• LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US political spectrum is leaning so far to the right. A US left is a France center or moderate right. So what Americans consider communism is merely what French consider moderate leftist.

    • I’m French living in the US
    • voidMainVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, it’s basically “If you keep calling all of the stuff I like ‘communism’, then I guess that makes me a communist.”

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Hell even Obama was right wing to many countries.

      …this was before we all dove headfirst into facism as a trauma response

    • gxgx55@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure, but the meme refers to the communities on the internet that unironically go full tankie, praising Stalin and Mao.

      Worst of all, tankies tend to inflitrate sane leftist spaces and slowly transform them. I’ve witnessed it many times, and that just makes me think that Marxists-Leninists are just the most dominant form of leftism on the internet, which is horrible.

      • Zozano@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think a lot of people give Mao a bad wrap.

        For what it’s worth, Stalin is a monster, and the state of China right now is repugnant.

        Mao didn’t intentionally lead tens of millions of people to starve in the same way Stalin did. Mao was trying to revolutionise agriculture (The Great Leap Forward) but didn’t understand the ecological and logistic principles required.

        I’m convinced his intentions were good, he just wasn’t educated enough to implement something like this.

  • CAPSLOCKFTW@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    There were no actual efforts to establish communism in eastern europe. Only autocratic regimes backed by soviet russia.

    • lieuwex@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      In what sense was it not an actual effort? Just because it quickly slid into non-marxism doesn’t say anything about the initial idea of the revolutionaries. Bakunin predicted exactly what would happen with Marxism, and it did every time.

      If you are against an authoritarian state, the only viable way to communism is to skip the dictatorship part directly and just have anarchism.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I literally pissed a slow day at work away pointing out the many, many flaws in the USSR to a lemming whose primary response was LALALALA I CAN’t HEAR YOU, GO READ THIS BOOK

      There is definitely a cadre of extremely disillusioned and extremely ill informed users who think the USSR was legitimate sunshine and candy communism

    • Polydextrous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There were no actual efforts to establish communism

      Period. Relying on the “temporary” government to relinquish their power is…foolish. If you’re building a system for the greater good, hierarchy will always undermine that goal. Unequal amounts of power does not a just system make.

      • kilinrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey, I can think what happened in Eastern Europe was just authoritarian dictatorships, backed by Muscovite colonialism & branded as communism just the same as what happened in parts of South America was just authoritarian dictatorship, backed by American imperialism & branded as laissez-faire capitalism.

        Also I can think communism has never actually been tried, and that it’s functionally impossible (therefore people should stop advocating for it).

      • cryball@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can’t critizise something that has never been tried! Also we already got a comment critizising capitalism as a counter argument :D

    • dub@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m no too learned in the subject but what would “true” communism even look like on the large scale like a country? Would it even be feasible?

      • Atheran@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        True communism in a country is impossible.

        You can have socialism, or anarchy, which we’ve seen before, but communism cannot function in one country alone, unless said country is completely and absolutely self reliant.

        A major part of communism is internationalism, which is why socialist countries had the Comintern. (Communist International). Besides a political/social system, communism has a strong basis as an economic system. You can’t apply communist economic system principles to the capitalist market.

        To my knowledge, no existing country is self reliant to the point that they can completely cut off trade with the rest of the world. USSR didn’t do it, China didn’t do it and they were the two biggest countries at the time.

        That, of course is all a very surface level ELI5, and if you want to ask something more specific or in depth, feel free to.

        • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Unless you’re an ultra-orthodox marxist, there is no such thing as trüe communism™.

          There always have been many different ideas what „communism“ is, e.g. there have been various „nationalist communist“ ideologies (complicated by the fact that the Russian SFSR called everything „nationalist“ that wasn’t 100% aligned with its ideas of the Soviet Union, e.g. Hungary).

          There are also no clear boundaries between communism, socialism, and anarchism, e.g. Kropotkin with his theories of anarchist communism.

          That being said, I don’t think communism is a system (either social or economic), it’s strictly an idealogy, meaning it’s a way to achieve something, i.e. the classless and stateless society. If you follow that thought to its logical end, you cannot even „achieve“ communism at all, since at this point e.g. the proletariat ceases to exist, and as a result you cannot have a „dictatorship of the proletariat“.

