|
Post by jasonward on Oct 5, 2018 21:45:32 GMT
Communism the idea
Further to discussion in another section, I want to help expose the myth and misinformation around what is and is not communism.
Communism as an idea, was first conceived by Karl Marx in his seminal work Das Kapital. What many people have missed in their understanding of Karl Marx and Communism, was that Das Kapital wasn't a discourse on Communism at all, but a discourse on Capitalism. Communism is not a significant amount of the book, or the work Karl Marx did or indeed is much of anything in Das Kapital.
In it's purest form, capitalism, has a major failing, it's unsustainable, it directs wealth away from the workers (those who actually produce) towards to capitalists (people that own the means of production) and provides for no method for wealth to flow in the opposite direction, left entirely to its own devices, ultimately the few haves will have everything and the have nots will have nothing, and capitalism at that point has to fail since money can no longer flow towards the capitalists. Capitalism has the seeds of its own destruction from day one.
Karl Marx theorised that AFTER capitalism failed, something he called communism must arise, and that one of the defining characteristics of this emergent communism would be that the workers would own the means of production, in other words the workers would be the capitalists.
Now, whilst my summary here is a huge simplification of the arguments and details of what Karl Marx said, it is fair summary.
Communism as practised
Now there are a couple of things to note before we even start on the Soviets etc, firstly, communism as Karl Marx imagined it has never had opportunity to exist, capitalism has not failed, at least not yet, in the way he said it would. Secondly, Karl Marx never described how communism would work, he never laid out a political philosophy or looked at the practicalities of communism.
The only substantive similarities between the communism of Karl Marx and of Soviet Russia is common ownership.
However, when you look at Karl Marx's communism, he's talking about society that is flat, no one person has more wealth or power than any other person, but that's just not at all true when it comes to Soviet Russia, there were very clearly rich and poor, powerful and weak, so by definition not the communism of Karl Marx.
But Maybe Karl Marx's communism is happening anyway?
So why hasn't capitalism collapsed? Well, basically because capitalism has proved to be quite flexible, it has been able to succeed and work alongside government intervention, welfare, regulation, unionisation, etc etc And each of those have in their way mitigated capitalism worst failing.
But consider something else.
Pensions.
Private pension funds are increasingly important to the capital markets, and these days own a significant proportion of the wealth making means, and at the moment, it seems this trend looks set to continue. And who owns the pensions? The workers, the people that produce.
I doubt very much that human nature is ever really going to change, and I doubt very much some form of egalitarian society is ever going to emerge, but it does occur to me, that over time, communism as envisaged by Karl Marx may well emerge and it will be called capitalism and the capitalists will be the pension funds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 0:49:33 GMT
To further put this in perspective, the ultimate outcome of Communism implies, if not outright states, the abolition of all forms of government. Now, if you're a government and are very attached to the idea ruling over the populous, you're not going to be too enthused with the idea of giving that up for unilateral equality. Hence, Maoism, Stalinism, Leninism, the -isms that became devolved from Marx and Engels' original tenants of Communism as outlined in their manifesto. It ceases being Communism as originally envisioned as soon it's said that: "All we have to do is kill X and all will be fine." As with most reinterpreted ideologies, there's some very interesting Indonesian history in regards to Communism as a scapegoat. I also have my doubts that Buddhism was founded with the Rinzai school initially in mind: The source of the "Dirty Red" stereotype predominantly found in the West comes from the places you'd usually expect -- propaganda, mainly. McCarthyism still remains a strong influence. It was a period in time where people were brought up in front of committees and investigated for being Communists or having Communist sympathies. Hundreds of people -- usually in the entertainment industry -- ended up blacklisted or persecuted in some fashion based on circumstantial evidence. Suspicion was usually enough and investigations typically fell into the field of "better safe, than sorry" (you could get discharged from the Airforce on suspicion). One of these figures who ended up in front of the Senate Committee is someone you wouldn't typically expect: J. Robert Oppenheimer, the man credited with creating the atomic bomb. Someone who had been long reported sympathetic to the ideal, if not an outright member of any Communist party. During this particular time, his security clearance was revoked and he was regularly harassed for the people he associated with. Another figure was Charlie Chaplin who ended up exiled from the States for the views he exposited both on and off the screen. In one particular instance, he refused to condemn a friend, just because he might be a Communist. Worse than that in their eyes, he was also a foreigner and he may have also been a homosexual. You can see how the stereotype is bundled up in a variety of prejudices with a believable scapegoat to position it under. The foreigners they don't like, well, they must be Communists. Those who don't ascribe to gender norms, well, they must be Communists too. And so on. It's why nowadays McCarthyism is a word synonymous with "show trial" or "kangaroo court". But unfortunately, some of these old misconceptions still linger on.
