I joined the Communist Party

Originally posted by nosacrificenofreedom
There is a form of communism called stateless communism, which has also been reffered to as a Resource based economy!

That would be Anarcho-Commmunism.

It really isn't a version of Communism, the goal is the same for all communists.

Anarcho-Communists are the revolutionary communists, who wanted direct action as apposed to the political path of Marxism.

In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their needs and desires.

Free association (communism and anarchism)

Anarchism, the no-government system of socialism, has a double origin. It is an outgrowth of the two great movements of thought in the economic and the political fields which characterise the nineteenth century, and especially its second part. In common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear; and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And in common with the most advanced representatives of political radicalism, they maintain that the ideal of the political organisation of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to a minimum, and the individual recovers his full liberty of initiative and action for satisfying, by means of free groups and federations—freely constituted—all the infinitely varied needs of the human being...

Anarchist Communism: Its Basis and Principles by Peter Kropotkin 1887

I am convinced the OP is a troll. He hasn't said anything of substance.

He keeps repeating himself and none of his replies are longer than 2 sentences. Instead of clarifying himself, he just prolongs the discussion instead of putting it to a rest.

He is also very condescending in his replies, while trying to maintain that he wants to understand. I don't even believe he just joined communist party, he has always been a communist and just wants to raise hairs.

He took us for a long ride. So this is where I exit.

Originally posted by INDOMITABLE
.

He keeps repeating himself and none of his replies are longer than 2 sentences.

He is also very condescend

to his defense---- people keep making the same semantic mistakes over and over.

he believes communism is something other than the communism some people keep talking about here.

Originally posted by krossfyter

Originally posted by INDOMITABLE
.

He keeps repeating himself and none of his replies are longer than 2 sentences.

He is also very condescend

to his defense---- people keep making the same semantic mistakes over and over.

he believes communism is something other than the communism some people keep talking about here.

Uh.

I feel like a salesman is dangling a juicy morsel of meat in front of my face, all the while telling me how juicy it is instead of letting me eat it.

Nearly 40 pages later he still hasn't clarified his position. Everyone is trying to understand, yet he keeps saying "no that's not communism".

What is communism?
How does it work?
What does a perfect communist society look like?

Put the baby to rest once and for all. If its not THAT communism and its something different what is it.

Originally posted by INDOMITABLE
Nearly 40 pages later he still hasn't clarified his position. Everyone is trying to understand, yet he keeps saying "no that's not communism".

What is communism?
How does it work?
What does a perfect communist society look like?

Put the baby to rest once and for all. If its not THAT communism and its something different what is it.

Actually the OP is asking other people who have joined the party what their experience was like because his was very negative, in regards to family, friends and his girlfriend.

Everyone that chimes in with claims of what communism is, based on the popular concept are met with a request for proof. He never offered to explain what it was.

Originally posted by brukernavn

I agree with you entirely. Things need to be reworked. The people cannot own the means of production through the state. The state is always bad, no matter what. I believe that the people should own the means of production themselves, not through the state.

But then you start running afoul of the precepts against "private ownership". It become only a matter of scale - one private owner or 400 private owners. When that ownership is filtered through the state, the scale increases to include everyone (theoretically, via "democracy"), and ceases to be "private". That's why I believe that if communism is to ever be functionally implemented anywhere in the incarnation people here seem to believe in, then it will have to be radically decentralized. Only be redefining or eliminating provisions against "private ownership", and restructuring to provide maximum local autonomy while simultaneously minimizing or eliminating central authority will it ever be practical.

If you eliminate central authority altogether, however, then each and every local enclave will have to deal with each and every local enclave in the world on it's own, in it's own terms. That could get very cumbersome in short order - setting up trade agreements with a rice production enclave in China, for example, multiplied by the thousands of things the local enclave wants, but cannot produce itself. that is how merchant classes get set up to begin with, and indeed how they came about in history - they devoted their time to trade between communities, so that the workers could devote THEIR time to production rather than endless negotiation and intercommunal trading.

So then, some sort of structure is desirable, and probably necessary, in order to keep the workers free to work. There are ways to limit that power and authority, however - everyone would just have to jealously guard those safeguards against unfair seizure of power by circumventing them.

Unfair seizure of power by circumventing the safeguards, and the centralization of that seized power, is what has gotten the US into the mess it is currently in. How it applies to communist revolutions in Russia and China, for example, I can't say.

reply to post by nenothtu


The beauty of it is that you have a choice. If you want to be the private owner of a business, you can. Only thing is, your only employee will be you. If you know a skill, such as plumbing, you can be a private contractor and contract yourself out for jobs. If you eventually desire to expand the business, you can take on partners. Although, then you would not be the sole owner. So, under communism, one truly can solely own their own business. And, you will be paid based on what you, personally, produce. Thank you for being civil, and I do not mean that sarcastically.

Originally posted by brukernavn
reply to post by nenothtu

 

The beauty of it is that you have a choice. If you want to be the private owner of a business, you can. Only thing is, your only employee will be you. If you know a skill, such as plumbing, you can be a private contractor and contract yourself out for jobs. If you eventually desire to expand the business, you can take on partners. Although, then you would not be the sole owner. So, under communism, one truly can solely own their own business. And, you will be paid based on what you, personally, produce. Thank you for being civil, and I do not mean that sarcastically.

I see.
So there will be no corporations? Each person would be considered a company.
Who would run the hospitals and the large organizations? If a hospital now has 500 employees, would they then be considered as 500 partners?
Would there be a military? What about politicians, who runs the country?
Something like this would be hard to scale, because it would be difficult to get people to cooperate. I also think there are flaws.
Would a secretary be a partner also?
How can you determine each person's contribution? Will everyone be paid equally?

Thank you for answering my questions.

Can someone confirm that this "10 Measures of Communism" is actually from the original text ?

If it is, how does the "proletariat" achieve all this without a ruling elite class ?

And just Who decides who gets to be the "ruling class" ?

Is this from the "Communist Manifesto" ?

The 10 Measures of Communism


Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.

edit on Jun-16-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)