NationStates Jolt Archive

Which of today's nations that claim to be communist live up most to the billing?

Cuba, I guess.

Not very close, though.

Of those listed, Cuba.

Rolling squid;13459521']none. Communism by definition has to be a democracy, so they all fail epicly.

what about Moldova?

none. Communism by definition has to be a democracy, so they all fail epicly.

Isn't there some pacific Islands that could be classed as communist states?

Isn't there some pacific Islands that could be classed as communist states?

Usually those communalist societies on small Pacific Islands are more akin to tribal groups, with little to no external threat, and a limited amount of resources. They are not industrial, thus they do not meet the Marxist test of being an industrial society.

Not that I care for Marx, too determinist and engrossed in the scientific rigidity that works so well for the natural world, but is made of Epic Phail when it comes to human beings.

Rolling squid;13459521']none. Communism by definition has to be a democracy, so they all fail epicly.

As Soviestan said, how about Moldova? Democratically elected 'communist' government.

Rolling squid;13459521']none. Communism by definition has to be a democracy, so they all fail epicly.

Well, it could also be a dictatorship of the people.

Laos, although Cuba comes close.

Cuba, I guess.

Not very close, though.

I dunno, it looks more and more like Cuba's just gonna be a "Communist Monarchy" (Like North Korea), where executive power is handled within the Castro family, and not by anyone else.

Laos, although Cuba comes close.

I think most commies here would disagree that a genocidal dictatorship is not close to communism.

I dunno, it looks more and more like Cuba's just gonna be a "Communist Monarchy" (Like North Korea), where executive power is handled within the Castro family, and not by anyone else.

Yes, well, if we're going to go with "power concentrated at the top" being a disqualifying factor, we have to reject all of them... and the question was, after all, relative.

Yes, well, if we're going to go with "power concentrated at the top" being a disqualifying factor, we have to reject all of them... and the question was, after all, relative.

True, true...I'm picking...ummmm...the Kingdom of Fortriu, I guess.


Fortriu's an option, right?

I know what will be, USA under Billary Clinton, amirite fellas! ;)

No

what about Moldova?

didn't know that country existed, thanks for that.

I'd have to say they come pretty close, but still no cigar. Maybe with some reforms.

I know what will be, USA under Billary Clinton, amirite fellas! ;)

No

She even supports a national health care system, how could you not say she is a dirty commie!!!?

I know what will be, USA under Billary Clinton, amirite fellas! ;)
I can see the Feminazi Commie Wetbacks at the polling stations now *shudders*

I can see the Feminazi Commie Wetbacks at the polling stations now *shudders*

You mean Marxist Feminists?
Hell there's more groups of feminists than Marxist, Radical, Liberal. There's about 16 different types, no kidding either.

You mean Marxist Feminists?
No, I mean Las Feministas Marxistas-Fascistas. A terrible thought.

Stupid Commies... Oh, and I'd say Cuba.

Answer: none.

Communism´s so outdated in this day and age. I´m actually surprised it still stands as a form of government in some parts of the world. I think Marx tried to envision an utopia (it could´ve worked so good if it wasn´t for human nature) and his ideas fell in the wrong hands. But I have to say that from all the countries that still uphold Communism, Cuba is the strongest.

Not China.

Not China.

China has opened it´s door to foreign interests and it has diversified in the last few years. Still, it´s considered a Communist country. I was told that instead of studying Japanese, I should study Mandarin, because China´s taking over the business world.

Cuba. Of course, even they are keeping themselves alive with the hard currency inflows from their limited trading partners in the developed world; it's not like they're really self-sufficient or sustainable in any meaningful sense.

She even supports a national health care system, how could you not say she is a dirty commie!!!?

Easy, she's not.

Why don't I see Europe up there? Europe is a country.:p

I guess I'll just have to blame Canada.

Communism´s so outdated in this day and age. I´m actually surprised it still stands as a form of government in some parts of the world. I think Marx tried to envision an utopia (it could´ve worked so good if it wasn´t for human nature) and his ideas fell in the wrong hands. But I have to say that from all the countries that still uphold Communism, Cuba is the strongest.

Marxism may be outdated, but the theory of communism I don't think can be out of date.

Cuba, but it's more socialisty. Maybe it is communist...

