What is communism?

[Patshiv]

I'm not posting this to find out what communism is but rather to find out how communism is percieved, especially by americans who generally seem to have a pretty skewed idea about it.

I'm doing some research on cultural perspectives for an assignment in a course on organization analysis, and for this I'd like to get a general idea about what people think about communism in general and if at all possible the ideals on which communism was founded.

My basis for the statement that americans seem to have a skewed idea about it is really years of listening to american popculture but can be examplified by the phase "accuse them of being communists" which has a premise that clashes with absolutely everything I know about the subject. I dont wish to elaborate on this because I'd rather not bias any responses.

Also before you ask I'm from Denmark, and to the best of my knowledge there has never been a hugely successful communist party in government here.

I'm not really looking for a debate on the pros and cons of communism (though i am open for that debate as well) which is the reason why I'm not posting this in the religion and politics board.

Edit: To clarify I'd like input from absolutely anyone willing to give it.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

It's basically means you hate freedom.

But for real, what I've always perceived it to be is the truest form of equality, which ends up keeping anyone who aspires to greater things down. It's something that sounds good on paper, but in reality, it just plain can't work.

There hasn't been true communism (which I believe is called Marxism) in society to this day, because for it to work people need to not be... well, people.

 

[Soviet Steve]

A Dane here - not sure if you want my opinion so feel free to disregard it:

In theory communism is a broad political ideology that emphasises collective ownership.

In practice it was an extension of Soviet authority around the world at first, and then later a broad anti-liberal movement encompassing many varieties. (Stalinism, Maoism, Titoism etc.)

I'd be happy to elaborate if there are questions.

 

[Patshiv]

How does equality necessitate the restriction of individuals? You say its a true form of equality, honestly to me it sounds like you mean an absolute form of equality.

 

[Haxxle]

I haven't made any serious research into communism, but from what I can tell from scraps of information I remember; communism is equality for all which sounds like in my head 'You have a dollar; everyone has a dollar'

 

[Thaluikhain]

Everyone works for the state, which own and run all industrial concerns.

And/or, anything I don't personally like.

Oh, Australian, BTW.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Its a system that will never work because most people are to stupid to see that it could work.

Rather ironic.

Would you care to explain this? As of my understanding the monopolization of power by the vanguard party always results in an autocracy as the absence of an economic incentive to perform well leads to shortages which the government is unable to respond to by other means than violence and terror.

 

[GoldenFish]

I like the idea of communism myself, although I am no expert. As JoesshittyOs has already said it's great in its most ideal form but unfortunately in a nationwide/empire size it has a lot of problems (can work great for small communities like communes although I'm not saying communes are all communist). If a population was motivated enough to work with the government and work together I think communism could really work, but I don't really see that happening.

I'm from New Zealand.

Also I don't think you'll get the average Americans opinion from the Escapist.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Communism in it's pure form can't exist because people are too stupid to accept it. Our nature wouldn't allow such a system to last long because there will always be people who want to have more than others, who want money and power. Even though in the end none of that shit matter. This is what real communism should look like. Not the Russian and Chinese version, but this:

 

[Patshiv]

Everyone works for the state, which own and run all industrial concerns.

This is rather interresting, why did you choose to limit it to industrial concerns? Do you see communism as something that can only exist in a situation where there is something external that has an interrest in the society that embraces communism? Also you bring up the concept of ownership when referring to the state, which again implies that someone else also has the capacity to own.
I know the idea of ownership might just be inherent in the way you conceptualize societies, but do you think that ownership is essential to communism?

And/or, anything I don't personally like.

Yes ok I see where this one might come from I now run the risk of overanalyzing but is this use of communism a reference to a metaphorical "evil" or a comedic reference to a stereotype or a combination? And also had you previously thought of why you use cimmunism like that?

I dont mean to hound you mate, but these are exactly the kinds of things I was looking for.


Also i just realized my mistake in posting this subject during what is essentially the middle of the night in the states.

 

[SinisterGehe]

A Finn here. Philosophy student... I had to go trough political philosophy course, but I study and think about ontology, language and moral mostly.

But how I see communism.

