty power either for one. green technologies are currently fully implementable

 

[Angst]

I'm well aware of that; the CPSU considered the socialist state to be a precursor to communism and the "withering away of the state," as coined by Engels.

also (and i'm sorry to note it here since it's one of the most shrill defenses of "communism hasn't been tried yet"), they were doing a state capitalist model in their economy, as specifically declared and outlined by lenin

 

[red_elk]

also (and i'm sorry to note it here since it's one of the most shrill defenses of "communism hasn't been tried yet"), they were doing a state capitalist model in their economy, as specifically declared and outlined by lenin

I wrote that the Soviets did not consider USSR a communist state to fix possible misunderstanding.
Because we were discussing communist society and amadeus immediately brought up USSR.
The misconception that communist society was something implemented in USSR and Eastern Block countries is very common.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The Shakers come pretty close to an egalitarian communal society.

The United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing, more commonly known as the Shakers, are a millenarian nontrinitarian restorationist Christian sect founded circa 1747 in England and then organized in the United States in the 1780s. They were initially known as "Shaking Quakers" because of their ecstatic behavior during worship services. Espousing egalitarian ideals, women took on spiritual leadership roles alongside men, including founding leaders such as Jane Wardley, Mother Ann Lee, and Mother Lucy Wright. The Shakers emigrated from England and settled in Revolutionary colonial America, with an initial settlement at Watervliet, New York (present-day Colonie), in 1774. They practice a celibate and communal utopian lifestyle, pacifism, uniform charismatic worship, and their model of equality of the sexes, which they institutionalized in their society in the 1780s. They are also known for their simple living, architecture, technological innovation, music, and furniture.

During the mid-19th century, an Era of Manifestations resulted in a period of dances, gift drawings, and gift songs inspired by spiritual revelations. At its peak in the mid-19th century, there were 2,000-4,000 Shaker believers living in 18 major communities and numerous smaller, often short-lived, communities. External and internal societal changes in the mid- and late-19th century resulted in the thinning of the Shaker community as members left or died with few converts to the faith to replace them. By 1920, there were only 12 Shaker communities remaining in the United States. As of 2019, there is only one active Shaker village: Sabbathday Lake Shaker Village, in Maine.[1] Consequently, many of the other Shaker settlements are now museums.

 

[Zardnaar]

The Shakers come pretty close to an egalitarian communal society.

I did say earlier communism or something similar can work on a smaller scale can work where everyone involved believes/voluntary.

 

[Ajidica]

@Lexicus sorry, I got it a bit turned around in my head when I was reading it. My bad.

 

[Ajidica]

also (and i'm sorry to note it here since it's one of the most shrill defenses of "communism hasn't been tried yet"), they were doing a state capitalist model in their economy, as specifically declared and outlined by lenin

Did they? Lenin was quite apt in finding names to give proper Marxist credentials to whatever program was necessary due to wartime demands, but I'm not aware of the Soviet leadership presenting themselves as 'state capitalist' as opposed to socialist (as they understood it).

 

[Angst]

Did they? Lenin was quite apt in finding names to give proper Marxist credentials to whatever program was necessary due to wartime demands, but I'm not aware of the Soviet leadership presenting themselves as 'state capitalist' as opposed to socialist (as they understood it).

Lenin argued this in his writings after the revolution was won. I think his terminology was abandoned later for propaganda purposes but it was basically the same economic model until the partly liberal reforms, even under Stalin.

 

[stinkubus]

I did say earlier communism or something similar can work on a smaller scale can work where everyone involved believes/voluntary.

How does capitalism perpetuate itself when not everyone believes in it and participation in society is never voluntary?

 

[El_Machinae]

By scaring us with communism's failures!

 

[Zardnaar]

How does capitalism perpetuate itself when not everyone believes in it and participation in society is never voluntary?

It has enough buy in to make it work. Capitalism is the worst except for everything else we've tried.

Maybe capitalism will go the way of the dodo it's not perfect by any means.

 

[AmazonQueen]

It has enough buy in to make it work. Capitalism is the worst except for everything else we've tried.

Maybe capitalism will go the way of the dodo it's not perfect by any means.

But you argued Communism can only work when everyone believes and its voluntary.
Obviously not everyone believes in capitalism and its not voluntary but for all its faults it works, or at least doesn't cease to function.

 

[Zardnaar]

But you argued Communism can only work when everyone believes and its voluntary.
Obviously not everyone believes in capitalism and its not voluntary but for all its faults it works, or at least doesn't cease to function.

Enough people believe in it to keep it going.

Even in US now you have more opportunity that say the USSR where you more or less had to join the party to get ahead.

Communism doesn't work capitalism has been going 400 years roughly in it's modern form. It might collapse one day but it's more stable than Communism.

Capitalism can also adapt Communism not so much die to Marx/Engel.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Enough people believe in it to keep it going.

Even in US now you have more opportunity that say the USSR where you more or less had to join the party to get ahead.

Communism doesn't work capitalism has been going 400 years roughly in it's modern form. It might collapse one day but it's more stable than Communism.

Capitalism can also adapt Communism not so much die to Marx/Engel.

Capitalism has been going for maybe 400 years but lets face it until the last 100 years or so its taken no notice of most peoples opinion and in the last 100 years it has had to make some pretty big compromises in the most developed capitalist countries to survive.

 

[Zardnaar]

Capitalism has been going for maybe 400 years but lets face it until the last 100 years or so its taken no notice of most peoples opinion and in the last 100 years it has had to make some pretty big compromises in the most developed capitalist countries to survive.

Yep it's adapted that's what I'm talking about.

If communism adapts it's no longer communism.

Capitalism will have to adapt again or there's gonna be some big problems.

 

[El_Machinae]

Yeah, there are no true capitalist economies. The best we have is to look at what types of economies have voluntary buy-in, where the behavior is going to be a function of actual events.
A truly successful economic system would be able to compound itself as well as have voluntary buy-in. The winner will be obvious in retrospect.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Yep it's adapted that's what I'm talking about.

If communism adapts it's no longer communism.

Capitalism will have to adapt again or there's gonna be some big problems.

I see, capitalism adapts but its still capitalism
Communism adapts so it isn't communism anymore
why not admit everything has to adapt to survive
Mid-20th century capitalisim was barely recogniseable from 19th century capitalism largely due to communism but according to you they are the same thing
both have little in common with the venture capitalism of the late 20th/early 21st century

 

[Zardnaar]

I see, capitalism adapts but its still capitalism
Communism adapts so it isn't communism anymore
why not admit everything has to adapt to survive
Mid-20th century capitalisim was barely recogniseable from 19th century capitalism largely due to communism but according to you they are the same thing
both have little in common with the venture capitalism of the late 20th/early 21st century

Capitalism doesn't have one set of books laying down the rules. There's more leeway there.

Communism is heavily associated with Marx and Engels with no real way to implement it in the real world.