How come Americans dislike communism so much? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

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

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Why do Americans despise Communism?

It always or almost always leads to dictatorship
19
22%
Capitalism is too ingrained in American Society
8
9%
Cold War Era Mentality
23
26%
Fear of reduced progress
4
5%
They benefit from Capitalism
9
10%
Misconceptions
15
17%
Other
9
10%
#14801065
I am a communist and believe that we should strive economic equality. I feel that that capitalism is a system that allows the upper classes to exploit the lower classes to get ahead even more. However, as an American, I cannot come out with my views publicly, even though I live in a very liberal area, because I know that they will not be respected. Instead I must discuss them on forums such as these.

Why do you think Americans are so especially anti-communist/anti-socialist?
#14801072
True. A greedy Pig once said that "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." Not sure if that was from Animal Farm or Stalin and that is why I oppose Authoritarian Communism because it defeats the whole purpose of striving for a stateless society
#14801076
MememyselfandIJK wrote:I am a communist and believe that we should strive economic equality. I feel that that capitalism is a system that allows the upper classes to exploit the lower classes to get ahead even more. However, as an American, I cannot come out with my views publicly, even though I live in a very liberal area, because I know that they will not be respected. Instead I must discuss them on forums such as these.

Why do you think Americans are so especially anti-communist/anti-socialist?


Communism is through and through wilful retardedness but that is not why americans are anti-commie, it might be why the polish are anti-commie as they had to actually swallow that retardedness for some fifty odd years, the yanks however have a soft spot for retards generally as can be seen from their TV programs and unlike the polish or latvians or romanians they have never had to actually suffer any communism and without suffering there can be no serious hate only mock hate.

So it's a legacy of the cold war. During the cold war the US was enemies with the USSR and also USSR satellites like Cuba and Vietnam. Patriots hate those their governors have selected for strategic rivalry, which from the end of WW2 until fall of the berlin wall meant the USSR and by extension the USSR's official state religion which was communism. Of course the cold war is over now, the USSR is gone and China's sweatshops stock up Walmart so the US gov doesn't care so much having other newer trendy enemies to pour the national hate upon, like jihadists.
#14801083
Fear of reduced progress.

The thing I like about Capitalism is that it encourages competition. Anyone can start a business and there are so many ways to market a brand to the public. You have so much control over how you present your business and your image to the world.

A lot of progress and breakthroughs have come from democratic countries.

I have this image in my head of Communist leaders ordering the destruction of books, machines, homes, killing off scientists and scholars and that to me is anti-progress.
#14801803
Other

Because American and Western leftists are generally stupid and incompetent.

Most of them agitate against the ethnic interests of the majority of the American white working class.

They generally hold their white working class in contempt, accusing them of being a labour aristocracy or unrevolutionary.

It is no surprise Americans dislike communism when it is sold to them as anti-American.

Why is a mechanic in an American town going to vote for the communists if they are promising open door immigration and telling him he has white privilege? May as well forget it. Chinese and Russian socialists never told their peoples such lies.

In England Corbyn is another example. The man is going in the right direction on economic questions but does not want to end mass immigration.
#14802538
Why is a mechanic in an American town going to vote for the communists if they are promising open door immigration and telling him he has white privilege? May as well forget it. Chinese and Russian socialists never told their peoples such lies.


No communist wants that, why are you telling these lies PI? Did the Soviet Union have mass immigration? What about East Germany?

The capitalists are the ones who import the immigrants, they is why mass immigration happens in capitalist nations (the US, German the UK etc).
#14802755
Decky wrote:
No communist wants that, why are you telling these lies PI? Did the Soviet Union have mass immigration? What about East Germany?

The capitalists are the ones who import the immigrants, they is why mass immigration happens in capitalist nations (the US, German the UK etc).


I am not speaking about you but you must admit that your particular type of Marxism died in the 1970s.

Today most of the Marxists in the West only fight to destabilise Western societies.

Most of them are absolute lunatics.

They do not fight for the stable conservative middle class societies that were the Stalinist states but instead for constant chaos a la, Maoist permanent cultural revolution.

For example, in Soviet movies from the 1970s nearly everyone is conservative, its a traditional nuclear family and almost everyone is white. Most look very middle class too. It looks like a nightmare for any of the Marxists in the West today.
#14802760
I am not speaking about you but you must admit that your particular type of Marxism died in the 1970s.