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 6, 2018 7:51:14 GMT
I did read an article about Karl Marx and Das Kapital (his book) recently and I have to agree with both of you. Karl Marx himself did not really want to start any type of revolution and called his book "That damn book". He would have been mortified and appalled at what happened in all the so called "Communist" countries during the 20th century.
The article I read also said it might actually be likely that the outcome Marx describes in his book happens, and I think you might not be too far off Jasonward.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 8:09:43 GMT
I did read an article about Karl Marx and Das Kapital (his book) recently and I have to agree with both of you. Karl Marx himself did not really want to start any type of revolution and called his book "That damn book". He would have been mortified and appalled at what happened in all the so called "Communist" countries during the 20th century. The article I read also said it might actually be likely that the outcome Marx describes in his book happens, and I think you might not be too far off Jasonward. I always come at these ideologies from a catholic perspective.(many have tried to cure me of faith 😂) In 1917 we believe that the Virgin Mary appeared to 3 children in Fatima Portugal.It is officially recognised by the Church two of the children died very early on and the third died only ion recent years. The story is intriguing as it predates the Russian revolution. another interesting thing is there is no mention of Nazism(we all know what happened but it is never mentioned yet errors of Russia is).If there is a God ,if there is a heaven and a hell then they came to warn us of the errors of communism as if they were the greater threat. i quote part of the text and hope you find it as fascinating as i did as an 8 year old lad.It frightened the shit out of me. “Looking with compassion at the pale and trembling little ones, the vision spoke to them: "You have seen hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace." VISION FORETELLS WORLD WAR II AND COMMUNISM "The war (First World War, then raging)is going to end. But if people do not stop offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius the Eleventh. When you see a night illuminated by an unknown light, (January 25, 1938)know that this is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its many crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father." "To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays. If my requests are granted, Russia will be converted and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecution of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me and she shall be converted, and a period of peace shall be granted to the world." The Lady asked that this message be kept secret until she gave permission to reveal it.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 8:39:52 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War.
Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century.
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 6, 2018 8:40:47 GMT
I always come at these ideologies from a catholic perspective.(many have tried to cure me of faith 😂) In 1917 we believe that the Virgin Mary appeared to 3 children in Fatima Portugal.It is officially recognised by the Church two of the children died very early on and the third died only ion recent years. The story is intriguing as it predates the Russian revolution. another interesting thing is there is no mention of Nazism(we all know what happened but it is never mentioned yet errors of Russia is).If there is a God ,if there is a heaven and a hell then they came to warn us of the errors of communism as if they were the greater threat. i quote part of the text and hope you find it as fascinating as i did as an 8 year old lad.It frightened the shit out of me. “Looking with compassion at the pale and trembling little ones, the vision spoke to them: "You have seen hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace." VISION FORETELLS WORLD WAR II AND COMMUNISM "The war (First World War, then raging)is going to end. But if people do not stop offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius the Eleventh. When you see a night illuminated by an unknown light, (January 25, 1938)know that this is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its many crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father." "To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays. If my requests are granted, Russia will be converted and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecution of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me and she shall be converted, and a period of peace shall be granted to the world." The Lady asked that this message be kept secret until she gave permission to reveal it.” Yes, I did hear of that, my mum even has some books on the topic (which I did not read though).
But what is labelled "Communism" here is not Communism as described by Marx. What Marx wrote is not an ideology but an analysis of how capitalism is going to collapse because it is unsustainable (which we may witness in reality in the near future).
This is the point we are all trying to make here- Soviet Russia and China are NOT communist countries as described by Marx.
They were brutal destructive dictatorships- exactly what these Saints were predicting.
The term "Communism" has been misused for decades for propaganda reasons on both sides.
What Marx said in his book actually makes a lot of sense and modern sociologists are looking at his work again with a modern viewpoint (as in that article I was reading).
What Marx critizised in religion was the total abuse of religion by the ruling classes- the kind of religion that has nothing to do anymore with "love one another" but was an instrument of suppression. Basically very similar to what Martin Luther critizised 500 years ago.
And, as a Catholic Christian myself, I have to agree that they are right in their critisism.
