Are you seriously conflating communism with authoritarianism?
It’s like you guys went through the red scare and instead of figuring it was a stupid insane witch hunt without any real foundation, decided that the republican definition of “communism = evil” was actually true, but you wanted in anyway. It’s ridiculous.
I remain at the same place, yet to understand how one can be a communist and not authoritarian. And I feel like you’re failing to interrogate whether your concept of authoritarianism is being used with any amount of consistency or if it’s just a club you wield against people who have positions you disagree with for other reasons.
When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organized power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.
More fun quotes:
We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.
OK, so maybe you don’t know what “authoritarian” means? Because,
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.
Is not it.
Edit: A period of time where the proletariat organizes power to eliminate the bourgeoisie in order to get rid of those previous class divides, is not authoritarianism.
Edit: A period of time where the proletariat organizes power to eliminate the bourgeoisie in order to get rid of those previous class divides, is not authoritarianism.
It is though, you are being authoritarian toward the bourgeois in that case.
Edit: A period of time where the proletariat organizes power to eliminate the bourgeoisie in order to get rid of those previous class divides, is not authoritarianism.
Ok, so how can this be done in such a way that it is not? Were the Soviets, Cubans, Vietnamese, Chinese, Koreans, Venezuelans, Laotians, Grenadians, Nicaraguans, Tanzanians, Angolans, Zimbabweans, and Burkinabes just not quite smart enough to figure it out?
I know perfectly well what Marx is talking about. Socialist states, as they exist in real life, are that dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie. Until all production and distribution is collectivized globally, there will not be the grand stage of communism, and instead we are in the radical transformation between capitalism and communism called socialism.
But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement. This equal right is an unequal right for unequal labor. It recognizes no class differences, because everyone is only a worker like everyone else; but it tacitly recognizes unequal individual endowment, and thus productive capacity, as a natural privilege. It is, therefore, a right of inequality, in its content, like every right. Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance, in the present case, are regarded only as workers and nothing more is seen in them, everything else being ignored. Further, one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal.
But these defects are inevitable in the first phase of communist society as it is when it has just emerged after prolonged birth pangs from capitalist society. Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development conditioned thereby.
In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!
The transition between capitalism and communism is long, messy, queer, gradual, protracted, bumpy, and involves working out many contradictions.
It’s such an irony to me that people who call us “tankies” and say that we are somehow caricatures of communists, always make such caricatures out of themselves. Like, instead of engaging with any of FunkyStuff’s very reasonable, calmly stated questions, you go off about how we (“tankies”) just decided to be evil, and calling us ridiculous while behaving in such a ridiculous, blatantly and needlessly antagonistic way yourself. It’s over the top.
Paraphrasing:
FunkyStuff: asks a calm, concise series of questions that are meant to help clarify the issue.
Lunarais: “See?! Look how frothing these evil, ridiculous lunatic tankies are!!”
And this after correctly recognizing that the red scare was a terrible witch hunt? But it was people like us, people who believe what we believe, that were the “witches” of that particular persecution. We are simply what most communists in the world look like, we believe what most communists in the world believe, people who have very clear and consistent views. But instead of honestly trying to engage or actually understand why “tankies” believe the things they do, you just smear us with lies and pretend that the position of Marxist-Leninist communists is just some bananas, made-up-on-the-fly, contrarian position, rather than one with deep foundations that have been developed over decades of intense thought and practice including by people fighting in the trenches for their own and others liberation. To you, were the Black Panthers “tankies”? Do you know about their mutual support of and with North Korea, or did they just decide to be “evil” to pwn the libs? Was Che Guevara a “tankie”? Is Michael Parenti? Were they all just ridiculous contrarians who liked the picture that reactionaries (“republicans”) painted of them?
It’s such an irony to me that people who call us “tankies” and say that we are somehow caricatures of communists, always make such caricatures out of themselves. Like, instead of engaging with any of FunkyStuff’s very reasonable, calmly stated questions, you go off about how we (“tankies”) just decided to be evil, and calling us ridiculous while behaving in such a ridiculous, blatantly and needlessly antagonistic way yourself. It’s over the top.
Paraphrasing:
FunkyStuff: asks a calm, concise series of questions that are meant to help clarify the issue.
Lunarais: “See?! Look how frothing these evil, ridiculous lunatic tankies are!!”
And this after correctly recognizing that the red scare was a terrible witch hunt? But it was people like us, people who believe what we believe, that were the “witches” of that particular persecution. We are simply what most communists in the world look like, we believe what most communists in the world believe, people who have very clear and consistent views. But instead of honestly trying to engage or actually understand why “tankies” believe the things they do, you just smear us with lies and pretend that the position of Marxist-Leninist communists is just some bananas, made-up-on-the-fly, contrarian position, rather than one with deep foundations that have been developed over decades of intense thought and practice including by people fighting in the trenches for their own and others liberation. To you, were the Black Panthers “tankies”? Do you know about their mutual support of and with North Korea, or did they just decide to be “evil” to pwn the libs? Was Che Guevara a “tankie”? Is Michael Parenti? Were they all just ridiculous contrarians who liked the picture that reactionaries (“republicans”) painted of them?
