4 ms·

But don't worry guys... When it's ME given absolute power it will be different... Just trust me. Not even a single Gulag...

kerkeslager 3y ago
What you're describing is authoritarianism, not communism. Authoritarian communists certainly exist, but there are plenty of anarcho-communists who directly oppose anyone having absolute power, including themselves.
- alexvoda 3y ago
  It's a shame GP decided to miss the point so badly. They do indeed describe authoritarianism not communism. I think there are very good reasons that every time some regime self branded as communism it very quickly devolved into dictatorship. Reasons that many of the solutions proposed were unworkable and naive. And I am not sure those reasons can be overcome. Communism should maybe be more of an ideal to be strived for but impossible to ever achieve. I think it is fair to at the same time accept the self labeling of historical regimes as communist when discussing history yet also recognize that none of them ever achieved the communist ideal and became dictatorships instead when discussing philosophy. The values of communism are aligned with democracy yet a democratic communist regime has never been implemented.
  - llamaLord 3y ago
    How could you ever implement it democratically? What happens when people vote for the capitalists? The reality is that communism requires centralised power, centralised power attracts bad actors, and bad actors are significantly more comfortable wrestling control of that power by force than good ones are. Communism isn't inherently totalitarian, but according to all the experiments we've run so far as a species (at the cost of several hundred million lives), it does seem to inevitably lead to totalitarians. Capitalism works as a socio-political system because its decentralised.
    - kerkeslager 3y ago
      > What happens when people vote for the capitalists? You mean what happens if people vote for the capitalists. Why do you assume that people will vote for the capitalists? Historically, we know what happens if people vote for the communists: if this happens at any scale, the US steps in and sets up a capitalist dictator. Examples: 1. The US displacement of Lyuh Woon-Hyung to set up Syngman Rhee. Rhee was "democtratically" elected in a US-controlled election which was boycotted by other candidates because voting was limited to property owners and tax payers or, in smaller towns, to town elders voting for everyone else. 2. The 1948 Costa Rican civil war, where the CIA helped stage a coup against Christian Socialist Rafael Ángel Calderón Guardia. However, the most conservative leader they could find was still pretty close to a communist, and he reinstated democracy, leading to a more equitable democracy, albeit still hampered by CIA interference, in 1950. 3. The 1949-1953 failed operation to overthrow the democratically-elected Albanian government with US/UK trained Albanian anti-communists. 4. Operation Fortune, the 1952 CIA operation to overthrow democratically-elected Jacobo Árbenz, followed by the more successful 1954 CIA coup which instated the capitalist dictator Carlos Castillo Armas, after the US-based United Fruit Company approached the CIA with concerns that Árbenz's anti-exploitation laws would hurt its ability to exploit workers in Guatemala. 5. The 1953 CIA/MI6 Operation Ajax/Boot (a.k.a. 28 Mordad coup), which overthrew a constitutional monarchy headed by Mohammad Mosaddegh's parliamentary government after the parliamentary government nationalized the Iranian oil pipeline. The coup saw the transition of Pahlavi from a constitutional monarch to an authoritarian, who relied heavily on United States government support. That support dissipated during the Iranian Revolution of 1979, as his own security forces refused to shoot into non-violent crowds. 6. The 1961 overthrow of democratically-elected Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, followed by the systematic US-supported genocide of democratic separatists in two separate rebellions. 7. 1970-1973 Chilean elections. Both the US and USSR were funding elections in Chile, so it's difficult to describe this process as purely democratic, but ultimately Salvador Allende was elected along with a right-dominated congress (i.e. congress was capitalist-majority, while the president was communist). This balance wasn't acceptable to the CIA, who in 1973 helped enstate Augusto Pinochet as dictator. Pinochet went on to commit one of the largest genocides in history. 8. The 1976 overthrow of democratically-elected President Isabel Perón in Argentina, starting the military dictatorship of Jorge Rafael Videla, which committed multiple crimes against humanity, with explicit support from the US including multiple visits from Kissinger during its reign of terror. > The reality is that communism requires centralised power, centralised power attracts bad actors, and bad actors are significantly more comfortable wrestling control of that power by force than good ones are. Capitalism is just centralized power by other means, where power becomes concentrated in those with enough wealth to enforce their will. At least with communism there's a chance that the centralized powers can be democratically elected--with capitalism, there's no pretense that corporate executives are democratically elected, with corporations being able to withhold people's basic needs if they don't comply. > Communism isn't inherently totalitarian, but according to all the experiments we've run so far as a species (at the cost of several hundred million lives), it does seem to inevitably lead to totalitarians. As seen above, this is not the case. Numerous large-scale democracies have elected communist leaders--followed by US interference and instatement of capitalist dictatorships. At a smaller scale, there are numerous examples of successful democratic (or even consensus-based) communism. With corporations funding political disinformation and buying candidates, it's questionable whether a capitalist democracy is even possible. But, if people really vote for the capitalists, you have a capitalist government. That's how democracy works: the majority might not be correct in their beliefs, but they still get to put those beliefs into action. The question is, why does the US brand of capitalism not seem to believe that? Why is it that when communists get elected, western capitalists suddenly don't believe in majority rule any more?