Dprk

China is a Communist country.

And its a success story.

Since the death of 毛澤東 and the gradual adoption of capitalist economic policies (or at least non-communist) it is, under Mao, not so much.

Not China.China is a Communist country.

And its a success story.

China is a Communist country.

And its a success story.

China's success is inversely proportional to its communist policy.

It wasn't until the Chinese went back to doing things the right way, allowing capitalism and markets to flourish, that they succeeded at improving the PRC.

This is common knowledge that shouldn't have to be explained to you, you can clearly read because you spam the forum with news articles.

Marxism may be outdated, but the theory of communism I don't think can be out of date.

That's correct, a bad theory is a bad theory no matter what year it is.

A failed theory is a failed theory, forever.

Something that always puts a smile on my face and brightens my day is when I am eating at one of the pricier (by Chinese standards) chain restaurants here in the PRC like Cafe de Coral or Ajisen Ramen or Gongfu Resturant, and I see old Chinese people there eating too.

I realize that these people witnessed the darkness and horror of China's genuinely communist past, and lived through the cultural revolution and other indignities against the human spirit, but at the end survived long enough to see the light of prosperity and economic freedom come again to China.

A 70 year old paying 30 yuan for a bowl of noodles, by choice, is a beautiful statement to the progress China has made and to the fact that communist peonage can be overcome, and that the human spirit can outlast the depravity of communist evil.

There are great books written on similar topics, and great films as well, and I enjoy them very much, but it is something else entirely to see it with your own eyes.

..you can clearly read .You are giving me too much credit :D

I guess that for some people: success is impossible for a communist Country.

Well I have news for all of you Communism haters.

#1 China is a Communist Country.
#2 China is successful.

Deal with it. :D

see this
Since the death of 毛澤東 and the gradual adoption of capitalist economic policies (or at least non-communist) it is, under Mao, not so much.

Just to be nit picky, it's communist if referring to the social concept of a classless society, and it's Communist if you're referring to a country run by a Communist Party, but just for simplicities sake use the term 'socialist' for the economic period of proletarian property (which replaces bourgeois property).

China's success is inversely proportional to its communist policy.I guess that for some people: success is impossible for a communist Country.

Well I have news for all of you Communism haters.

#1 China is a Communist Country.
#2 China is successful.

Deal with it. :D

And how exactly is Marxism 'outdated', the only people who think that haven't read the Manifesto or Marx's critique of capital. I mean ancient slave society lasted for hundreds of years before feudalism replaced it, and so to did feudalism last hundreds of years before bourgeois property relations replaced it. It makes sense that the natural progression of material history will see proletarian property (socialism) replace bourgeois property, just as ancient society created the Burgess hierarchical Christian model (feudalism) which supplanted it, so too have the bourgeois created their own downfall (the proletariat) merely through trying to survive.

The general ignorance and naivety of this forum saddens me... Seriously people, pick up Marx before you think you understand everything...

I guess that for some people: success is impossible for a communist Country.

Well I have news for all of you Communism haters.

#1 China is a Communist Country.
#2 China is successful.

Deal with it. :D

Surely you don't actually believe something that downright stupid, and are instead just posting it to stir shit.

Trolling, to use the argot of these'un parts.

Well I have news for all of you Communism haters.
and just to piss you off, I voted China (even if other countries may be more Communist)

:D :D :p :D

Surely you don't actually believe something that downright stupid.I believe China is a Communist country.

let me say it again:
China is a Communist Country.

Surely you actually believe you can prove me wrong..

*prepares pop corn*
bring it on bicha :D

Rolling squid;13459521']none. Communism by definition has to be a democracy, so they all fail epicly.
What do you mean exactly by that? Communism is a stage of human society whereby class antagonisms have been done away with and it is by definition 'classless', so it won't be a state or anything. Socialism is the economic transition phase, whereby proletarian property replaced bourgeois property. Marx theorized that just as feudalism produced bourgeois capitalism, so will capitalism bring socialism (because industrialization makes the workers the most powerful), and socialism will breed communism.

Marxist materialism is that the material conditions (ie reality) mold and form future relations, so that economic socialism (through the existence of it's conditions of socialization of production) will breed communal relations, in short that economics effects life.

I believe China is a Communist country.

let me say it again:
China is a Communist Country.