Today most of the Marxists in the West only fight to destabilise Western societies.

Most of them are absolute lunatics.

They do not fight for the stable conservative middle class societies that were the Stalinist states but instead for constant chaos a la, Maoist permanent cultural revolution.

For example, in Soviet movies from the 1970s nearly everyone is conservative, its a traditional nuclear family and almost everyone is white. Most look very middle class too. It looks like a nightmare for any of the Marxists in the West today.


You are talking about liberals PI not Marxists. Why do you insist on criticising liberalism but bizarrely labelling it as Marxism? I expect it from the Americans of course but you are intelligent and educated PI, why are you doing this? :?:

Also the Soviet Union was not conservative at all. Conservatives think women should be in kitchen or working as whores on street corners for example. The Soviet Union put them into universities and into space.
#14802858
Bullshit PI you are telling lies based on your own misconceptions. Also Decky is right af. Imagining the USSR as some bastion of conservative morality is stupid as hell. It was the most progressive and modern nation to ever exist.

@Suntzu who exactly lived like kings in the USSR? Even Brehznev was impoverished by western bourgie standards.

As for the OP that is some old timer behavior. Baby boomers have imprinted a lot of anticommunism on the youth but a lot more kids than my generation aren't listening.
#14802937
@SolarCross
The Poles elected a communist gov't after independence.
Plenty of people from the former USSR have fond memories of communist rule.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -life.html

To answer the OP I'd say it's a result of propaganda and decades upon decades of the narrative being controlled and later dominated by capitalists.
#14802941
What always strikes me as funny, but not in a laughing way, is how the naive out there always extol the virtues of communism, as though the people benefit from it and in theory there are no malevolent dictators or elitist rich in their Utopian type societies. In reality, an oppressive system such as communism, history has proven this, has just the opposite affect.

Here it is in a nutshell for the politically ignorant who still can't comprehend that capitalism works, and communism doesn't. Yes, both systems have elitist rich...the big difference is that the elitist rich in capitalism enjoy it when others become rich or move up the societal ladder. While in communism the elitist rich have no desire for the rest of society to make their lives better, and intentionally do whatever they can to keep the rest of the people down and desperate, dependent on the elitist rich rulers for their welfare and survival.

Capitalism by its nature equates with freedom and liberty, while communism does not. If freedom and liberty isn't important to you, if you prefer a nanny state with government officials dictating what time you can go to the bathroom, then you will likely continue to espouse the greatness of vermin such as Chairman Mao and Joseph Stalin.
#14803037
Political Interest wrote:Other

Because American and Western leftists are generally stupid and incompetent.


As one of the most progressive Marxist type people on this forum, I am going to suggest that I am the forum member who most closely resembles your caricature or strawman of a leftist. Thus, I will address your concerns.

Most of them agitate against the ethnic interests of the majority of the American white working class.


It depends on what you mean by "ethnic interests". If it means perpetuating racism, then yes, we oppose it. Mind you, the racism of many white working class people is itself against the class interests of white working class people.

They generally hold their white working class in contempt, accusing them of being a labour aristocracy or unrevolutionary.


No, we do not hold anyone in contempt. We are simply aware of the fact that most working class people are conservative and reject communism and socialism.

It is no surprise Americans dislike communism when it is sold to them as anti-American.


It s the US right who have convinced US people that communism is inherently anti-US.

Why is a mechanic in an American town going to vote for the communists if they are promising open door immigration and telling him he has white privilege? May as well forget it. Chinese and Russian socialists never told their peoples such lies.

In England Corbyn is another example. The man is going in the right direction on economic questions but does not want to end mass immigration.


Neither me nor any other Marxist on this forum is supporting mass immigration or open borders. I don't even think there is a progressive SJW person who argues this. This open borders thing seems like a fabrication.

And working class people do listen when you talk about privilege. As long as you do not actually use the word, and instead describe how they have to deal with extra crap because they are poor or rural.

Political Interest wrote:I am not speaking about you but you must admit that your particular type of Marxism died in the 1970s.

Today most of the Marxists in the West only fight to destabilise Western societies.


Not really. Most progressives are working to change western societies, to get rid of ongoing forms of discrimination. This does destablise certain parts of western societies, but since those parts are responsible for discrimination, this is no big loss.

Most of them are absolute lunatics.

They do not fight for the stable conservative middle class societies that were the Stalinist states but instead for constant chaos a la, Maoist permanent cultural revolution.

