Communism & Dictatorships

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
No they are not!

There was no country in the world which practiced communism. Why? Because Communism works in theory but not in practice.

Having a dictator means having a hierarchy of some kind which directly contradicts with what was supposed to be happening in Communist country, accodring to Marx theory, no?

All these countries were at large Dictatorships, or even socialist countries, but certainly not communist.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
No they are not!

There was no country in the world which practiced communism. Why? Because Communism works in theory but not in practice.

Having a dictator means having a hierarchy of some kind which directly contradicts with what was supposed to be happening in Communist country, accodring to Marx theory, no?

All these countries were at large Dictatorships, or even socialist countries, but certainly not communist.

Also Marx did not like the ideal of armies BUT every major communist power relies on an army to maintain control.

It also seems for Communism to work it takes Anarchy.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Good way of avoiding the answer. Nice use of logic on that one.

What ARE you talking about? 😖

Communism does not have a leader of any kind. People ARE the leader. Collectivly - that is what communism is about.

Have you even read Das Kapital?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What ARE you talking about? 😖

Communism does not have a leader of any kind. People ARE the leader. Collectivly - that is what communism is about.

Have you even read Das Kapital?

Anarchy!

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What ARE you talking about? 😖

Communism does not have a leader of any kind. People ARE the leader. Collectivly - that is what communism is about.

Have you even read Das Kapital?

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Really? They are the leader so much that they can't even own. All is controlled by The government. It's just a dictator with a larger-bodied base.

Please quote Marx on this, because I am really confused at to which part of his ideology you are refering to.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Anarchy!

Communism!!

😛

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Please quote Marx on this, because I am really confused at to which part of his ideology you are refering to.

Communism!!

😛

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
I'm really confused because the communism that is practiced is what this thread is referring to. If you want to bring up irrelevant opinions, then put 'IMO' or 'In My Opinion' in your posts.

They called it ''communism'' but it was never so. It might have been Socialism in some cases, and dictatorship in many, but never Communism, because by deffinition of communism no country which called itself that, was in fact communist.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Communism was NEVER practiced. Ever.

They called it ''communism'' but it was never so. It might have been Socialism in some cases, and dictatorship in many, but never Communism, because by deffinition of communism no country which called itself that, was in fact communist.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
The General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (First Secretary in 1953-1966) was the title synonymous with leader of the Soviet Union after Vladimir Lenin's death in 1924. The full name of the office was General (or First) Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

The position was originally an administrative one when it was created in 1922 with Stalin being the first to hold the title. However, the access to and authority over the party bureaucracy which accrued to the position allowed Joseph Stalin to increase his power during Lenin's illness and particularly after his death. Once Stalin came to dominate the Politburo, the position of General Secretary became synonymous with that of party leader and de facto ruler of the USSR. From 1934 on, Stalin increasingly preferred to sign documents as just "Secretary of the Central Committee" and there are no official references to the post between the XIXth Party Congress in October 1952 and Stalin's death on March 5, 1953, but there was never any doubt that he remained in charge.

That seems to me like he's as good a dictator as it gets.

Stalin's rule was characterized by a strong cult of personality, an extreme concentration of power, and little concern for the lives of people.

A key role in Stalin's success was in the power that his position as Secretary General gave him of being able to place people he trusted in key positions.

Apparently, someone who worked on his Wiki profile tends to agree.

This process was accompanied by repressive measures and terror, which reached their height in the political purges of the 1930s. [b]Stalin made his dictatorship absolute by liquidating all opposition within the party. The purge was touched off by the murder (1934) of S. M. Kirov, Stalin's lieutenant, which led to prosecutions for an alleged plot—vast, Trotsky-inspired, and aided by Nazi Germany—to overthrow Stalin's government. In the purge trials many old Bolsheviks, including Kamenev, Zinoviev, Aleksey Rykov, and Bukharin, were accused, pleaded guilty, and were executed.

Same with Reference.com. [/B]

Seriously, Calvin. Don't be ridiculous.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Seriously, Calvin. Don't be ridiculous.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Have you even read Das Kapital?