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 6, 2018 8:50:16 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War. Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century. In Communist Germany, the church was also allowed to exist. While it was not encouraged to be Christian by the State, they did not really have to fear for themselves or face serious repercussions. Even the Christian Party was allowed to exist beside the state party, although they never had any influence beside the SED who always faked and rigged the elections. Angela Merkels dad was a Protestant priest and she was in the Eastern Christian Party before they fused with the West- German Christian Party after the unification.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 8:51:32 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War. Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century. In Communist Germany, the church was also allowed to exist. While it was not encouraged to be Christian by the State, they did not really have to fear for themselves or face serious repercussions. Even the Christian Party was allowed to exist beside the state party, although they never had any influence beside the SED who always faked and rigged the elections. Angela Merkels dad was a Protestant priest and she was in the Eastern Christian Party before they fused with the West- German Christian Party after the unification. Exactly, there wasn't a unified Communist ideology as such. It's not the knife, the knife can be used to cut vegetables or kill a man, it's the hand that wields it. Actually, while I've got it in front of me, what Van der Post writes on the first page of his travelogue bears repeating, whatever the circumstances: (This was 1964, for reference.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 8:52:54 GMT
I always come at these ideologies from a catholic perspective.(many have tried to cure me of faith 😂) In 1917 we believe that the Virgin Mary appeared to 3 children in Fatima Portugal.It is officially recognised by the Church two of the children died very early on and the third died only ion recent years. The story is intriguing as it predates the Russian revolution. another interesting thing is there is no mention of Nazism(we all know what happened but it is never mentioned yet errors of Russia is).If there is a God ,if there is a heaven and a hell then they came to warn us of the errors of communism as if they were the greater threat. i quote part of the text and hope you find it as fascinating as i did as an 8 year old lad.It frightened the shit out of me. “Looking with compassion at the pale and trembling little ones, the vision spoke to them: "You have seen hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace." VISION FORETELLS WORLD WAR II AND COMMUNISM "The war (First World War, then raging)is going to end. But if people do not stop offending God, a worse one will break out during the reign of Pius the Eleventh. When you see a night illuminated by an unknown light, (January 25, 1938)know that this is the great sign that God gives you that He is going to punish the world for its many crimes by means of war, hunger, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father." "To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart and the Communion of Reparation on the first Saturdays. If my requests are granted, Russia will be converted and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecution of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated. In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me and she shall be converted, and a period of peace shall be granted to the world." The Lady asked that this message be kept secret until she gave permission to reveal it.” Yes, I did hear of that, my mum even has some books on the topic (which I did not read though).
But what is labelled "Communism" here is not Communism as described by Marx. What Marx wrote is not an ideology but an analysis of how capitalism is going to collapse because it is unsustainable (which we may witness in reality in the near future).
This is the point we are all trying to make here- Soviet Russia and China are NOT communist countries as described by Marx.
They were brutal destructive dictatorships- exactly what these Saints were predicting.
The term "Communism" has been misused for decades for propaganda reasons on both sides.
What Marx said in his book actually makes a lot of sense and modern sociologists are looking at his work again with a modern viewpoint (as in that article I was reading).
What Marx critizised in religion was the total abuse of religion by the ruling classes- the kind of religion that has nothing to do anymore with "love one another" but was an instrument of suppression. Basically very similar to what Martin Luther critizised 500 years ago.
And, as a Catholic Christian myself, I have to agree that they are right in their critisism.
I am of the opinion and i know many disagree.Christ can be seen as the first communist and the first Christians very much shared among the community but they Had GOD at the centre of their acts Communism fascism have man as the centre point and this is very much the error.Some problems on this planet will never be solved.We will never eradicate evil or poverty.Poverty will always remain in some form,but we should not give up trying.Someone will always have the upper hand,man has a flaw in his character so any system has to be made Man proof.Some are going to hate me but Martin Luther was mad and a a very distasteful character in history.(IMO).
|
|
|
Post by tuigirl on Oct 6, 2018 9:47:13 GMT
I am of the opinion and i know many disagree.Christ can be seen as the first communist and the first Christians very much shared among the community but they Had GOD at the centre of their acts Communism fascism have man as the centre point and this is very much the error.Some problems on this planet will never be solved.We will never eradicate evil or poverty.Poverty will always remain in some form,but we should not give up trying.Someone will always have the upper hand,man has a flaw in his character so any system has to be made Man proof.Some are going to hate me but Martin Luther was mad and a a very distasteful character in history.(IMO). I wish you could come and discuss with my dad. That would be a very enlightening and interesting discussion to listen to (I mean that in the most positive sense).
My dad is a very religious man and but he is also a Union member and socialist. Plus he is Lutheran protestant and Martin Luther is his biggest hero. My mum and my dad actually caused a bit of a scandal with their marriage back in the day in our backwards village, because she, as a Catholic, had married a Protestant. This was back in the day when there were still seperate graveyards for both. I was brought up going to both churches and taking part in both communities.
