Current state of the International Proletarian Revolution

[terekon]

“The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off.”

Gloria Steinem

[Vythica]

Originally Posted by Syd_Vicious

The only real solution I can interpret from your answer since you would not work from the scenario questions to work with what you have been given, is that everyone must be first reduced to base level 0 standard of living. level 0 only representing true equality.

I did work within the parameters you set, but the flaw was in the original state of things, not in how the scenario played out.

Originally Posted by makarios68

How exactly would you solve all the problems of humanity?

Originally posted by Friedrich Engels
1) Restriction of private property through progressive taxes, large inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance by remoter relatives (brothers, nephew, etc), forced loans and the like.

2) Gradual expropriation of landed proprietors, factory owners, railway owners and shipowners, partly by the competition of state-operated industry and partly by assignat compensation.

3) Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels against the majority rule of the people (the Capitalists, not political dissenters)

4) Organization of work or employment of the proletarians on national estates, in factories and workshops, whereby competition of workers among themselves is eliminated and the factory owners, so long as they still exist, are compelled to pay them wages as high as those paid by the state.

5) Equal labour duty for all members of society until private property is entirely done away with. Formation of industrial armies, particularly for agriculture.

6) Centralization of the credit system and finance in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and suppression of all private banks and bankers.

7) Increase in the number of nationalized factories, workshops, railways and ships; cultivation of all land and improvement of land already under cultivation in proportion to the capital and the workers at the disposal of the nation.

8) Maintenance of all children from the moment they can dispense with maternal care in national institutions at the cost of the state. Combination of education and factory work. (Like a co-op placement for high school students)

9) Construction of large palaces on the national estates as common dwellings for communities of citizens, who should pursue industry as well as agriculture and enjoy the advantages of urban as well as rural life without the onesidedness and disadvantages of either.

10) Destruction of all unhealthy and badly built dwellings and town-quarters.

11) Equal rights of inheritance for children born in and out of wedlock.

12) Concentration of all means of transport in the hands of the state.

I don't know if I could put it any better than Engels...

[Syd_Vicious]

Originally Posted by Vythica

I did work within the parameters you set, but the flaw was in the original state of things, not in how the scenario played out.
I don't know if I could put it any better than Engels...

The original state of things as in the scenario is much closer to what you want rather than that you would be working with now. That is why I was pushing more for critical thinking and expression of thoughts rather than quoting other people's ideology without bridging it between modern and classical environments.

Also on Engels points:

1. Sounds like this would be pricing people out of the homes they worked for

2. Confiscation of the private property sounds like a large big brother concept that only empowers the politically motivated

3. Again those who are politically motivated can cast anyone as a dissenter, just look at the 2nd red scare and the spread of McCarthyism

4. This sounds a lot like the concept of minimum wage

I am just going to skip the additional points made, as from my perspective they are either wishful thinking or are too vague and not well defined (exception of 10 and 11 that I agree with). Like the point I keep coming back to what is equal?

[Vythica]

Originally Posted by Syd_Vicious

The original state of things as in the scenario is much closer to what you want rather than that you would be working with now. That is why I was pushing more for critical thinking and expression of thoughts rather than quoting other people's ideology without bridging it between modern and classical environments.

Also on Engels points:

1. Sounds like this would be pricing people out of the homes they worked for

2. Confiscation of the private property sounds like a large big brother concept that only empowers the politically motivated

3. Again those who are politically motivated can cast anyone as a dissenter, just look at the 2nd red scare and the spread of McCarthyism

4. This sounds a lot like the concept of minimum wage

I am just going to skip the additional points made, as from my perspective they are either wishful thinking or are too vague and not well defined (exception of 10 and 11 that I agree with). Like the point I keep coming back to what is equal?

Here's the single largest problem I see with people posting in this thread and when individuals discuss Communism en général:

They're trying to fit Socialist ideas into a Capitalist framework. That's not Communism. I don't think people grasp the concept fully of dismantling the entire state.
We're not talking about "voting" and whatnot, we're talking about forcefully overthrowing and suppressing the current ruling class.
Like, this isn't just some protest where the government simply acquiesces or a strike where the employer finally meets the union's demands.
This would be like a strike where the employer's assets are seized, the means of production seized, by the workers, and the employer is put to work along side everyone else.

Now that that's out of the way. Here, specifically is what I'm talking about.

No revolution can be won without armed struggle. Winning the support of the military is vital. The average soldier is a proletarian. He just needs to be shown that and made to realize that the worker's struggle is his struggle.
Once the military is on side, the armed vanguard of the proletariat and the military would seize key govt buildings, and take over their function.

All banks would be seized by the local workers. Trading would be stopped on the stock market.

All railways, toll-roads, and interstate highways would be seized. All air travel suspended and the airports seized by the workers.

The questions posed by you assume that these kinds of things can be negotiated. They can not. The answer to all of your questions of how to this or that is the same. Force. There will be bloodshed, and how to deal with the exploiters will be dependent on the situation, thoughtfulness, and morals of the revolutionary generation, so I can't speculate as to how they would be suppressed. I will say that violence is not an inherent quality of force, however.