Surely you actually believe you can prove me wrong..

*prepares pop corn*
bring it on bicha :D


This isn't a school.

Seriously people, pick up Marx before you think you understand everything...

Seriously AP, pick up something besides Marx before you think you understand everything.

The general ignorance and naivety of this forum saddens me...

Hahahaha

AHAh
ahahahahaha
hhahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

And how exactly is Marxism 'outdated', the only people who think that haven't read the Manifesto or Marx's critique of capital. I mean ancient slave society lasted for hundreds of years before feudalism replaced it, and so to did feudalism last hundreds of years before bourgeois property relations replaced it. It makes sense that the natural progression of material history will see proletarian property (socialism) replace bourgeois property, just as ancient society created the Burgess hierarchical Christian model (feudalism) which supplanted it, so too have the bourgeois created their own downfall (the proletariat) merely through trying to survive.

The general ignorance and naivety of this forum saddens me... Seriously people, pick up Marx before you think you understand everything...


At any rate, aren't you supposed to be boycotting this wwwwRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSIISSSSSSSSSS
forum?

"Not one more post until racism is banned! Hasta la victoria siempre!"

I believe China is a Communist country.

let me say it again:
China is a Communist Country.

Surely you actually believe you can prove me wrong..

*prepares pop corn*
bring it on bicha :D

And a communist country would have a higher income equality than the United States because...

At any rate, aren't you supposed to be boycotting this wwwwRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSIISSSSSSSSSS
forum?

"Not one more post until racism is banned! Hasta la victoria siempre!"
That excludes me defending Marxism from the NSG hordes of ignorance and collective stupidity.

That excludes me defending Marxism from the NSG hordes of ignorance and collective stupidity.

The ordinary way of defending marxism is by shooting people or starving them or torturing them to death.

Why have you taken this novel and profoundly ineffective approach?

I revert to my previous comment.

(notice how no one has replied to my statements regarding Marxism)

Really no-one has? You might want to go through the thread again.

The ordinary way of defending marxism is by shooting people or starving them or torturing them to death.

Why have you taken this novel and profoundly ineffective approach?
I revert to my previous comment.

(notice how no one has replied to my statements regarding Marxism)

My day-to-day life and the lives of people all over the PRC and the rest of the world, as well as the events of the last hundred years are a material refutation of your "statements regarding marxism."
Your 'day-to-day life' is hardly empirical fact, nor objective reality. Again Granada as in the other thread you using common irrational hatred and susceptibility to demogogic rhetoric as a basis for argument. I on the other hand prefer fact.

I revert to my previous comment.

(notice how no one has replied to my statements regarding Marxism)


My day-to-day life and the lives of people all over the PRC and the rest of the world, as well as the events of the last hundred years are a material refutation of your "statements regarding marxism."


What is more, to quote a sentiment I am sure you agree with, we learn that the settled issue of marxism vs the human spirit is a moot discussion...

Because we can now effectively ignore the fringe views of people like you.

I on the other hand prefer fact.

If and only if it fits with your ideology.

Your 'day-to-day life' is hardly empirical fact, nor objective reality. Again Granada as in the other thread you using common irrational hatred and susceptibility to demogogic rhetoric as a basis for argument. I on the other hand prefer fact.

Ahahahahahaha

Fascinating, I'm sure!

Ahahahahahaha

Fascinating, I'm sure!

Wow, I am stunned by your superior debating skills.

Also Granada, are you honestly telling me you where alive in the period of China before market reform?

Wow, I am stunned by your superior debating skills.

Also Granada, are you honestly telling me you where alive in the period of China before market reform?

I'll bet you are!

A class on my "superior debating skills" can be had for a small fee, I'm sure.

I can't possibly fathom how to answer the question you've asked.

Also Granada, are you honestly telling me you where alive in the period of China before market reform?

It wasn't that long ago AP, so really not out of the realm of possibility.

Well can he answer the question?

Yes he can...
Will he? I have no idea.

It wasn't that long ago AP, so really not out of the realm of possibility.
Well can he answer the question?

Well can he answer the question?

I won't answer it, because it is a trivial question that doesn't refer to or have any bearing on anything I've posted.

None really claim to be "communist", or if they do, they're just stupid. Communism is, by definition, a long term goal that none of those countries could be close to reach.