I agree that Martin Luther had some really bad sides (he was a xenophobic racist for one, which makes him a bit of a hypocrite concerning the Christian faith, but back then only white people were considered as humans. Come to think of it, maybe the racist hate of some of the Protestants in the US stems from his writings!!; he also was a very ruthless politician and did not show much respect for human lives during the peasant revolts) but many of the things he said critisising the Catholic church back in the day were valid. Plus he translated the bible for us, so that is also a big bonus.
I do not believe he was mad, I think he knew exactly what he was doing (and some of the things he did and said were monstrous).
BUT he also said one of the most wonderful and hopeful things: "If I knew the world was going to end tomorrow, I would still plant an apple tree today." This made my dad and his church group plant apple trees in the fields all around our and the neighbouring communities during the Luther anniversary year.
As a sign of hope for everybody to see.
As with everything in live and society, nothing is ever truly black and white.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 10:27:27 GMT
I am of the opinion and i know many disagree.Christ can be seen as the first communist and the first Christians very much shared among the community but they Had GOD at the centre of their acts Communism fascism have man as the centre point and this is very much the error.Some problems on this planet will never be solved.We will never eradicate evil or poverty.Poverty will always remain in some form,but we should not give up trying.Someone will always have the upper hand,man has a flaw in his character so any system has to be made Man proof.Some are going to hate me but Martin Luther was mad and a a very distasteful character in history.(IMO). I wish you could come and discuss with my dad. That would be a very enlightening and interesting discussion to listen to (I mean that in the most positive sense).
My dad is a very religious man and but he is also a Union member and socialist. Plus he is Lutheran protestant and Martin Luther is his biggest hero. My mum and my dad actually caused a bit of a scandal with their marriage back in the day in our backwards village, because she, as a Catholic, had married a Protestant. This was back in the day when there were still seperate graveyards for both. I was brought up going to both churches and taking part in both communities.
I agree that Martin Luther had some really bad sides (he was a xenophobic racist for one, which makes him a bit of a hypocrite concerning the Christian faith, but back then only white people were considered as humans. Come to think of it, maybe the racist hate of some of the Protestants in the US stems from his writings!!; he also was a very ruthless politician and did not show much respect for human lives during the peasant revolts) but many of the things he said critisising the Catholic church back in the day were valid. Plus he translated the bible for us, so that is also a big bonus.
I do not believe he was mad, I think he knew exactly what he was doing (and some of the things he did and said were monstrous).
BUT he also said one of the most wonderful and hopeful things: "If I knew the world was going to end tomorrow, I would still plant an apple tree today." This made my dad and his church group plant apple trees in the fields all around our and the neighbouring communities during the Luther anniversary year.
As a sign of hope for everybody to see.
As with everything in live and society, nothing is ever truly black and white.
Tell yir dad to get the beers in i will be right over 😂 No i think by the end of his life he was mad and i mean it sincerely quite mad. His ego was his problem(as with us all).He was offered many times by the Vatican to come and discuss his theories with no penalty but by then he had become used to fame and adulation he had garnered.I think Luther like Henry 8th was a very selfish individual who tore the heart out of the very fabric of Europe. I guess though reading your wee story about the trees at least he inspired something good.
|
|
|
Post by number13 on Oct 6, 2018 10:35:47 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War. Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century. Stalin trained as a priest and often used religious turns of phrase. (Strange but true. Talk about the devil quoting scripture to suit his own ends!)
One assessment I recall of Russian religious leaders during the 80s was that (in so many words) they were at best naive and at worst KGB stooges. Quite different from say, Poland where the church was a leading part of the anti-Soviet resistance and because of this, many priests were murdered or 'disappeared'. Pope John Paul II's visit to Poland was one of the key moments in the Cold War; it really was a war of ideas and any idea which ran counter to Communist thought was a powerful weapon - whether religion or (real) trades-unionism or the free market.
The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 of course, the Iron Curtain before it in 1989. Then people could believe as they chose. I remember when the truly evil kleptocratic regime fell in Rumania at Christmas 1989, one of the first things some people did was to cut a fir tree for Christmas. It was no longer banned to celebrate. Even merely as a TV viewer from the UK, it was one of the happiest times in my wider life, the time that the people of half a continent were freed.
I had and always will have the deepest admiration for all the people who brought this about; the incredibly brave dissidents behind the Iron Curtain, the Western leaders who applied pressure against the Soviet Union until the Soviet economy began to crumble and reform was unavoidable, the Soviet leader who was a sincere Communist but embraced partial reform and ultimately would not use force to dictate to others.