For example, in Soviet movies from the 1970s nearly everyone is conservative, its a traditional nuclear family and almost everyone is white. Most look very middle class too. It looks like a nightmare for any of the Marxists in the West today.


I am not a European Marxist. I am a Latin American Marxist. This is important because during the Cold War, the capitalists were the conservative side and the communists were the progressive side. So, for Marxists from the developing world during the 1970s, today's more progressive society is not a problem. It is, in part, an effect of our hard work.
#14803053
Decky wrote:You are talking about liberals PI not Marxists. Why do you insist on criticising liberalism but bizarrely labelling it as Marxism? I expect it from the Americans of course but you are intelligent and educated PI, why are you doing this? :?:


No, they are Marxists. Why do you deny that a lot of people in your politics have this tendency? Jeremy Corbyn is a liberal?

Decky wrote:Also the Soviet Union was not conservative at all. Conservatives think women should be in kitchen or working as whores on street corners for example. The Soviet Union put them into universities and into space.


A nuclear family and traditional values are not conservative? The USSR was not a libertine society. Women were in work but the nuclear family was upheld. There were no sex scenes or pornism in media. There was a lot of censorship against anti-social influences. A lot of the leftists I met in the UK would not survive there because it would have been too drab for them. The Soviets did not attempt to deconstruct gender or give their students white privilege courses. This is a simple fact.

Dagoth Ur wrote:Bullshit PI you are telling lies based on your own misconceptions. Also Decky is right af. Imagining the USSR as some bastion of conservative morality is stupid as hell. It was the most progressive and modern nation to ever exist.


Which lies?

The USSR was so progressive that nearly everyone there was married in a nuclear family, sex pride parades did not exist and it was illegal to be anything other than heterosexual. A society where straight white men held nearly all major positions of influence. In what way is this anything like what the American left promotes for their own country?

Pants-of-dog wrote:It depends on what you mean by "ethnic interests". If it means perpetuating racism, then yes, we oppose it. Mind you, the racism of many white working class people is itself against the class interests of white working class people.


You will tell your American workers that they are privileged because they are white. Is it any wondrer they reject Marxism?

Pants-of-dog wrote:No, we do not hold anyone in contempt. We are simply aware of the fact that most working class people are conservative and reject communism and socialism.


If the people are not willing to buy what you are selling maybe it is because you are not advertising it well enough?

Pants-of-dog wrote:It s the US right who have convinced US people that communism is inherently anti-US.


Once upon a time Earl Browder sold communism as the twentieth century Americanism. I think this style had a chance of winning support but the American left was overtaken by the New Left after the 1960s. American commies used to wear suit and tie and promoted the establishment of a socialist America with equal rights for all races. They did not tell the American blue collar workers that they all have white privilege. Now American Marxists dress up in Maoist suits. Their main issue is white males and the patriarchy.

Image

Pants-of-dog wrote:Neither me nor any other Marxist on this forum is supporting mass immigration or open borders. I don't even think there is a progressive SJW person who argues this. This open borders thing seems like a fabrication.


Nearly any leftist I have encountered thinks that ending mass immigration is racism and a means of dividing the workers.

Pants-of-dog wrote:And working class people do listen when you talk about privilege. As long as you do not actually use the word, and instead describe how they have to deal with extra crap because they are poor or rural.


You know very well that I am referring to a different sort of privilege that the left is obsessed with.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Not really. Most progressives are working to change western societies, to get rid of ongoing forms of discrimination. This does destablise certain parts of western societies, but since those parts are responsible for discrimination, this is no big loss.


But then you have no base in the American working class who voted in large bymbers for Trump.

Pants-of-dog wrote:I am not a European Marxist. I am a Latin American Marxist. This is important because during the Cold War, the capitalists were the conservative side and the communists were the progressive side. So, for Marxists from the developing world during the 1970s, today's more progressive society is not a problem. It is, in part, an effect of our hard work.


There was a major divide between European Marxism and Marxisn of the global south. I think that the latter has come to define Marxism in the 21st century, including in Europe through the ideas of the New Left.
#14803071
Political Interest wrote:You will tell your American workers that they are privileged because they are white. Is it any wondrer they reject Marxism?


Privilege has nothing to do with Marxism. I say this as a person who understand privilege and someone raised by Marxists. It is like saying gay rights and climate change science are related because Starbucks patrons support both.