But Cuba is the one which is closer to this goal, IMHO, even they are still very far from it.

I won't answer it, because it is a trivial question that doesn't refer to or have any bearing on anything I've posted.

Actually it does, you said your argument that communism was bad was based on a day-to-day living experience in the PRC, I just want to know if you lived during the Maoist period and not during the post capitalist restoration.

What exactly are you trying to claim?

Probably that if you didn't live under the enlightened rule of Mao then you don't know what 'true' Chinese communism is.

What exactly are you trying to claim?

to wit:

"I won't answer it, because it is a trivial question that doesn't refer to or have any bearing on anything I've posted."

I am just trying to confirm your claim.

Actually it does, you said your argument that communism was bad was based on a day-to-day living experience in the PRC, I just want to know if you lived during the Maoist period and not during the post capitalist restoration.

What exactly are you trying to claim?

to wit:

"I won't answer it, because it is a trivial question that doesn't refer to or have any bearing on anything I've posted."

Cuba.

China is NOT Communist. If they were they wouldn't have free markets and they wouldn't abandon the poor because "the Gods made them that way."

Communism has not failed, communism has simply been betrayed time and time again. Athens had democracy and when they fell everyone said democracy was outdated and had failed. But some brave souls decided to give it another chance and look: it kinda worked. Communism deserves at last as many chances, especially since it hasn't really been tried yet save by Cuba and Vietnam who had to more or less give it up due to China's pressure and lack of support.

Read the manifesto: there is nothing 'ebil' about communism. Stalinism and Maoism maybe, but definitely NOT communism as a whole.

I am just trying to confirm your claim.

That is a false statement.

I can prove it.

But only on the condition that you wager me money.

Oh and PS:

OMG! You think North Korea is communist? North Korea doesn't even claim to be communist! They hate us and are more right wing then any other country in the area. North Korea is only called a communist country by the US so the American government can use them as an example of how horrible we supposedly are.

Cuba, I guess.

Not very close, though.

I think that most of the listed countries claim to be "socialist".

To answer the poll: None.

Isn't there some pacific Islands that could be classed as communist states?

"Communist state" is a contradiction in terms.

There are still some Pacific societies that ressemble what's sometimes called "primitive communism". Communism in a non-Marxist sense. An ethos of caring and sharing, a strong sense of community. You help whoever needs help, knowing you can rely on their help in return. You give freely to all who need, and acquire prestige and influence by doing so.

Melanesian societies, in particularly, are relatively egalitarian and non-hierarchical, although many of them have defined gender roles and may be termed patriarchies. Melanesian societies are highly diverse, so any generalisation is inherently misleading, but on the whole there are no "chiefs" in the hierarchical, quasi-monarchical Polynesian sense; rather, people rise to a position of influence through (in great part) acts of conspicuous generosity. You prove your ability to acquire things that are useful (through growing a lot of agricultural produce yourself, through skillful trade with neighbouring communities, etc...), then you redistribute it within your community. In some ways it's similar to communism, but you have to be careful not to force a Western Marxist reading onto it.

What I've just said is true of remote rural communities, rather than the urbanised population.

Oh, and Marxism as such is almost utterly absent from Pacific Island nations, mainly due to the fact that these societies are strongly Christian. I don't think there's a Communist Party in any of the Pacific Island countries. Or if there is one somewhere, its influence would be negligeable.

China is a Communist country.

And its a success story.

China has opened it´s door to foreign interests and it has diversified in the last few years. Still, it´s considered a Communist country. I was told that instead of studying Japanese, I should study Mandarin, because China´s taking over the business world.

I still don't think it's the most communist.

China is a Communist country.

And its a success story.

China is not communist, and does not even pretend to be. A communist society would, by definition, be stateless.

As I've mentioned before, several years ago now I saw an interview of a Chinese Communist Party official, explaining the Party line. He applied the Marxist reading of history and of the four stages of society. He said that China had (implicity, under Mao) tried to go straight from feudalism (1st stage) to socialism (3rd stage), skipping capitalism (2nd stage). That hadn't quite worked out, so China was now trying capitalism, so as to prepare for socialism, so as to prepare (eventually) for communism (the 4th stage).

