• We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days (this includes any time you see the message "account suspended"). For more updates please see here.

Is Communism dead?

It could be changed if people were less apathetic about their rulers actions. I propose assassination of any ruler suspected of corruption simply out of moral principle.

The revolution doesn't need leaders, it doesn't need martyrs, it needs individuals who care about the cause. It needs organization, but organization can be attained without overwhelming central authority. Cells with communication with each other and the ability to resolve conflicts. But the individuals within cells should not exceed a manageable number so that they can accurately check and balance each other, and so that those within cells have a say in the partaking of a particular mission. Anything else I fear, would not be revolutionary. We do not destroy the hierarchy to impose another one! Vive le revolution!
 
I am the Future said:
PEOPLE ARE GREEDY untill that is changed comunism is dead

Such baseless, rhetoric-filled comments are why I choose to stay away from any debates that are just 'about communism.' Believe me, I have had my fair share in the past, mainly because people think they will be cheeky and try to get a rise out of me by making some broad attack on communism without much of an understanding of how it really works - their arguments are based not on careful study of the communist system or theory from actual communists, but rather what anti-communists tell them are the flaws of the system. I am quite frankly tired of explaining over and over what communism really means and the differences between the various factions in order to debate on common ground with my peers. However, if someone would like to debate one particular aspect of communist ideology or, perhaps, one particular epoch or instance in communist history, then please do so and I will be more than willing to join in to provide my input. Until then, I reccomend that one gets to know the intricacies of the system, even if you despise it, before attempting to make vague and general arguments such as "Is Communism dead?"
 
A Marxist Revolution was my life goal, up until a few days ago. It can't work, people are to obsessed with themselves, they'll never be able to pull off an organized resistance, because people are too individualized, they lose focus too easily.

Like I said before, I wish it were possible, but I don't think the people want it. They say they want it but do nothing to achieve it, they want someone else to do it for them, and that's where the corrupt central authority rises from. I am a Marxist and I just want to take this opportunity to tell you other Marxists out there to give it up. It will never happen. I say we just fade away into the annals of history as a failed ideology, and watch society collapse in on itself from the weight of its own greed.
 
The vague and general argument "Is communism dead" is followed by a question mark. This makes it a vague and general question.

And in the standard dictatorship of the proletariat nonsense the greed and cupidity of those leading the dictatorship is why the revolution is for naught. I've studied my theory so knives to you.

If you mean a dictatorship of the proletariat that such as the system proposed following the paris commune, then that is different, but that is not the general meaning of the proletariat dictatorship, as the proletariat would have to build a government from the ground up and install infrastructure to fit it's form in the most insane places. Most communists even the leftists want a brief period of the dictatorship of the proletariat. As an anarchist I'd fight the revolution and then the dictatorship, regardless of it's intentions. Systems of government so rarely give power they take ultimately back, that to do otherwise would be the downfall of the social revolution.
 
I disagree. I believe it is in human nature to find a leader, and in the absence of a leader someone will fill the void.
 
Left said:
I disagree. I believe it is in human nature to find a leader, and in the absence of a leader someone will fill the void.

You're right, that is precisely why Marxism is dead. Marx called for the people to take control of their own destiny, to not rely on a central authority to rule over us. In my interpretation, he wanted us to take an active role in our lives, he wanted us to govern ourselves, but people seem incapable of this and are always looking for someone to hold their hand.
 
Left said:
I disagree. I believe it is in human nature to find a leader, and in the absence of a leader someone will fill the void.

Humanity fills the void. Companions fill the void. Community Fills the void.
 
Left said:
Cute one-liner. Care to explain what your talking about?
How many more social welfare programs do we have today than we had in 1990, 1980, 1970, or 1960?

"Federal grants are like rabbits. They multiply like crazy and when they are out, you can't catch them." - Ronald Reagan
 
North King said:
rmsharpe thinks Dems are commies, from what I gather. :rolleyes:
It's unfortunately close to the truth. Democrats have become the party of collectivism and Soviet-style bureaucracy.
 
Insane_Panda said:
Communism is dead, not only dictatorship but as an ideaology. Human nature defeated communism - the dictatorship of Soviet Russia proves this.

There are still millions upon millions of Communists around the globe. It is not dead, it is simply underground, watching, waiting, for the perfect time to strike.
 
rmsharpe said:
It's unfortunately close to the truth. Democrats have become the party of collectivism and Soviet-style bureaucracy.

There is virtually no difference between Dem and Republicans. The line that separates you two is fake and blurred.
 
Pasi Nurminen said:
There are still millions upon millions of Communists around the globe. It is not dead, it is simply underground, watching, waiting, for the perfect time to strike.

most intelligent people grow out of Communism by 14.
 
Communisto said:
Humanity fills the void. Companions fill the void. Community Fills the void.

Left is correct Comumunisto

It may last for one maybe two generations but eventualy anarchy will fall like comunisum. Capitalism or Monarchy willbe established and thing will come back to where they were. But Hey You can dream, cant you?
 
I am the Future said:
Left is correct Comumunisto

It may last for one maybe two generations but eventualy anarchy will fall like comunisum. Capitalism or Monarchy willbe established and thing will come back to where they were. But Hey You can dream, cant you?

Capitalism doesn't work. Anarchy does work, on a large scale too. I can prove it with facts. Maybe I should make an Anarchy Education thread?
 
Communisto said:
most intelligent people grow out of Communism by 14.

Millions around the world, many of them in arms, disagree.
 
Pasi Nurminen said:
Millions around the world, many of them in arms, disagree.

Communism defeats itself by allowing money to exist, even if it is distributed equally. Money is the source of greed and Capitalism, thus Communism cancels itself out. What those people really want is freedom, only Anarchy can deliver that.
 
Communisto said:
Humanity fills the void. Companions fill the void. Community Fills the void.

I can't really think of a society historically that was leaderless. Even the most communal of villages had some sort of elder or mayor.

One could argue about the communes during the Spanish Civil War, but I think thats special circumstances.
 
Left said:
I can't really think of a society historically that was leaderless. Even the most communal of villages had some sort of elder or mayor.

One could argue about the communes during the Spanish Civil War, but I think thats special circumstances.

I don't, those and Barcelona proved it could work on a grand scale. Many African tribes are completely leaderless as well as the thousands of Communes that are currently working around the world.
 
Back
Top Bottom