Jim Jones a Communist? Interesting read
Marx wrote that the proponents of crude communism remain very much mentally captive to private property:
General
envy constituting itself as a power is the disguise in which
greed reestablishes itself and satisfies itself, only in
another way. The thought of every piece of private property as such is
at least turned against
wealthier private property in the form of envy and the urge to reduce things to the
unnatural simplicity of the
poor and crude man who has few needs and who has not only failed to go beyond private property, but has not yet even reached it. (Marx 1977, 95, italics in original)
In other words, by dragging the private property of the rich down to the private property of the poor, the crude communist merely punishes the rich for their wealth without creating the conditions for actually overcoming (as opposed to suppressing for what proves to be a temporary period) private ownership of the means of production.
For Marxists, “The real content of the proletarian demand for equality is the demand for the
abolition of classes. Any demand for equality which goes beyond that, of necessity passes into absurdity” (Engels 1977, 132, italics in original). Crude communism “has not yet grasped the positive essence of private property, and just as little the
human nature of need, [so] that it remains captive to it and infected by it” (Marx 1977, 96, italics in original). It is this attempt to suppress efforts by individuals to satisfy their needs which more than anything else dooms communities founded on crude communism. Hence Marx’s statement that the development of productive forces “is an absolutely necessary practical premise [of communism], because without it privation,
want is merely made general, and with
want the struggle for necessities would begin again, and all the old filthy business would necessarily be restored” (Marx 1976, 54).
Jim Jones
Because he eschewed independent working-class action, Jones was dependent on the beneficence of the capitalist state in the form of welfare, housing, and other services that Jones could promise members of Peoples Temple, which in turn was linked to supporting Democratic and Republican politicians at different times in different contexts. There was, of course, another motivation, in that Jones made use of politicians to shield himself and the Temple (and Jonestown) from scrutiny, but that isn’t the subject of this article.
A logical conclusion was reached in Guyana, where Jones appealed to the ruling Peoples National Congress party for permission to establish Jonestown. Throughout the rest of Jonestown’s history, retaining the good graces of the corrupt and autocratic PNC remained a vital task for Jones, even though as an ostensible Marxist he should have been identified with the PNC’s rival, the Peoples Progressive Party.