The Party line is that capitalism is the means to an end, the short-term end being socialism, and the long-term end being communism. The Chinese government therefore says that China is currently capitalist.

Seriously guys, big 'C'ommunist refers to countries run by the Communist Party, little 'c'ommunist refers to the Marxist theory.

Actually Marxism views bourgeois capitalism as the most progressive society in the world, second only to a socialist (and of course then communist) society, Marx observed that bourgeois society has abolished feudalism and thus because it's materially and historically superior it survives. Marx observed that bourgeois capitalism harnesses the power of modern industrial labor, of which modern civilization was built, but that because the bourgeois exploit their workers in order to achieve this, that the bourgeois has given to the workers the weapons that will be used against it.

Seriously guys, big 'C'ommunist refers to countries run by the Communist Party, little 'c'ommunist refers to the Marxist theory.

The question in the poll is little 'c'. ;)

Actually Marxism views bourgeois capitalism as the most progressive society in the world, second only to a socialist (and of course then communist) society, Marx observed that bourgeois society has abolished feudalism and thus because it's materially and historically superior it survives. Marx observed that bourgeois capitalism harnesses the power of modern industrial labor, of which modern civilization was built, but that because the bourgeois exploit their workers in order to achieve this, that the bourgeois has given to the workers the weapons that will be used against it.

Indeed. Which is what enables the CCP to use such unusual logic to explain that it is adopting capitalism so as to surpass capitalism and prepare for socialism.

The question in the poll is little 'c'. ;)



Indeed. Which is what enables the CCP to use such unusual logic to explain that it is adopting capitalism so as to surpass capitalism and prepare for socialism.

Lol, that's quite a jump, I agree that it does somewhat leave a hole. Both the Russian, Chinese and Cuban Revolutions came to power not on the back of a revolutionary urban worker, but on the back of the peasant guerilla, Marx simply thought that the revolution would only come once bourgeois capitalism was so developed that it was fully class conscious. I mean class conscious also in terms of intellectual development. Marx also observed that the early 'socialist' writings, such as Saint-Simon especially, were the manifestation of the utopian and dreamy beginnings, which is why they were vague and idealistic, rather than materialistic and grounded in the facts of reality.

So then Marx observed that utopianism would only exist so long as the limited consciousness of the workers persisted.

The idea that the proletarian government (which China isn't) must develop socialism but developing capitalism and exploiting the workers is extremely strange, and probably left to the brains of people like Hu Jintao. But yeah I admit in the First World it's rather simple, but when you consider the material discrepancies in different parts of the world, it's confusing. Marx himself said that the different worker parties would have to develop their movement based upon the material conditions of their national development, but he didn't talk about a workers movement coming to power and abolishing feudalism (which is what happened in Russia and China). I think this is dangerous because it distracts from the 'war of ideas' with the bourgeois. Just as absolutism and liberalism battled and the bourgeois liberalism prevailed over feudal absolutism, so must the proletarian engage in such a war with the bourgeois.

Their is a large group of though however which would hold that the 'socialist' adventures of the 20th century to be simply a first step in the coming class war, keeping in mind that previous modes of production have lasted hundreds of years before being supplanted.

The idea that the proletarian government (which China isn't) must develop socialism by developing capitalism and exploiting the workers is extremely strange, and probably left to the brains of people like Hu Jintao.

No disagreement here. It's simply a case of "How can we twist the theory to make it fit with what we're doing?".

All of them are pretty bad. Cuba and North Korea the most communist though.

My aunt came over to the US from 'Nam (Republic of) in '75, courtesy of Air America and the Marines. It was a mess when she left, and apparently in some places it hasn't gotten any better.

All of them are pretty bad. Cuba and North Korea the most communist though.

My aunt came over to the US from 'Nam (Republic of) in '75, courtesy of Air America and the Marines. It was a mess when she left, and apparently in some places it hasn't gotten any better.

Please let this thread die, I thought it ended with a nice conclusion.

china could be considered a communism in the countryside I guess, but it really is a bastard mix of capitalism and socialism, with a crazy government.
That's simply a leftover from the pre-revisionist/bourgeois restoration, and simply a result of the government being unable to completely get rid of rural communal relations.

china could be considered a communism in the countryside I guess, but it really is a bastard mix of capitalism and socialism, with a crazy government.