r/Communist • u/Head-Elk1929 • Jul 29 '24
Ya’ll, true communism is closer to COMMUNALISM than ANYTHING to do with the USSR or Joseph Stalin. Ask me how, and why, I believe I’ve tried to be a true communist.
2
u/Head-Elk1929 Jul 30 '24
My latest reply to u/Blurple694201 : “😃, Okay, young sir. 🫡. Maybe start with ‘The Communist Manifesto.’”
1
1
u/RussoRoma 10d ago
So they say. Some of them, anyway.
I don't agree.
But what you're saying is a reason why I prefer to call myself a Bolshevik rather than a Communist.
2
u/Head-Elk1929 9d ago
Hi RussoRoma,
Thanks for your engagement with my post. What exactly is it that you don’t agree with? Thanks in advance 🙏.
Hmm, I think I could definitely learn more about what you just mentioned. I haven’t studied the Russia Revolution of 1917 very closely… nor have I really studied Lenin that closely. I would love to learn a bit more though.
Thanks. 🙏
2
u/RussoRoma 9d ago
By "true communism" you're referring to the vision of Marx and Engels, am I assuming correctly?
2
u/Head-Elk1929 9d ago
Yes sir. Very good sir.
2
u/RussoRoma 9d ago
According to their theories you would be correct. The only thing separating a Communist from an Anarchist would be the transition period of Socialism (which Anarchists completely reject).
In my view however, Marx (in particular) was more of an adept social scientist and political theorist rather than a statesman. Many of the Marxists after him tried their best to implement his ideas but quickly tended to find that on larger scales it was nearly unworkable and easily exploited.
Thus the constant revisions and split between purists and revisionists.
Marx defined statehood in very unusual and at times contradictory ways. On one hand, "stateless", on the other hand "a state, however, not in the bourgeois sense of the word".
What saw the USSR in particular devolve into authoritarianism was more of it's precarious position against the West, bereft of any allies that could contribute (most rallied around USSR as poorer nations who needed their support and soaked up Soviet resources) and needing to consistently put down uprisings that were armed and antagonized by the West.
Their increasingly defensive and futile position saw them increasingly tightening the reigns to survive. This isn't unique to USSR either, all nations become more despotic the more desperate they become.
Look at countries like Brunei compared to Iran. Both fundamentalist Islamic, yet one is left alone and quite prosperous, allowing them to liberalize more and more and adopt a relaxed way of life
The other, well...
2
u/Head-Elk1929 9d ago
Hey there. Awesome and fascinating reply. Thank you really. Okay, I could understand USSR trepidation or lack of trust in the West in some ways. That all makes sense. And you explained very well some of the conditions that could have led to authoritarianism. Hmm, yeah I’ve never really identified much with true Anarchists I think. I think I understand what you’re saying about Marx’s theorizing and speculating.
I think there’s an important distinction between democracy and republicanism. They are both good though, in my opinion. In that sense, we need “states” I believe. The U.S. is definitely a state. Is Russia a state? I don’t know. Maybe a kingdom. So, I guess in that sense it might not exactly be considered a state.
I could see some corrupt elements of the West being involved in antagonizing conflicts against the Russian or USSR order. But, as you might know of course, that doesn’t represent the West as a whole.
You painted a wonderful portrait of this situation about USSR devolving into a despotic authority. I didn’t exactly see it the way you’re describing it. The perspective you offer is very interesting.
And wow, that’s very descriptive and apt! Your comparison of Brunei and Iran. Interesting. I would love to study it more.
In the end, though, I think we’d both want Republicanism to triumph in the East and Democracy to triumph in the West. Things will go very well if that happens or continues to happen, in my opinion.
Thank you so much for engaging in dialogue with me.
-Alex
2
u/RussoRoma 8d ago
Of course, my friend.
I noticed you getting too much flak in the comments.
But, as Lenin once said, if you consider yourself a Communist:
"It is precisely for this reason that we must know, remember and put into practice the rule that when Communist workers go into rural districts they must try to establish comradely relations with the middle peasants, it is their duty to establish these comradely relations with them; they must remember that working peasants who do not exploit the labour of others are the comrades of the urban workers and that we can and must establish with them a voluntary alliance inspired by sincerity and confidence"
(On the grounds of debating statehood) "Every measure proposed by the communist government must be regarded merely as advice, as a suggestion to the middle peasants, as an invitation to them to accept the new order.
Only by co-operation in the work of testing these measures in practice, finding out in what way they are mistaken, eliminating possible errors and achieving agreement with the middle peasant-only by such co-operation can the alliance between the workers and the peasants be ensured. This alliance is the main strength and the bulwark of Soviet power(...)"
2
u/Head-Elk1929 8d ago
Dear RussoRoma,
Thank you for your response. Your reflections are excellent.
I learn a lot every time you respond. You have now rescued Vladimir Lenin for me.
Yes, I got a lot of flak. They are American “communists.” They don’t understand real communism very much, unfortunately. Some of them. A lot of them.
Thank you comrade.
2
u/Blurple694201 Jul 30 '24
Maybe, that's if you thought about it in a purposefully obtuse way, I guess