kerkeslager 3y ago

What you're describing is authoritarianism, not communism. Authoritarian communists certainly exist, but there are plenty of anarcho-communists who directly oppose anyone having absolute power, including themselves.

alexvoda 3y ago
It's a shame GP decided to miss the point so badly. They do indeed describe authoritarianism not communism. I think there are very good reasons that every time some regime self branded as communism it very quickly devolved into dictatorship. Reasons that many of the solutions proposed were unworkable and naive. And I am not sure those reasons can be overcome. Communism should maybe be more of an ideal to be strived for but impossible to ever achieve. I think it is fair to at the same time accept the self labeling of historical regimes as communist when discussing history yet also recognize that none of them ever achieved the communist ideal and became dictatorships instead when discussing philosophy. The values of communism are aligned with democracy yet a democratic communist regime has never been implemented.
- llamaLord 3y ago
  How could you ever implement it democratically? What happens when people vote for the capitalists? The reality is that communism requires centralised power, centralised power attracts bad actors, and bad actors are significantly more comfortable wrestling control of that power by force than good ones are. Communism isn't inherently totalitarian, but according to all the experiments we've run so far as a species (at the cost of several hundred million lives), it does seem to inevitably lead to totalitarians. Capitalism works as a socio-political system because its decentralised.
  - kerkeslager 3y ago
    > What happens when people vote for the capitalists? You mean what happens if people vote for the capitalists. Why do you assume that people will vote for the capitalists? Historically, we know what happens if people vote for the communists: if this happens at any scale, the US steps in and sets up a capitalist dictator. Examples: 1. The US displacement of Lyuh Woon-Hyung to set up Syngman Rhee. Rhee was "democtratically" elected in a US-controlled election which was boycotted by other candidates because voting was limited to property owners and tax payers or, in smaller towns, to town elders voting for everyone else. 2. The 1948 Costa Rican civil war, where the CIA helped stage a coup against Christian Socialist Rafael Ángel Calderón Guardia. However, the most conservative leader they could find was still pretty close to a communist, and he reinstated democracy, leading to a more equitable democracy, albeit still hampered by CIA interference, in 1950. 3. The 1949-1953 failed operation to overthrow the democratically-elected Albanian government with US/UK trained Albanian anti-communists. 4. Operation Fortune, the 1952 CIA operation to overthrow democratically-elected Jacobo Árbenz, followed by the more successful 1954 CIA coup which instated the capitalist dictator Carlos Castillo Armas, after the US-based United Fruit Company approached the CIA with concerns that Árbenz's anti-exploitation laws would hurt its ability to exploit workers in Guatemala. 5. The 1953 CIA/MI6 Operation Ajax/Boot (a.k.a. 28 Mordad coup), which overthrew a constitutional monarchy headed by Mohammad Mosaddegh's parliamentary government after the parliamentary government nationalized the Iranian oil pipeline. The coup saw the transition of Pahlavi from a constitutional monarch to an authoritarian, who relied heavily on United States government support. That support dissipated during the Iranian Revolution of 1979, as his own security forces refused to shoot into non-violent crowds. 6. The 1961 overthrow of democratically-elected Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, followed by the systematic US-supported genocide of democratic separatists in two separate rebellions. 7. 1970-1973 Chilean elections. Both the US and USSR were funding elections in Chile, so it's difficult to describe this process as purely democratic, but ultimately Salvador Allende was elected along with a right-dominated congress (i.e. congress was capitalist-majority, while the president was communist). This balance wasn't acceptable to the CIA, who in 1973 helped enstate Augusto Pinochet as dictator. Pinochet went on to commit one of the largest genocides in history. 8. The 1976 overthrow of democratically-elected President Isabel Perón in Argentina, starting the military dictatorship of Jorge Rafael Videla, which committed multiple crimes against humanity, with explicit support from the US including multiple visits from Kissinger during its reign of terror. > The reality is that communism requires centralised power, centralised power attracts bad actors, and bad actors are significantly more comfortable wrestling control of that power by force than good ones are. Capitalism is just centralized power by other means, where power becomes concentrated in those with enough wealth to enforce their will. At least with communism there's a chance that the centralized powers can be democratically elected--with capitalism, there's no pretense that corporate executives are democratically elected, with corporations being able to withhold people's basic needs if they don't comply. > Communism isn't inherently totalitarian, but according to all the experiments we've run so far as a species (at the cost of several hundred million lives), it does seem to inevitably lead to totalitarians. As seen above, this is not the case. Numerous large-scale democracies have elected communist leaders--followed by US interference and instatement of capitalist dictatorships. At a smaller scale, there are numerous examples of successful democratic (or even consensus-based) communism. With corporations funding political disinformation and buying candidates, it's questionable whether a capitalist democracy is even possible. But, if people really vote for the capitalists, you have a capitalist government. That's how democracy works: the majority might not be correct in their beliefs, but they still get to put those beliefs into action. The question is, why does the US brand of capitalism not seem to believe that? Why is it that when communists get elected, western capitalists suddenly don't believe in majority rule any more?