          It’s… complicated.

          • Atheran@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            In feel like you make it complicated to arrive at your conclusion here. Communism, as described by Marx and Engels and to some degree Lenin, is something very specific that covers most aspects of the society. Political, social and economic. Marx himself wrote books upon books on the economy of a socialist, communist system.

            It is not an abstract “I don’t like capitalism so let’s try something different” approach. And yes, many have tried to adapt it, as you mentioned which is why those different approaches carry a different name ‘anarchist communism’ in your example. Because they are different enough from flat out communism.

            • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, I have a very easy explanation what communism is, it’s just that nobody else agrees is the issue.

              different approaches carry a different name

              Yeah, well… So let’s see, we have: Marxism, Leninism, Trotskyism, Stalinism, Titoism, Gulyáskommunizmus (both, as mentioned before, considered „nationalist communism“ by other communists), Rätekommunismus, Realsozialismus, Maoism …

              So, which one of those is the true communism?

              Joking aside, most of the 20th century was spent with people killing other people because they had slightly different opinions on what true communism means, so it’s really not me who made things complicated.

          • Atheran@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Without search engine and without going into detail that is out of the scope, anarchy is a different path to a classless system. Said classless system is different enough from communism to warrant discussion but close enough for that discussion to be devolving into anarchy vs socialism most of the time to differentiate the path to that system.

            Said path in anarchy is comprised of setting up collectives that start small, neighborhood small, and gradually evolve. Each collective shares almost everything between its members and there’s no leadership or ranking across its members.

            Anything deeper than that leads to a long discussion that is out of the scope of this thread and definitely out of the scope of the ELI5 the post I originally replied to needed or had the philosophical basis to understand possibly. I’m not saying one is better than the other, but they are quite different approaches to a similar goal, a classless society that money does not rule all.

            • Dharma Curious@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Anarchist checking in, so, y’know, bias and all that. But I’d say it’s just as impossible to have anarchism in one country. Bearing in mind, I’m an anarcho-communist, and not terribly familiar things like mutualism, so that may be different. I tend to view, as do (to my knowledge) most ancoms, communism and anarchism as synonyms. The difference is how we get to the end point, not the end point itself. A stateless, classless, moneyless society. We’ve had the Spanish anarchists, and some examples of societies like Madagascar, where there are villages and region that function in an anarchistic way, but True Anarchism™ couldn’t function in a single country/region. It needs to be international in it’s scope for all the same reasons communism needs to be international in it’s scope. Anarchist political methods can function at a smaller scale, but we can’t have a fully anarchist society until it’s global.

              Which all just means that I’m an anarchist because I prefer the methods to achieving the shared goal, not because I disagree on the goal itself, if that makes sense.

      • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Realistically, it would look something like how the Anarchists organized society in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War, or how Rojava is organizing today with communal federations. Anarchism sidesteps the inevitable authoritarian regime that various Marxist theories have by not installing a ‘temporary’ vanguard state that quickly becomes autocratic and dictatorial, they just jump straight to decentralizing power immediately by giving it to the people.

    • ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Communism fails every time it is tried because it goes against human nature of constantly comparing yourself to others and trying to improve yourself. You will never do harder work if you can get the same reward for easier work, and you will look for other, less moral ways of getting the bigger reward.

      Communism sounds great but it will never work until we have unlimited resources and completely automated labour.

  • P4ulin_Kbana@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    To be honest, I’ve been using Lemmy for a week now, and I’m kind of concerned with all the communism stuff around here.

  • BurnedDonutHole@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck Communism and fuck unchecked capitalism. People deserve basic human rights. Free heallthcare, education, insurance and liveable basic income is a must. It doesn’t make your society full of freeloaders instead it gives all the people a chance to become what they want in the society. I hope that people can see this basic difference and we can work towards for a better future as humanity instead of whatever country title.

    • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fuck centralized power. By definition true communism shouldnt have any of that, and anyone considering the systems equal is butt chugging propaganda

  • EnnuinerDog@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    How dare teenagers not become Neoliberals while growing up in a late capitalist hellscape where climate change can’t be taken seriously because it isn’t a profitable problem to solve.

  • Flinch@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Redditors try not to froth and post anticommunism for 120 seconds challenge (impossible!!!)

    • HRDS_654@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The main issue is that they communism is economic policy, NOT social policy. While they do go hand in hand people often conflate the two. Many dictatorships use communism as a way to control the people but that doesn’t mean that communism leads directly to dictatorships.

      • Spinnyl@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Communism is an economic fairy tale, not policy.
        It would be nice if it were possible but with the current state of the world, it is not.

        Social democracy is a reasonable compromise.

        • Sharkwellington@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Is true Communism even possible if it’s being attempted by flawed humans? Seems like it doesn’t matter the economic system so much as the fact that people will ruin anything given enough time.

      • Yendor@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t have a communist economic policy without being authoritarian. It’s human nature - once money is removed as a motivator, society breaks down unless you motivate people some other way (not being sent to the gulag).

    • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Eeehhhh there are plenty of Tankies around here that unironically simp for Stalin and Mao, (never Pol Pot for some reason though), and those regimes were frought with corruption and are often called “red fascism,” so I wouldn’t be so quick to say “we” here. “You” maybe, “me” definitely, but “we” is too strong of a word when there are plenty of people doing just that on lemmygrad right now, and lemmy.ml being a marxist instance some there as well (though the refugees mostly drowned them out now).

      • SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Mao and Stalin (though to a noticably lesser extent) actually had insightful things to say though. Mao’s essays on epistemology are genuinely really fantastic. And that can be true alongside all of the show trials and sparrow murder which was genuinely really fucking bad.

        Pol Pot meanwhile admitted to never having really ever read Marx, and his faction of the Communist Party of Cambodia was more concerned about Khmer ultranationalism and anti-Vietmamese sentiment that had been brewing over the course of French colonialism, then with anything to do with building socialism.

        So, I guess what I’m saying is that we ought to take a nuanced, grounded view of historic socialisms that accounts for their success and failures, and doesn’t fall into either mindless exoneration of awful shit, nor reflexively screeching “TANKIE TANKIE!!!” Every time anything vaguely socialist oriented comes up in discussion.

        • Akasazh@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Stalin botched Marxism into an authoritarian system that suited him. It was successful and he sponsored other authoritarians that liked his ideas. Those are all about the concentration of power and have fuck all to do with Marxs ideas.

  • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    More like: People on the internet being critical of the current system, Americans on the internet saying “COMMUNISM BAD” as if USSR style state capitalism is the only other possible option.

    • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      How else would it work? You need some power structure that actively forbids a free market and private ownership. And that power will sooner or later be abused.

      You can’t just imagine some utopia where nobody has to work, and everything is free, and call that communism.

      • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The core tenant of every form of Communism, regardless of if said party or organisation follows it, is as follows: that the means of production should belong to the workers who work them. If the means of production are not in the hands of the workers, then they are not communist. If they are in the hands of a CEO or a corporation, you have private capitalism or market capitalis like the US. If you put them in the hands of a state, they are in the state, you get state capitalism ala China or the USSR.

        The power structure of the state protects an upper class, be it billionaires or “the party”. If you abolish the state, but not capitalism, capitalism will rebuild the state (which is why Anarcho capitalism fails every time) and vice versa (which is what happens with Marxist Leninism).

        For a Communist or communalist society to work it needs to be Anarchist or classically Libertarian (aka like Bakunin or Kropotkin proposed, not “money first”). It needs to have a horizontal and democratic decision making process that is decentralised, federated, and involves all the members of the community or communities effected. If there is to be a state, it should be to facilitate the colaboration of communities in a bottom up manner. These are the features of almost every single effective or successful Anarchist or Socialist movements from Rojava or the Zapatistas, as well as non-political movements like the Open Source Movement, railway preservatiion movement, and even the early RNLI.

        The power structure thant would forbid a free market would be the collective weight of everyone else rather than a state that, sooner or later, becomes the jackboot of capital.