In the spring of 1990, I was on holiday in the northwest Highlands (of Scotland); the roads were (and still are) very quiet and so I heard and saw them coming literally for miles - a small, chugging car leaving behind a cloud of oil smoke. They eventually passed where I was parked and waved with huge smiles on their faces, pointing at the mountains, the sea, the sheer openness of it all. They were (judging by the car) East Germans who had driven about as far west as they could get and were clearly revelling in the freedom to do so.
I remain unconvinced that Communism in practice could ever be anything other than evil. People are social animals, generally happy to cooperate for mutual benefit but people are not and never will be worker ants thinking only of the collective. Except in the direst national emergency (WWI and WWII for example), most human beings do not wish to be units in an organised system, to be told where to live, what work to do, what possessions they are allowed to have. Communism is impossible without first removing individual freedom of choice.
If Capitalism collapsed (as it has certainly done on a local level many times in history as civilisations failed) people would promptly set it up again and have done so, time after time, because, regulated by law and a judicious amount of redistribution (by whatever name), it works.
(Sorry folks, that turned into a polemic!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 10:47:05 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War. Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century. Stalin trained as a priest and often used religious turns of phrase. (Strange but true. Talk about the devil quoting scripture to suit his own ends!)
One assessment I recall of Russian religious leaders during the 80s was that (in so many words) they were at best naive and at worst KGB stooges. Quite different from say, Poland where the church was a leading part of the anti-Soviet resistance and because of this, many priests were murdered or 'disappeared'. Pope John Paul II's visit to Poland was one of the key moments in the Cold War; it really was a war of ideas and any idea which ran counter to Communist thought was a powerful weapon - whether religion or (real) trades-unionism or the free market.
The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 of course, the Iron Curtain before it in 1989. Then people could believe as they chose. I remember when the truly evil kleptocratic regime fell in Rumania at Christmas 1989, one of the first things some people did was to cut a fir tree for Christmas. It was no longer banned to celebrate. Even merely as a TV viewer from the UK, it was one of the happiest times in my wider life, the time that the people of half a continent were freed.
I had and always will have the deepest admiration for all the people who brought this about; the incredibly brave dissidents behind the Iron Curtain, the Western leaders who applied pressure against the Soviet Union until the Soviet economy began to crumble and reform was unavoidable, the Soviet leader who was a sincere Communist but embraced partial reform and ultimately would not use force to dictate to others.
In the spring of 1990, I was on holiday in the northwest Highlands (of Scotland); the roads were (and still are) very quiet and so I heard and saw them coming literally for miles - a small, chugging car leaving behind a cloud of oil smoke. They eventually passed where I was parked and waved with huge smiles on their faces, pointing at the mountains, the sea, the sheer openness of it all. They were (judging by the car) East Germans who had driven about as far west as they could get and were clearly revelling in the freedom to do so.
I remain unconvinced that Communism in practice could ever be anything other than evil. People are social animals, generally happy to cooperate for mutual benefit but people are not and never will be worker ants thinking only of the collective. Except in the direst national emergency (WWI and WWII for example), most human beings do not wish to be units in an organised system, to be told where to live, what work to do, what possessions they are allowed to have. Communism is impossible without first removing individual freedom of choice.
If Capitalism collapsed (as it has certainly done on a local level many times in history as civilisations failed) people would promptly set it up again and have done so, time after time, because, regulated by law and a judicious amount of redistribution (by whatever name), it works.
(Sorry folks, that turned into a polemic!)
