Afaik this happened with every single instance of a communist country. Communism seems like a pretty good idea on the surface, but then why does it always become autocratic?

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 days ago

    Theoretically, one could spontaneously be created from scratch starting with a small group of people on a new world who have never experienced a centralized form of government. Formal governing is not required if the society is small enough and there are no outside forces at work to create a threat. But once governing is required, there will generally be forces at work that will centralize it. The only exception might be in a society with very limited need for cooperation due to plentiful resources available to all, such as a utopia like Star Trek’s Earth.

    In all other, realistic scenarios, there will need to be a revolution. That will always be led by a person or group of people to organize the overthrow and coordinate the changes. This group will inevitably be in search of power themselves, corrupted by the power they are given, or infiltrated by those in search of such power and are unlikely to give up that power.

    • chaogomu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 days ago

      That village that talks out their problems and thus needs no government is A, a fiction, and B, a form of extreme democracy. Every decision is discussed and agreed upon by the group. That’s extreme democracy.

      And if you push for more democracy, you can get it. But you have to resist the revolutionaries and the fascists. All while prepping to be a revolutionary if required.

      Work within the system as much as possible, because when it’s gone, when that fragile peace is broken, nothing good can come out. As you said, the revolution is inevitably betrayed.

      Now if we could actually teach people what a Tariff is. Fuckers voting for Trump wanting to bring prices down, when that’s exactly the opposite of what happens with a Tariff. And Democrats abandoning their base to chase a mythical center that just does not exist…

      I understand the push for revolution. I just know that in order for things to get better, the transition to communism needs to happen slowly and democratically.

      • irotsoma@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        18 days ago

        Which is why I was emphasizing that theoretically it is possible, but that it’s not realistic. The realistic scenario is revolution which would require centralized leadership which then never actually gives up the power and money they were put there to redistribute and decentralize. Thus it’s never been done. The only way for communism to exist without the need for a group of people to give up power would be in that theoretical world where no elite-run government ever existed to need to take the power and wealth away from and that only historically has existed in very small communities prior to them having regular contact with hostile outsiders. Currently only a few “untouched” tribal societies exist in that way.

        • chaogomu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          17 days ago

          Of course, we’re ignoring the European Social democracies, many of which are well on their way to true communism.

          It’s a slow process, but they’re doing the work to get there. But they don’t count? for reasons?

          Seriously. The blueprint of how to get to communism from democracy is right there in the European Social Democracies.

          Universal healthcare and efforts to make food and housing basic rights. That’s like 90% of what you need.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Social Democracies cannot get to Communism without revolution and replacement with Socialism. This is because the dominant system in Social Democracy, especially the nordic countries, is Capitalism and Imperialism. They fund their safety nets from massive exploitation of the Global South with brutal IMF loans, exporting Capital for outsourcing production, and more, they are parasitic.

            Further, European Social Democracies are seeing sliding worker protections and social safety nets. Because the Capitalists are in control, they wear down the safety nets via austerity politics to further their profits. This is due to the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall, Capitalists are forced to expand internationally and seek further and further exploitation due to competition forcing rates of profit down, so they counteract by expanding to raise absolute profits. Austerity measures are one example of Capitalists lowering their expenditures.

            Next, Socialism is democratic. Whether it be the Soviet Model (for more in-depth accounting of it, Soviet Democracy by American Pat Sloan who participated in and observed it directly in the 1930s), or otherwise, Socialism has always been democratic. The Dictatorship of the Proletariat is the dictatorship by the proletarian class as a whole against the bourgeois clasd as a whole, as a direct contrast to liberal democratic dictatorships of the bourgeoisie found in the world over, including European Social Democracy.

            Social Safety Nets alone are not Worker supremacy over Capital, hence why the US saw the erosion of social safety nets from FDR to complete obliteration, and why we are seeing the same trend in European countries. This is unavoidable as long as Capital is the dominant factor in the economy and humans are not, due to the Tendency for the Rate of Profit to Fall. In 1900, Rosa Luxemburg already proved why this is the case in Reform or Revolution. Reformism has never worked, because it cannot work. Even when a Communist does get in via existing democratic systems, such as Salvadore Allende in Chile, they get couped by the national bourgeoisie with the aid of Imperialist countries like the United States or EU.

            Finally, there is no “true communism.” Every country will have a different path to Communism, but certain factors will remain the same, such as the necessity of revolution. The idea of a pure, untainted “true communism” that has never been actually tried is a western-chauvanistic attitude that necessitates that workers in AES countries are simply “too dumb” to understand what communism is or how to build it, despite their real, practical work. The only Communism is the kind that exists in the real world, not in the figments of imagination alone.

            You would do well to watch Dr. Michael Parenti’s 1986 lecture and read his seminal historical book Blackshirts and Reds.