        • MostlyBirds@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The system you describe cannot exist. An anarchist or libertarian state in the real world can neither regulate nor defend itself from other states. It’s a fantasy that would collapse immediately upon implementation in all possible real world circumstances.

  • sweet@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    boomers destroyed the earth beyond all belief, poisoned everyone with sketchy ass chemicals, destroyed the economy more than once (twice in my life), most of us will NEVER own a home because the housed your grand pappy paid 100k for is now worth 2.5 million and average yearly wage is less than 30,000… among a million other things. The greed and entitlement is baffling, mix that in with delusional red scare propaganda that a ton of people fall for and yall mfers spending time defending all this insane shit.

    we effectively live in a corporate government where what the people want doesn’t matter alongside the million other ways we are lied to and exploited. Billionaires and trillionaires run the world and they keep pushing for “the next thing” like the metaverse, blockchain and going mars while most of us cant even afford to fucking eat. Suck it. I guarantee that you cant even define communism and point out how it differs from social policies even on a very basic fundamental level. Fuck dude

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And Soviet communism was… better how? Just as (if not more) destructive to the environment, and their “billionaires” were called “party members” instead. What an improvement! Now they can jail/deport political dissenters without even having to pretend to hold a fair trial.

      Now of course this is where communists usually go No True Scotsman, but consider for just ONE MOMENT that the concept of wealth inequality is not, in fact, unique to capitalism. Any economic system is vulnerable to greed. And that the countries with arguably the strongest social welfare, highest human development, etc. are… the Nordics. Hardly capitalist, hardly hellholes.

      This is why people say communists are angsty teenagers. Capitalism is a deeply flawed system, but all of what you just pointed to is, in fact, not unique to capitalism. That’s just Americana. Pointing to the U.S. as a reason why “capitalism bad” is just as silly as pointing to N.K. as a reason why “communism bad”.
      Typical American with a viewpoint so narrow you can’t see further than your nose. I’ve had lots of interesting discussions with French communists, and I agree with some of their viewpoints, but to start with you have to realize that capitalism is not the root of ALL evil, only of some specific systemic issues, which are only a small part of what’s wrong with the US.

  • Rubezahl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am from Eastern Europe and I share this sentiment when I see anyone from the West defending communism. The issue is complicated but, to put it bluntly:

    No, Timothy, communism didn’t fail in Eastern Europe because it was implemented wrongly. This is a very complicated topic but the tldr summary is “It is a broken idea, it did not work and it will never work. The natural and logical outcome of any attempt at Marxism is a bloodbath followed by autocracy.”

    That being said, communism isn’t the only way to achieve a more equitable society. You have social democracy (in Lennin’s words - communism’s greatest adversary); organized labour movements; collectivist anarchism; communitariasm, etc.

    Communism, as applied in the 20th century, violently fought against or oppressed all of these movements and is incompatible with any of them.

    Not to mention that in most countries nowadays orthodox communists have been hugely discredited for excusing the Russian war of annihilation against the Ukrainian people.

    In conclusion, if you live in the USA or Western Europe and you are unhappy with how corporate greed has ruined society, don’t look to communism for answers. There are many other proposed solutions out there - go and research these. Communism is very well known, which makes it easily accessible to people who want change - but it is never, ever the solution.

    • CthulhuOnIce@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      being from eastern Europe doesn’t automatically make your position on communism any more credible, especially when statistically most of your peers disagree with you

      Also it’s really hilarious how you claim that communism is more accessible to westerners than social democracy, like ???

      • Spinnyl@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        especially when statistically most of your peers disagree with you

        There is not a single post-communist nation in Eastern Europe that feels anything other than hate towards communism on average. Its effects were worse than WWII.

  • PASAQUALIA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s funny because if you look at living standards in eastern Europe during communism’s peak they were wayyy better than they are now

  • nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Communism isn’t the issue the same way Capitalism isn’t the issue, the issue is rich people abusing working class and poor people. Removing democracy from these systems just make them absolutely horrid in the long run. Also China isn’t communist it’s state capitalist dictatorship.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Meanwhile in the real world