NationStates Jolt Archive

"United Democratic Communist"? What's this about? You can pick two, but not all three.

United Communist - a totalitarian regime is a-ok for communists. State controls everything, but you can't have democracy, or the number of issues people disagree on skyrockets and unification is lost. Example: North Korea Communists.

Democratic Communists - this is well possible, but they'll be hampered by the constant internal disagreements. Example: any "Communist" party from a Western country. Like, Finnish SKP, or was that SKDL, or SKP-Y, or Taistoists, or TPSL, or KTP, or Vasemmistoliitto, or ...

United Democratic - don't exist with communism, because this requires the number of possible issues to disagree upon to be so small that it's a liberal, not a communist society.

(p.s. not misusing the word "liberal" like the Americans often do.)

"Democractic Communist" - classic oxymoron.

"Democractic Communist" - classic oxymoron.

Nope. Perhaps "Democratic Facism" is, b ut not Democratic Communism. Democracy and Communism can coexist, unlikely to happen, but it CAN exist.

Nope. Perhaps "Democratic Facism" is, b ut not Democratic Communism. Democracy and Communism can coexist, unlikely to happen, but it CAN exist.It depends on what your idea of what the purpose of democracy is, but I would argue that democracy is impossible *without* communism.

"Democractic Communist" - classic oxymoron.
"opinionated centrist", on the other hand....

democracy is impossible *without* communism.

Indeed.

It appears that "liberal" is not the only word that has fallen victim to the American Word-Terrorists.

That said, I believe "United" applies not to the system of government but to the party. One could argue that a "United" country cannot be democratic anyway, as it implies negligible dissent. In this case, I guess "United" is just added for the vowel and the third letter. Who has ever heard of a party called "DC"?

Also, Eutrusca, you'll have to enlighten me on the meaning of the word "democractic". Who knows, perhaps it *is* incompatible with communism?

not this again.... :headbang:

communism is a economic ideal, as opposed to Marxism which encompasses a whole set of economic, social and governmental ideals. it says nothing about freedoms, or the way in which the government is run.
there is no reason to equate communism with totalitarianism, or any other governmental system for that matter.


i assume you are referring to the UDCP thread?


Communism: economic system
Democracy: governmental system

= Democratic Communists.

as for social issues, the UDCP has made up its mind on a point-by-point/per issue basis, but leans towards libertarianism.

"opinionated centrist", on the other hand....
Hey! Centrist doesn't mean "can't decide". Centrist means "able to see without the pink eyeglasses of left- or right-wing ideologies".

It depends on what your idea of what the purpose of democracy is, but I would argue that democracy is impossible *without* communism.

Agreed.

not this again.... :headbang:

LOL, agreed here as well. :p

It depends on what your idea of what the purpose of democracy is, but I would argue that democracy is impossible *without* communism.

Indeed. And genuine communism cannot exist without democracy. The two go together and need each other. (If we're talking about absolute democracy, that is). A "communist dictatorship" is a contradiction in terms; only State Socialism can be dictatorial (though it can also be democratic, as PM pointed out).

As for the "United" bit, that qualifies "Party", not "Democratic Communist". ;)