We all have opinions and i like reading others. Yes Stalin was a priest,Rasputin a monk such picture postcard perfect role models for individuals of faith eh. From a Catholic perspective(isn’t it always) Communism was to be defeated only when all the bishops of the world agreed to consecrate Russia to the Blessed Virgin Mary which only happened when John Paul II managed to sneak a priest into Communist Russia and stand secretly in Red Square and with the Bishops consecrate it..soon after there were a series of military calamities and collapse of missile bases behind the Iron Curtain.Catholics do not put the Collapse of communism down to anything other than Our Lady’s intervention as part of her promise at Fatima in 1917 pity it took the bishops till the 80s before they fulfilled the consecration to her requested design.Think if all the people of faith had did what she asked in 1917 we could have averted communism ,the holocaust so many evils that have now plagued us.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Oct 6, 2018 11:37:43 GMT
So had the Catholic church consecrated Red Square in 1917, you posit that Nazi Germany would not have risen to power?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 11:49:56 GMT
So had the Catholic church consecrated Red Square in 1917, you posit that Nazi Germany would not have risen to power? I think a lot of evil would have been averted but it required also people to stop Offending God as part of what she had imparted was to do with People to stop offending God as he was so much already offended. And if you are looking for a reason to blame the Church hahaha nae chance. ps it wasn’t red square that required consecration it was the whole of Russia and John Paul 2 had to do it in such a fashion so as to avoid offending communist russia who could have retaliated It is part of historical record the story and the Miracle of the sun that occurred was witnessed by thousands and not just at the site and also reported in the Communist press
|
|
|
Post by barnabaslives on Oct 6, 2018 11:51:37 GMT
I am of the opinion and i know many disagree.Christ can be seen as the first communist and the first Christians very much shared among the community but they Had GOD at the centre of their acts Communism fascism have man as the centre point and this is very much the error.Some problems on this planet will never be solved.We will never eradicate evil or poverty.Poverty will always remain in some form,but we should not give up trying.Someone will always have the upper hand,man has a flaw in his character so any system has to be made Man proof.Some are going to hate me but Martin Luther was mad and a a very distasteful character in history.(IMO). That's an interesting perspective. I certainly admire the spirit of perseverance reflected there. I don't quite know if I'd agree that a humanist focus is the inevitable downfall of an -ism (I'd think I actually like to commend all the atheists who manage to be decent human beings even without a spiritual mandate, hooray), although I'd probably agree that an -ism worth saving might be salvaged by any leadership involved being aligned with a genuine spiritual, ethical or idealist focus. I'd probably be more inclined to think that the downfall of Communist fascism is the fascism, and the downfall of any system might be the development of an elite that is eventually willing to resort to the unspeakable in order to maintain their status, and prioritizes accordingly. I don't actually know much about these things, I don't think I've actually read a word that Marx wrote. I do think it's interesting that allegedly he and I have an ailment in common, and for some reason I seem to have independently developed what's probably a rather socialist perspective. Even though I often tend to frame things in terms of efficiency or relevancy or sustainable use of resources or expenditure of effort, capitalism continues to seem like it must have an inherently limited shelf life. That, I suppose I could live with, but it's the constant denial of its own shortcomings that's worrisome to me - it makes it seem like a lot of people could be caught unprepared if it ever made an exit and failed to make a smooth one. I don't think the President ever has a fireside chat with us about what Plan B is if capitalism should ever begin to outlive its usefulness, we don't quite seem to have plans for what to do in such an event like we do for natural disasters or I must have missed them somehow. We had people here in the States as many are aware, who were against everyone having access to health care because they had been "informed" that this would be "socialist", which they were often still equating with fascist communism. Some were quite hateful in their speech toward Obama until they were reminded that as the word was actually being used, it was probably a lot closer to a synonym for "public". Some actually changed their tune after being presented a list of "socialist" services they already took for granted and thought quite highly of, including their Social Security pensions. I don't know if anyone uses "McCarthyist" to mean a good thing anymore, and yet those Commie boogy-men that used to hide under every bed can still somehow be wrung for a little more counterfeit political capital. Socialism does continue to be a terribly abused term, as I'm sure does Communism. Enough bread and circuses and some might forget that we might have hopefully set some trends, even our small town has had a few stores and services that boast of being "employee owned" - the employees pooled their resources and bought the establishment and became equal owners. It sounds wonderful, I can only imagine that the employee owners must feel like they actually have a stake in their futures rather than that they're squandering themselves just for someone else's sake. Ours is certainly not the most forward thinking sort of town, but even here this seems to be successful. There must be little islands here and there where the workers literally control the means of production, apparently without posing any threat to capitalism.
|
|
|
Post by jasonward on Oct 6, 2018 12:02:05 GMT
So had the Catholic church consecrated Red Square in 1917, you posit that Nazi Germany would not have risen to power? I think a lot of evil would have been averted but it required also people to stop Offending God as part of what she had imparted was to do with People to stop offending God as he was so much already offended. And if you are looking for a reason to blame the Church hahaha nae chance. ps it wasn’t red square that required consecration it was the whole of Russia and John Paul 2 had to do it in such a fashion so as to avoid offending communist russia who could have retaliated It is part of historical record the story and the Miracle of the sun that occurred was witnessed by thousands and not just at the site and also reported in the Communist press Hmmm, I'm not looking at this as a reason to blame the Church, I would have to buy into whole mythology and assign the church as holding mystic power, which I don't. My question was just to probe and understand how deeply you believe in those things, I wanted to find if there was a meaningful way forward with this conversation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 12:11:03 GMT
I think a lot of evil would have been averted but it required also people to stop Offending God as part of what she had imparted was to do with People to stop offending God as he was so much already offended. And if you are looking for a reason to blame the Church hahaha nae chance. ps it wasn’t red square that required consecration it was the whole of Russia and John Paul 2 had to do it in such a fashion so as to avoid offending communist russia who could have retaliated It is part of historical record the story and the Miracle of the sun that occurred was witnessed by thousands and not just at the site and also reported in the Communist press Hmmm, I'm not looking at this as a reason to blame the Church, I would have to buy into whole mythology and assign the church as holding mystic power, which I don't. My question was just to probe and understand how deeply you believe in those things, I wanted to find if there was a meaningful way forward with this conversation.