After the dust settled, it would be dependent on the people to elect councils to forge a new state. The means of doing that is up to the revolutionary generation. Each society is different, each revolution will be different, and therefore will produce different outcomes. Which is why it's wholly impossible for me to say I would do this or that in regards to more specific policy. That's why Communism is vague and only outlines a set of principles and goals.

It's up to the revolutionary generation to figure out how to apply those principles to achieve their goals.

[Henri_Freundlich]

Originally Posted by terekon

“The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off.”

Gloria Steinem

Indeed. The absolute truth here, is:

1. Unforeseen circumstances which leads to the individual getting 'disconnected' from Society

2. Religious groups, Modern non-religious Cults and radical groups (Suicide bombers etc) recruiting the vulnerable - especially the group of people from Point No.1

3. Making new recruits do missionary work for them. Whether it be phone calls, door-to-door work, leaflets or Internet adverts.

These leaflets etc always contains sugar-coated words and phrases. Words/phrases that the uneducated (people without all the facts; not related to formal education) would fall in love with, especially if they've lost all hope.

4. They participate in seminars and meetings which re-hashes the points mentioned in the leaflet over and over. Gradually brainwashing them into believing all the rubbish they throw.

5a. Traditional religious groups usually stops there, collecting *voluntary* donations at the end.

5b. Cults and Radicals go much further. They plan to exploit and/or destroy the entire world - for revenge.

Their primary (and hidden) agenda is to punish fellow human beings for neglecting them and disconnecting them from society. Methods range from pyramid schemes/scams to Suicide Bombers and public assassinations.

Originally Posted by Vythica

The answer to all of your questions of how to this or that is the same. Force. There will be bloodshed, and how to deal with the exploiters will be dependent on the situation, thoughtfulness, and morals of the revolutionary generation, so I can't speculate as to how they would be suppressed. I will say that violence is not an inherent quality of force, however.

Translation: Putting guns to people's heads and forcing them to do things, out of fear. Physical blackmail, essentially.


Corporate brainwashing or physical blackmail... All the same. Why even preach violence and brainwashing if you yourself have run away from it, in the first place? You can't guarantee that arrows and bullets won't destroy the lives of pure innocents in the first place.

A contradiction; a conflict between one personal policy and another.

Not to mention brushing off legit concerns raised by people, replacing them with 'faith' and 'optimism'.


---------------------------------------------
"We've had to endure much, you and I, but soon there will be order again, a new age. Aquinas spoke of the mythical City on the Hill. Soon that city will be a reality, and we will be crowned it's kings.

Or better than kings. Gods."

-- Bob Page's *radical* opening speech, Deus Ex
----------------------------------------------

All this reminds me of one point, that CS Lewis made ~50 years earlier: Radical "revolutions" are all based on fascist tendencies.

For the power of Man to make himself what he pleases means, as we have seen, the power of some men to make other men what they please. In all ages, no doubt, nurture and instruction have, in some sense, attempted to exercise this power. But the situation to which we must look forward will be novel in two respects. In the first place, the power will be enormously increased. Hitherto the plans of educationalists have achieved very little of what they attempted and indeed, when we read them — how Plato would have every infant ‘a bastard nursed in a bureau’, and Elyot would have the boy see no men before the age of seven and, after that, no women, and how Locke wants children to have leaky shoes and no turn for poetry — we may well thank the beneficent obstinacy of real mothers, real nurses, and (above all) real children for preserving the human race in such sanity as it still possesses. (CS Lewis)

[Henri_Freundlich]

Shihad/Pacifier's 'Comfort me' fits the theme here, really well

[Vythica]

Originally Posted by Henri_Freundlich

Corporate brainwashing or physical blackmail... All the same. Why even preach violence and brainwashing if you yourself have run away from it, in the first place?

I see your point. I disagree however. This is not relevant. Firstly, I left to avoid oppressing and killing and torturing innocents. The Capitalists are not innocents. Secondly, it won't be the proletariat who starts the violence, it's usually the people trying to hold on to power that start the shooting. And finally, as I said, force, does not necessarily mean violence.

[Henri_Freundlich]

Still, you haven't answered all the other questions. Just like all the people who said 245-T is a safe spray to use - until they actually saw the fallout with their own eyes.

Also, I seriously doubt Communism would let hard-working Labour politicians like Norman Kirk, to thrive. From assistant painter to hard-working Prime Minister.

Hard-working, rising to the top, incredibly clever and outspoken.

[Vythica]

I disagree, the Norman Kirks would thrive; politically speaking of course.

[Henri_Freundlich]

That's exactly what a salesman would say - like those TV infomercials.

Critical questions still unanswered... Bye bye thread! Discussion progress can't be made until all (if not most) posed questions are answered. A reminder of hindered progress in communist countries, like China and Vietnam. Suppression of free thinking - the ability to make independent decisions.

Edit: Also, not all countries violate people's rights with illegal street invasions and searches.