And yes, I have discussed privilege with white working class people. It is not that difficult, as I already pointed out.

If the people are not willing to buy what you are selling maybe it is because you are not advertising it well enough?


I am definitely not advertising it well enough to combat the decades long propaganda campaign that western governments have been waging against communism and socialism.

Once upon a time Earl Browder sold communism as the twentieth century Americanism. I think this style had a chance of winning support but the American left was overtaken by the New Left after the 1960s. American commies used to wear suit and tie and promoted the establishment of a socialist America with equal rights for all races. They did not tell the American blue collar workers that they all have white privilege. Now American Marxists dress up in Maoist suits. Their main issue is white males and the patriarchy.


What does this have to do with my claim that it is the US right who are responsible for anti-communist propaganda in the US?

Nearly any leftist I have encountered thinks that ending mass immigration is racism and a means of dividing the workers.


...except Decky, Dagoth, TIG, and me. In fact, I would argue that you cannot hame a single Marxist on this forum who supports open borders.

You know very well that I am referring to a different sort of privilege that the left is obsessed with.


Privilege works along economic lines as well as racial lines.

But then you have no base in the American working class who voted in large numbers for Trump.


Well, we will piss off a certain group no matter what we do (or not do) about racism. And they are a minority of the US working class.

There was a major divide between European Marxism and Marxisn of the global south. I think that the latter has come to define Marxism in the 21st century, including in Europe through the ideas of the New Left.


I do not think there is an inherent divide between these two traditions. At worst, they tend to ignore each other when they should be working together.
#14803074
Political Interest wrote:No, they are Marxists. Why do you deny that a lot of people in your politics have this tendency? Jeremy Corbyn is a liberal?


He is a social democrat, the left wing of liberalism. He is certainly no Marxist or even close to Marxism.

Political Interest wrote:A nuclear family and traditional values are not conservative? The USSR was not a libertine society. Women were in work but the nuclear family was upheld. There were no sex scenes or pornism in media. There was a lot of censorship against anti-social influences. A lot of the leftists I met in the UK would not survive there because it would have been too drab for them. The Soviets did not attempt to deconstruct gender or give their students white privilege courses. This is a simple fact.


The nuclear family is not conservative no. People used to live in a large extended family network traditionally with grandparents and parents and kids in the same household. Capitalism then changed the family in a revolutionary way as workers needed to be mobile to move from the country to factories and then chase the jobs wherever they went. The nuclear family is a creation of modernity.

As I said traditional family values had rich women idle at home and poor women forced into prostitution, and the women in between working in the home doing textile work in their living rooms, the Soviet Union crushed those traditional values and had the most progressive attitude to women of any nation in human history.

You are chatting total nonsense, this is bellow you PI.
#14803108
MememyselfandIJK wrote:I am a communist and believe that we should strive economic equality. I feel that that capitalism is a system that allows the upper classes to exploit the lower classes to get ahead even more. However, as an American, I cannot come out with my views publicly, even though I live in a very liberal area, because I know that they will not be respected. Instead I must discuss them on forums such as these.

Why do you think Americans are so especially anti-communist/anti-socialist?



What "Americans" are you referring to?

American elite loved Communism, American banksters financed the "Russian Revolution".

Stalin was an ally of the "free world" in WWII, they called him "uncle Joe".

Leading American financiers were Communist spies.

Harry Dexter White (October 9, 1892 – August 16, 1948) was an American economist and senior U.S. Treasury department official. Working closely with the Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau, Jr., he helped set American financial policy toward the Allies of World War II while at the same time he passed numerous secrets to the Soviet Union.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Dexter_White


As we see, American elite loved Communism more than Nationalism, as long as Communism was a globalist ideology.

In other words, Commies were a tool of Globalists, because Commies were against national states and national identity.

After WWII the Communist regimes abandoned the globalist agenda, because Nationalism won in these countries. Stalin had to support Russian Nationalism to protect his own ass in WWII, because Russians were not ready to die for the "ideals of Comintern".

That is why Stalin is now remembered as a "bad guy", because he did not like (((cosmopolites))).

So the hate, promoted in the (((American))) media against Commies was in reality a hate against nationalism. American intellectuals still loved Trotzki, and American academia was subverted by Communists.

Today they hate Russia even more, than they hated the Soviet Union, precisely for the same reason: Russia became a Christian nationalist state and betrayed the ideals of "international Communism", which was a globalist thing.