I cannot really give faith to others.Mines is important and i find meaning in it.The prophecies of Fatima figured and figure prominently in my upbringing as the Period of Peace promised (either has arrived or will arrive)If it’s arrived i would hate to fall out with the Blessed Virgin(as we have differing ideas of what peace would be lol). PS am still a guy who believes evolution is still only a theory and that an Adam and Eve actually existed and are not some fairy tale story to simply events.Just as I believe the Red Sea parted and Egypt was visited by plagues and that man is born in a stain of original sin and that Satan is not some invention but an actual spiritual angel. Given all that i still have a fun life lol and am not some dour faced b
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 12:31:09 GMT
Well, it's certainly interesting in the context of the Soviet Union. For a fair amount of time, in the 1920s/30s it was considered state policy by the Leninist government to suppress religious expression. How this was actually carried out varied quite a bit from region-to-region and nationality-to-nationality. Some cared more than others. (A good rule of thumb always when talking about Russia: are you referring to the wider country or to the State? Because the two are very different things.) The Russian Orthodox Church was, however, brought back under Stalin in the late 40s as a way of intensifying patriotism during the Second World War. Colonel Laurens van der Post noted on his journey in the early 1960s, that it was still considered a faus pax to mention religion, but it was slowly becoming more accepted during that decade. By the early 1990s, people were able to actively campaign against the removal of religious objects of significance and restore churches that had been removed during the first part of the century. Stalin trained as a priest and often used religious turns of phrase. (Strange but true. Talk about the devil quoting scripture to suit his own ends!) One assessment I recall of Russian religious leaders during the 80s was that (in so many words) they were at best naive and at worst KGB stooges. Quite different from say, Poland where the church was a leading part of the anti-Soviet resistance and because of this, many priests were murdered or 'disappeared'. Pope John Paul II's visit to Poland was one of the key moments in the Cold War; it really was a war of ideas and any idea which ran counter to Communist thought was a powerful weapon - whether religion or (real) trades-unionism or the free market. The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 of course, the Iron Curtain before it in 1989. Then people could believe as they chose. I remember when the truly evil kleptocratic regime fell in Rumania at Christmas 1989, one of the first things some people did was to cut a fir tree for Christmas. It was no longer banned to celebrate. Even merely as a TV viewer from the UK, it was one of the happiest times in my wider life, the time that the people of half a continent were freed.
I had and always will have the deepest admiration for all the people who brought this about; the incredibly brave dissidents behind the Iron Curtain, the Western leaders who applied pressure against the Soviet Union until the Soviet economy began to crumble and reform was unavoidable, the Soviet leader who was a sincere Communist but embraced partial reform and ultimately would not use force to dictate to others. In the spring of 1990, I was on holiday in the northwest Highlands (of Scotland); the roads were (and still are) very quiet and so I heard and saw them coming literally for miles - a small, chugging car leaving behind a cloud of oil smoke. They eventually passed where I was parked and waved with huge smiles on their faces, pointing at the mountains, the sea, the sheer openness of it all. They were (judging by the car) East Germans who had driven about as far west as they could get and were clearly revelling in the freedom to do so.
I remain unconvinced that Communism in practice could ever be anything other than evil. People are social animals, generally happy to cooperate for mutual benefit but people are not and never will be worker ants thinking only of the collective. Except in the direst national emergency (WWI and WWII for example), most human beings do not wish to be units in an organised system, to be told where to live, what work to do, what possessions they are allowed to have. Communism is impossible without first removing individual freedom of choice. If Capitalism collapsed (as it has certainly done on a local level many times in history as civilisations failed) people would promptly set it up again and have done so, time after time, because, regulated by law and a judicious amount of redistribution (by whatever name), it works. (Sorry folks, that turned into a polemic!)
