Can anyone succinctly explain communism? Everything I’ve read in the past said that the state owns the means of production and in practice (in real life) that seems to be the reality. However I encountered a random idiot on the Internet that claimed in communism, there is no state and it is a stateless society. I immediately rejected this idea because it was counter to what I knew about communism irl. In searching using these keywords, I came across the ideas that in communism, it does strive to be a stateless society. So which one is it? If it’s supposed to be a stateless society, why are all real-life forms of communism authoritarian in nature?
Couple considerations: what is a nation to do when it constantly is on the verge of civil war, hasnt had breathing room to get its feet under it after a political revolution and is beset by brand new, world power level enemies doing everything they can to make sure your new nation fails?
Followup: when has this not been the case for a new communist nation? How many coups has the US backed? How many times did we try to assassinate Castro? Vietnam?
Finally: what does it look like when none of the above is true?
We tend to think of nations in a vacuum, but they exist along side each other and they have people like us inside them. Stupid, greedy, lying, shitbags that are full of empathy, love and curiousity, just like us. That makes them messy by definition, but its easy to forget.
It looks like a European welfare state, because instead of upending the system and ending up in an authoritarian nightmare, people are compromising with each other.
Popular prosperity is a function of power being reliant on the approval of the masses, and thus will not be achieved in any meaningful way under an authoritarian regime.
Im not disagreeing here. That is one way to interpret “how communism with no capitalist boot on your neck?” Note though, those states dont self identify as communist or really even socialist in most cases, which leads to muddy waters, and does no favors for socialism as a political system… As an economic system its arguable, but not relevant.
I am far from making an argument for auth; it is however important to point out the context in which the most famous example of authy socialism are taken from. I feel that being aware of the strategy of the propagandabeing consumed is important.
The self-identification of governments is possibly the least reliable way to identify which are closest to being socialist/communist.
Lol “them damn commie Scandinavians!” Nah
Just saying that there are a lot of governments who like to pretend. If it’s called Peoples Socialist Democratic Republic of Utopian Communist Happiness, odds are that you should run for the hills.
Point taken, and I dont disagree. What I’m saying is though, there ARE governments that clearly state what they are. You shouldn’t discount self description in full because of the DPRK or whatever. Of those governments that do accurately self describe, I dont think any of them explicitly call thselves socialist or communist.
No answers in this reply, only questions.
No answers in this reply, just stating that the sky is blue except when its not.