It is an absolute taboo to whitewash Nantional Socialism, you will be imprisoned for this in most Western countries.

But in these "free" countries it is OK to whitewash the crimes of Communism, though Commies killed millions and millions of innocent civilians even before National Socialists came to power (because of the deadly threat of Communism) in Germany.
#14803134
Political Interest wrote:No, they are Marxists. Why do you deny that a lot of people in your politics have this tendency? Jeremy Corbyn is a liberal?

See this is the lie. You should know enough about Maxism at this point to know that Corbyn is nothing more than another "left" liberal with a penchant for the Keynesian welfare state.


Political Interest wrote:A nuclear family and traditional values are not conservative?

Absolutely not.

Political Interest wrote: The USSR was not a libertine society. Women were in work but the nuclear family was upheld. There were no sex scenes or pornism in media. There was a lot of censorship against anti-social influences. A lot of the leftists I met in the UK would not survive there because it would have been too drab for them. The Soviets did not attempt to deconstruct gender or give their students white privilege courses. This is a simple fact

They also stopped existing thirty years ago PI. This discourse didn't exist in the west outside college campuses in the west until around 2004. I have no doubt that the Soviet Union of today would be a wildly different beast than it was in 1989.

Political Interest wrote:Which lies?

The notion that the Soviet Union promoted Augustine moral conservatism. It is an outright lie. The Soviets were materialists. Any "conservatism" is simply a result of the cultural / historical conditions of the RSFSR.

Political Interest wrote:The USSR was so progressive that nearly everyone there was married in a nuclear family, sex pride parades did not exist and it was illegal to be anything other than heterosexual. A society where straight white men held nearly all major positions of influence. In what way is this anything like what the American left promotes for their own country

I'd balk at calling Slavs and Georgians "white". Where exactly is this super not white all gay western government btw? Easily 80-90% of our leadership is straight white Christian males.

Political Interest wrote:You will tell your American workers that they are privileged because they are white. Is it any wondrer they reject Marxism?

White working class privilege doesn't really extend much beyond the courts. Even American minorities have to accept they are privileged to live under the benefit of imperialism. I mean maybe you think it is only white privilege that matters but no marxist who engages in this discourse targets just white people in the analysis.

And let's be perfectly clear Marxists have always put the burden of standing up for your own rights onto the people. We have always harangued fools with false consciousness. Not acknowledging your privilege in a racist system is just another false consciousness. And maybe you don't talk to kids or something but way more are starting to get that talking about privilege isn't some simple "fuck white people" concept.

Political Interest wrote:If the people are not willing to buy what you are selling maybe it is because you are not advertising it well enough?

More and more people are listening to us. More than have ever listened in my lifetime. We could do better but it isn't as though everyone opposes us like they did in the 90's.

Political Interest wrote:Once upon a time Earl Browder sold communism as the twentieth century Americanism. I think this style had a chance of winning support but the American left was overtaken by the New Left after the 1960s. American commies used to wear suit and tie and promoted the establishment of a socialist America with equal rights for all races. They did not tell the American blue collar workers that they all have white privilege. Now American Marxists dress up in Maoist suits. Their main issue is white males and the patriarchy.

lol no it isn't. Which Marxists specifically are you talking about? Because this:

Political Interest wrote:Image

leads me to believe you are just pulling liberal rhetoric put of your ass and calling it ours. Do you even know who this picture is of that you've posted? And do you think American Marxists really look like this?

Now if you want us to coddle white reactionaries you can just forget that. America is only 65% white anymore. Ignoring minorities for a broad white support isn't going to work anymore.

Political Interest wrote:Nearly any leftist I have encountered thinks that ending mass immigration is racism and a means of dividing the workers.

Which marxists? What orgs?

Political Interest wrote:But then you have no base in the American working class who voted in large bymbers for Trump
.
lol no they didn't. Voter turnout was less than 50% and of those over half voted for Hillary. The American working class by and large DOES NOT VOTE.


Political Interest wrote:There was a major divide between European Marxism and Marxisn of the global south. I think that the latter has come to define Marxism in the 21st century, including in Europe through the ideas of the New Left.

The global South is the weak link in imperialism.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10

"Ukraine’s real losses should be counted i[…]

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]

@Rugoz A compromise with Putin is impossibl[…]

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]