The reforms brought about in part by perestroika, yeah. I like the basic tenants of Communism as an idea -- a classless society where everyone owns the means of production -- but I don't think that human beings are wired quite the right way for it to work. We love our power structures and we love our sense of possession (we enjoy the freedoms offered by control). It's like how Plato justifies censorship in Republic with the belief that a people with no knowledge of evil, therefore, cannot commit evil. Nice concept, but that's not typically how human beings work and it doesn't account for outliers. Figures that use these ideologies as a springboard for their own personal power plays, saying: "If only X would disappear, life would be a paradise." I honestly think that with globalisation and the Information Age we're moving away from the traditional dichotomies (capitalism vs. communism) towards something very different. I'm noticing that public patronage is now very big as a means of supporting artists and their projects online. Platforms such as Patreon, Twitch, Kickstarter, Indiegogo and so on; are pretty much synonymous with online content. So Communism as it has been known? Eh, likely not. Communities, though? I think there's a lot going on with communities at the moment. We're right in the middle of a new Industrial Revolution that's reshaping our ideologies with the technology we use. It's going to be cool to see what new method of thinking eventually comes out of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 12:53:24 GMT
I am of the opinion and i know many disagree.Christ can be seen as the first communist and the first Christians very much shared among the community but they Had GOD at the centre of their acts Communism fascism have man as the centre point and this is very much the error.Some problems on this planet will never be solved.We will never eradicate evil or poverty.Poverty will always remain in some form,but we should not give up trying.Someone will always have the upper hand,man has a flaw in his character so any system has to be made Man proof.Some are going to hate me but Martin Luther was mad and a a very distasteful character in history.(IMO). That's an interesting perspective. I certainly admire the spirit of perseverance reflected there. I don't quite know if I'd agree that a humanist focus is the inevitable downfall of an -ism (I'd think I actually like to commend all the atheists who manage to be decent human beings even without a spiritual mandate, hooray), although I'd probably agree that an -ism worth saving might be salvaged by any leadership involved being aligned with a genuine spiritual, ethical or idealist focus. I'd probably be more inclined to think that the downfall of Communist fascism is the fascism, and the downfall of any system might be the development of an elite that is eventually willing to resort to the unspeakable in order to maintain their status, and prioritizes accordingly. I don't actually know much about these things, I don't think I've actually read a word that Marx wrote. I do think it's interesting that allegedly he and I have an ailment in common, and for some reason I seem to have independently developed what's probably a rather socialist perspective. Even though I often tend to frame things in terms of efficiency or relevancy or sustainable use of resources or expenditure of effort, capitalism continues to seem like it must have an inherently limited shelf life. That, I suppose I could live with, but it's the constant denial of its own shortcomings that's worrisome to me - it makes it seem like a lot of people could be caught unprepared if it ever made an exit and failed to make a smooth one. I don't think the President ever has a fireside chat with us about what Plan B is if capitalism should ever begin to outlive its usefulness, we don't quite seem to have plans for what to do in such an event like we do for natural disasters or I must have missed them somehow. We had people here in the States as many are aware, who were against everyone having access to health care because they had been "informed" that this would be "socialist", which they were often still equating with fascist communism. Some were quite hateful in their speech toward Obama until they were reminded that as the word was actually being used, it was probably a lot closer to a synonym for "public". Some actually changed their tune after being presented a list of "socialist" services they already took for granted and thought quite highly of, including their Social Security pensions. I don't know if anyone uses "McCarthyist" to mean a good thing anymore, and yet those Commie boogy-men that used to hide under every bed can still somehow be wrung for a little more counterfeit political capital. Socialism does continue to be a terribly abused term, as I'm sure does Communism. Enough bread and circuses and some might forget that we might have hopefully set some trends, even our small town has had a few stores and services that boast of being "employee owned" - the employees pooled their resources and bought the establishment and became equal owners. It sounds wonderful, I can only imagine that the employee owners must feel like they actually have a stake in their futures rather than that they're squandering themselves just for someone else's sake. Ours is certainly not the most forward thinking sort of town, but even here this seems to be successful. There must be little islands here and there where the workers literally control the means of production, apparently without posing any threat to capitalism. Conflations of terms, yeah. That's another thing too. There's a great deal of grey area when it comes to assumptions of language. I'm half-Finnish, I have roots in a country that by traditional terms you could call socialist. Not big 'C' Communist, but socialist. For instance, when a Finnish citizen becomes pregnant, the government dispatches a hamper with bodysuits, a sleeping bag, outdoor gear, bathing products, nappies, bedding and a small mattress. We've done this since the 1930s because infant mortality rates used to be fairly high and there is a belief that every mother should have an equal start in life. We do not follow a little red book, have a Centre Party in a four-party democracy and operate as any other capitalist country in the European Union does in regards to its economy. But because of our relatively small size and the shape of our history, we can do this and other things for the people who live there. That particular brand of socialism works, but it blows people away who conflate the two terms -- socialism and Communism -- together because they believe it's just not possible. And yet... Finland exists as a stable nation, stable enough to be considered neutral ground for the Americans and the Russians to chat unimpeded.
|
|