How can you talk about Communism, if this system never existed? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Workers of the world, unite! Then argue about Trotsky and Stalin for all eternity...
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14928093
This issue keeps coming up, and the underlying problem seems to be that people confuse and conflate communist theory with communist society. It is said that "communism has existed" in reference to communist theory and parties that act on that theory, but it is also said that "communism has never existed" in reference to an actual communist society.
#14928096
It's kind of related to something I touched upon in another thread. I think life is largely about learning that you go for A but instead you get B, then you have to start recognizing this, taking it into account and planning for what B is. But some kinds of people never seem to grasp this. So it's sort of like, True Communism is A and then (take your pick of country) Venezuela is B but they refuse to accept this and keep demanding A until it turns into some form of ultra-conservatism.

Edit: Apparently OP thought he was supporting communism with this thread, which to me just further proves my point.
#14928378
Senter wrote:This issue keeps coming up, and the underlying problem seems to be that people confuse and conflate communist theory with communist society. It is said that "communism has existed" in reference to communist theory and parties that act on that theory, but it is also said that "communism has never existed" in reference to an actual communist society.

The sad truth is that there is no serious theory, just a bunch of lies to sucker the weak minded. The purpose of "communist theory" is to enable tyranny and atrocities, there isn't anything else to it.
#14935552
SolarCross wrote:The sad truth is that there is no serious theory, just a bunch of lies to sucker the weak minded. The purpose of "communist theory" is to enable tyranny and atrocities, there isn't anything else to it.

There is a fairly general theory. It cannot be detailed since no effective strategy has been found yet. The remainder of your post is mere anti-Marxist crap entirely lacking in evidence and even persuasive argument.
#14935555
Hong Wu wrote:It's kind of related to something I touched upon in another thread. I think life is largely about learning that you go for A but instead you get B, then you have to start recognizing this, taking it into account and planning for what B is. But some kinds of people never seem to grasp this. So it's sort of like, True Communism is A and then (take your pick of country) Venezuela is B but they refuse to accept this and keep demanding A until it turns into some form of ultra-conservatism.

Edit: Apparently OP thought he was supporting communism with this thread, which to me just further proves my point.

Oh come on. Think about the airplane. The Wright brothers decided to go for "A" (flight) but instead got "B" (failure), but they refused to accept "B". They kept working for "A" until they got it.

That is what life is about. The evidence is abundant. It was even the story of the development of capitalism.
#14935560
My impression is that Marx actually doesn’t speak in too great a detail about what communism would look like except to the extent he deduces it as a logical neccessity of how capitalism would be transformed into something qualitatively different. He is known for his study of capital/ism more so than utopian socialist dreamings of what the future will be, providing contours of what is required based on tn analysis of the essential relations of capitalism.
#14962884
labor credits framework for 'communist supply & demand'

Spoiler: show
Image



communist supply & demand -- Model of Material Factors

Spoiler: show
Image


https://www.revleft.space/vb/threads/20 ... ost2889338


A post-capitalist political economy using labor credits

To clarify and simplify, the labor credits system is like a cash-only economy that only works for *services* (labor), while the world of material implements, resources, and products is open-access and non-abstractable. (No financial valuations.) Given the world's current capacity for an abundance of productivity for the most essential items, there should be no doubt about producing a ready surplus of anything that's important, to satisfy every single person's basic humane needs.

[I]t would only be fair that those who put in the actual (liberated) labor to produce anything should also be able to get 'first dibs' of anything they produce.

In practice [...] everything would be pre-planned, so the workers would just factor in their own personal requirements as part of the project or production run. (Nothing would be done on a speculative or open-ended basis, the way it's done now, so all recipients and orders would be pre-determined -- it would make for minimal waste.)

We can do better than the market system, obviously, since it is zombie-like and continuously, automatically, calls for endless profit-making -- even past the point of primitive accumulation, through to overproduction and world wars, not to mention its intrinsic exploitation and oppression.

Labor vouchers imply a political economy that *consciously* determines valuations, but there's nothing to guarantee that such oversight -- regardless of its composition -- would properly take material realities into account. Such a system would be open to the systemic problems of groupthink and elitism.

What's called-for is a system that can match liberated-labor organizing ability, over mass-collectivized assets and resources, to the mass demand from below for collective production. If *liberated-labor* is too empowered it would probably lead to materialistic factionalism -- like a bad syndicalism -- and back into separatist claims of private property.

If *mass demand* is too empowered it would probably lead back to a clever system of exploitation, wherein labor would cease to retain control over the implements of mass production.

And, if the *administration* of it all is too specialized and detached we would have the phenomenon of Stalinism, or bureaucratic elitism and party favoritism.

I'll contend that I have developed a model that addresses all of these concerns in an even-handed way, and uses a system of *circulating* labor credits that are *not* exchangeable for material items of any kind. In accordance with communism being synonymous with 'free-access', all material implements, resources, and products would be freely available and *not* quantifiable according to any abstract valuations. The labor credits would represent past labor hours completed, multiplied by the difficulty or hazard of the work role performed. The difficulty/hazard multiplier would be determined by a mass survey of all work roles, compiled into an index.

In this way all concerns for labor, large and small, could be reduced to the ready transfer of labor-hour credits. The fulfillment of work roles would bring labor credits into the liberated-laborer's possession, and would empower them with a labor-organizing and labor-utilizing ability directly proportionate to the labor credits from past work completed.

This method would both *empower* and *limit* the position of liberated labor since a snapshot of labor performed -- more-or-less the same quantity of labor-power available continuously, going forward -- would be certain, known, and *finite*, and not subject to any kinds of abstraction- (financial-) based extrapolations or stretching. Since all resources would be in the public domain no one would be at a loss for the basics of life, or at least for free access to providing for the basics of life for themselves. And, no political power or status, other than that represented by possession of actual labor credits, could be enjoyed by liberated labor. It would be free to represent itself on an individual basis or could associate and organize on its own political terms, within the confines of its empowerment by the sum of pooled labor credits in possession.

Mass demand, then as now, would be a matter of public discourse, but in a societal context of open access to all means of mass communication for all, with collectivized implements of mass production at its disposal. It would have no special claim over any liberated labor and would have no means by which to coerce it.

The administration of all of this would be dependent on the conscious political mass struggle, on a continuous, ongoing basis, to keep it running smoothly and accountably.

https://tinyurl.com/labor-credits-faq
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

This war is going to drag on for probably another[…]

4 foot tall Chinese parents are regularly giving b[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

https://twitter.com/hermit_hwarang/status/1779130[…]

Iran is going to attack Israel

All foreign politics are an extension of domestic[…]