In theory it is perfectly well functioning system for a society. But it has way too many holes that can allow the chaos of nature to take over the minds of human beings. Humans are not built to be fair, just and selfless. It would function if everyone, that means every single being in that society, is willing to take the same amount, do the same share and think and work as one, without any subjective variations in anything.
But as we know that is impossible. It only works as a Utopia.

In real it is a system which was used to do really bad things. It wasn't executed right and was used to make everyone but the few poor.

In American culture. It is the big bad, freedom hating threat that America has to safe humanity from... Which is rotten idea also.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Everyone works for the state, which own and run all industrial concerns.

This is rather interresting, why did you choose to limit it to industrial concerns? Do you see communism as something that can only exist in a situation where there is something external that has an interrest in the society that embraces communism? Also you bring up the concept of ownership when referring to the state, which again implies that someone else also has the capacity to own.
I know the idea of ownership might just be inherent in the way you conceptualize societies, but do you think that ownership is essential to communism?

Well, perhaps "industrial" isn't the right word. A broader "means of production", or "things that need to get done" perhaps.

As for ownership, isn't that needed to differentiate communism from capitalism, which communism is a reaction to?

And/or, anything I don't personally like.

Yes ok I see where this one might come from I now run the risk of overanalyzing but is this use of communism a reference to a metaphorical "evil" or a comedic reference to a stereotype or a combination? And also had you previously thought of why you use cimmunism like that?

Well, that was a bit tongue in cheek. I personally don't use the word that way, but many people do. I'd attribute it to the successful propaganda of the cold war.

Similarly, any right wing authorative government gets labelled as fascist or Nazi, because of how the two are equated...implying that something can't be right wing and authorative without being one of those. Similarly, anything authorative (such as police) or political movement that is/could said to be taking away rights/privileges gets labelled the same to discredit it (Rush Limbaugh using the term "feminazis" to describe those people who think men shouldn't have a privileged position over women, for example).

 

[Patshiv]

As of my understanding the monopolization of power by the vanguard party always results in an autocracy as the absence of an economic incentive to perform well leads to shortages which the government is unable to respond to by other means than violence and terror.

This is essentially what i think is the problem with the practical application of communism, but by the time the vanguard party achieves monopolization of power, it's no longer communism, not even in the ideals.

Also I don't think you'll get the average Americans opinion from the Escapist.

This is exactly why i posted this on the escapist, I can't stand the stereotypical average american.

 

[Low Key]

It makes no sense to be ambitious by, say, getting a second job, and it stifles innovation from educated individuals by rewarding mediocrity. Equality is great and all, and I wish we could attain it at some point, but there is usually that greedy person somewhere in the pipeline that screws it up for everyone. It could either be a corrupt politician running the show, or it could be that person who wants to start a coup and overthrow those in power.

Now, I'm not here to claim capitalism is perfect or anything. I think we all know it's not, but communism is designed to be perfect, and anything hailed as perfection yet relies on imperfect beings such as ourselves is destined to fail.

I'm American by the way. Maybe not the "average" American, but fairly close.

 

[SomeLameStuff]

Communism is an idea which sounds really good on paper, but in practice, totally flunks. MAINLY because humans are dicks and would take advantage of it the first chance they get.

 

[lionsprey]

It's a nice idea but sadly couldn't work in reality because of human nature.

Swedish here

 

[Angry Camel]

From what little attention I paid in history class, this is what I think communism is: the pooling together of all resources in the goverment, where upon it is given to the people as they need. Nor more, but more importantly, no less, which is why it appealed to the Russians in the early 20th century.

In theory, it's a good system. Everyone is pulling their weight as best they can and get everything they need to live, with more luxuries afforded to everyone equally as standards rise. The problem is, it's too vulnerable and reliant on the people in government being perfectly just. If they decide to withold things from the population and hoard it for themselves secretly or justify it somehow, the system disintergrates, with workers thinking they're getting a fair deal when they're not and the politicians end up filthy rich. There's also potential for disagreement on how much certain people must contribute (eg: production levels), causing resentment and other problems.

There's probably something wrong in there, but take it how you want, OP.