You are not going to tell me that you have read "Das Kapital"...no one has read "Das Kapital".... probably Marx didn't even read it....

Originally posted by Bardock42
You are not going to tell me that you have read "Das Kapital"...no one has read "Das Kapital".... probably Marx didn't even read it....

There was an incident with it as well. My professor has asked me few questions regarding it in the first year, and my answer (in all my attempt to lie) was ''Oh I didn't really understand it well''

My professor said ''Miss, Marx wrote Das Kapital in such way so that 19th century working class could understand what he was trying to say, and you are a University Student in 21st Century and you didn't understand it''

So yeah...that was embarrassing.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Yes I have, actually.

There was an incident with it as well. My professor has asked me few questions regarding it in the first year, and my answer (in all my attempt to lie) was ''Oh I didn't really understand it well''

My professor said ''Miss, Marx wrote Das Kapital in such way so that 19th century working class could understand what he was trying to say, and you are a University Student in 21st Century and you didn't understand it''

So yeah...that was embarrassing.

You should have told her that the working class of the 19th century certainly didn't understand Das Kapital....

That's almost as absurd as claiming that someoe understood Heidegger....or Hegel...haha....sure.

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Wow, I guess the rest of the world is wrong then...

How do you mean? Communism was ment to be put into practice but never quite made it the full way... thats why russias 'communism' fell, just like berlins and etc... but North Korea and Vietnam etc are still running with sorta communism, if you get me

Originally posted by Bardock42
You should have told her that the working class of the 19th century certainly didn't understand Das Kapital....

That's almost as absurd as claiming that someoe understood Heidegger....or Hegel...haha....sure.

Actually, I don't think Das Kapital is all that complex. The only complex things are the ''new phrases and words'' Marx decided to invent.

Besides, especailly in sociology and criminology, we use Marx ideas to compare with contemporary issues all the time - such as what would the Marxist explanation be on criminality in society, or coporate criminality, or marxist view on the public housing and Ghetto.

Obviously he never refered to Ghetto, but his ideas can be tied with such.

Plato's Prepublic is ''complex'' and hard to comprehend.

I don't understand what is so complex about his idea (apart from that it cannot be done)

He has clearly explained the inevitable change from Feaudalism, to Capitalism to Socialism to Communism, at which point everything will be nice and peachy.

I do understand Marx...now that I actually read it...

But perhaps it is complex, which parts do you deem as complex?

Originally posted by Fatal Smoke
Is that towards me? The period is separating the two sentences. Am I being ridiculous? ?The way I see it, she's dodging the facts. This reminds me of somebody named Glentract.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Actually, I don't think Das Kapital is all that complex. The only complex things are the ''new phrases and words'' Marx decided to invent.

Besides, especailly in sociology and criminology, we use Marx ideas to compare with contemporary issues all the time - such as what would the Marxist explanation be on criminality in society, or coporate criminality, or marxist view on the public housing and Ghetto.

Obviously he never refered to Ghetto, but his ideas can be tied with such.

Plato's Prepublic is ''complex'' and hard to comprehend.

I don't understand what is so complex about his idea (apart from that it cannot be done)

He has clearly explained the inevitable change from Feaudalism, to Capitalism to Socialism to Communism, at which point everything will be nice and peachy.

I do understand Marx...now that I actually read it...

But perhaps it is complex, which parts do you deem as complex?

Actually I think you are rioght, I skipped through it and the language, which I for some reason thought of as very complex isn't that complex after all. I guess I might just have been put of by the 2000 pages reading material.....also, if any proletarian of the 19th century had enough time to actually read it...I think then there wasn't as much wrong as people claimed after all.....

Originally posted by Janus Marius
You keep saying Stalin wasn't a dictator, but the point is he was.

Only barely...

Fascism is nationalist, anti-Marxist, mass mobilising political movement, usually lead by one charismatic leader, such as Hitler or Mussolini (he might have been over inflated, but he was still charismatic - and Italian women thought he was hot), in a aim of a conquest of complete power through a single party system.

While Stalin was Marxist, he was also everything else in my definition. 😖