Are you seriously conflating communism with authoritarianism?
It’s like you guys went through the red scare and instead of figuring it was a stupid insane witch hunt without any real foundation, decided that the republican definition of “communism = evil” was actually true, but you wanted in anyway. It’s ridiculous.
I remain at the same place, yet to understand how one can be a communist and not authoritarian. And I feel like you’re failing to interrogate whether your concept of authoritarianism is being used with any amount of consistency or if it’s just a club you wield against people who have positions you disagree with for other reasons.
I think you maybe need to read a book then. Try starting with “The Communist Manifesto”
Will do!
More fun quotes:
OK, so maybe you don’t know what “authoritarian” means? Because,
Is not it.
Edit: A period of time where the proletariat organizes power to eliminate the bourgeoisie in order to get rid of those previous class divides, is not authoritarianism.
It is though, you are being authoritarian toward the bourgeois in that case.
Ok, so how can this be done in such a way that it is not? Were the Soviets, Cubans, Vietnamese, Chinese, Koreans, Venezuelans, Laotians, Grenadians, Nicaraguans, Tanzanians, Angolans, Zimbabweans, and Burkinabes just not quite smart enough to figure it out?
I know perfectly well what Marx is talking about. Socialist states, as they exist in real life, are that dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie. Until all production and distribution is collectivized globally, there will not be the grand stage of communism, and instead we are in the radical transformation between capitalism and communism called socialism.
Critique of the Gotha Programme is also quite helpful:
The transition between capitalism and communism is long, messy, queer, gradual, protracted, bumpy, and involves working out many contradictions.
It’s such an irony to me that people who call us “tankies” and say that we are somehow caricatures of communists, always make such caricatures out of themselves. Like, instead of engaging with any of FunkyStuff’s very reasonable, calmly stated questions, you go off about how we (“tankies”) just decided to be evil, and calling us ridiculous while behaving in such a ridiculous, blatantly and needlessly antagonistic way yourself. It’s over the top.
Paraphrasing:
FunkyStuff: asks a calm, concise series of questions that are meant to help clarify the issue.
Lunarais: “See?! Look how frothing these evil, ridiculous lunatic tankies are!!”
And this after correctly recognizing that the red scare was a terrible witch hunt? But it was people like us, people who believe what we believe, that were the “witches” of that particular persecution. We are simply what most communists in the world look like, we believe what most communists in the world believe, people who have very clear and consistent views. But instead of honestly trying to engage or actually understand why “tankies” believe the things they do, you just smear us with lies and pretend that the position of Marxist-Leninist communists is just some bananas, made-up-on-the-fly, contrarian position, rather than one with deep foundations that have been developed over decades of intense thought and practice including by people fighting in the trenches for their own and others liberation. To you, were the Black Panthers “tankies”? Do you know about their mutual support of and with North Korea, or did they just decide to be “evil” to pwn the libs? Was Che Guevara a “tankie”? Is Michael Parenti? Were they all just ridiculous contrarians who liked the picture that reactionaries (“republicans”) painted of them?
It’s such an irony to me that people who call us “tankies” and say that we are somehow caricatures of communists, always make such caricatures out of themselves. Like, instead of engaging with any of FunkyStuff’s very reasonable, calmly stated questions, you go off about how we (“tankies”) just decided to be evil, and calling us ridiculous while behaving in such a ridiculous, blatantly and needlessly antagonistic way yourself. It’s over the top.
Paraphrasing: FunkyStuff: asks a calm, concise series of questions that are meant to help clarify the issue. Lunarais: “See?! Look how frothing these evil, ridiculous lunatic tankies are!!”
And this after correctly recognizing that the red scare was a terrible witch hunt? But it was people like us, people who believe what we believe, that were the “witches” of that particular persecution. We are simply what most communists in the world look like, we believe what most communists in the world believe, people who have very clear and consistent views. But instead of honestly trying to engage or actually understand why “tankies” believe the things they do, you just smear us with lies and pretend that the position of Marxist-Leninist communists is just some bananas, made-up-on-the-fly, contrarian position, rather than one with deep foundations that have been developed over decades of intense thought and practice including by people fighting in the trenches for their own and others liberation. To you, were the Black Panthers “tankies”? Do you know about their mutual support of and with North Korea, or did they just decide to be “evil” to pwn the libs? Was Che Guevara a “tankie”? Is Michael Parenti? Were they all just ridiculous contrarians who liked the picture that reactionaries (“republicans”) painted of them?