Ask a Communist?

[Shadow]

hey there,

I've been a Communist sympathiser for nearly ten years. It is the closest thing I have to a "faith" and the decision to "convert" was one I made at a vulnerable time in my life when I started suffering from depression and came out as bisexual. Had I not been an atheist, I probably would have had a religious conversion to something else entirely but that's how it turned out. Its value is very debatable but it is part of who I am and works well enough for me on a day to day basis, even with the problems coming from depression.

As it is taboo, its difficult to make a meaningful contribution to a forum unless your open about it as you're never quite sure what to say or how people react. You all seem like nice people and I hope I can find a useful and lasting place here on CF even with the obvious differences of opinion.

As far as I can tell its ok to post this here, so you are very welcome to ask about personal stuff, or communist theory, history, etc. I'm more than happy to answer any questions you have.

 

[Chesterton]

Are you familiar with the Young Hegelians?

 

[Silmarien]

Do you consider violence a legitimate tool for producing the desired social change? Why or why not?

Do you believe that all of societal ills can ultimately be reduced to class struggle?

As it is taboo, its difficult to make a meaningful contribution to a forum unless your open about it as you're never quite sure what to say or how people react. You all seem like nice people and I hope I can find a useful and lasting place here on CF even with the obvious differences of opinion.

My sympathies lie with Christian socialism, since I view capitalism as idolatrous and rooted in greed. Secular utopianism makes me uncomfortable, though--people tend to lose their heads before it's over.

 

[Albion]

Red, I can respect your willingness to stand up for your beliefs. In this country (USA), the Marxists insist upon being known as Democrats or Progressives and they won't stone you for using the word Liberal.

Even a reference to them as Socialists usually brings a furious denial or, worse, an explanation about how Socialism really means little more than that the government operates public schools or a postal system, etc.

 

[Silmarien]

Red, I can respect your willingness to stand up for your beliefs. In this country (USA), the Marxists insist upon being known as Democrats or Progressives and they won't stone you for using the word Liberal.

There are genuine Marxists in the United States, and some of them actually will stone you for using the word liberal. The left is far from some big, happy family--divisions run deep. Those who identify with fullblown communist ideology are usually not shy about it.

 

[Albion]

There are genuine Marxists in the United States, and some of them actually will stone you for using the word liberal.

That's probably true of many of them, but I was trying to be generous.

Those who identify with fullblown communist ideology are usually not shy about it.

But how many actually fit into that category? Precious few in my experience, and they were generally novices who thought that Communism means we'll all share things and be nice.

 

[Silmarien]

But how many actually fit into that category? Precious few in my experience, and they were generally novices who thought that Communism means we'll all share things and be nice.

I really don't know. I have a friend who is a Marxist, and he talks about what his fellow communists are up to sometimes, so this is definitely something that exists. Given Bernie Sanders' success, it is probably something that's slowly growing.

I do think a Marxist can claim that none of the communist countries we have seen to date are genuinely communist, though--I'm inclined to view this as a truism because genuine communism is probably impossible. Still, it's hard to say what would have happened in Russia had the Mensheviks won out over the Bolsheviks. Maybe we would have seen a moderate Soviet Union, and maybe they would have eventually turned totalitarian as well.

 

[Albion]

I really don't know. I have a friend who is a Marxist, and he talks about what his fellow communists are up to sometimes, so this is definitely something that exists. Given Bernie Sanders' success, it is probably something that's slowly growing.

Could be, but you know that Bernie's followers are, in the main, defensive if someone says that he's a Socialist, and he's reluctant to admit to his own, long, affection for Soviet-style governments.

 

[Francis Drake]

My sympathies lie with Christian socialism, since I view capitalism as idolatrous and rooted in greed. Secular utopianism makes me uncomfortable, though--people tend to lose their heads before it's over.

But socialism is clearly based on coveting other peoples property!

Interestingly, the early Christian settlers believed in socialism, until they nearly all starved to death because far too many couldn't be bothered to pull their weight.

They then turned back to capitalism and salvation came.

 

[Silmarien]

Could be, but you know that Bernie's followers are, in the main, defensive if someone says that he's a Socialist, and he's reluctant to admit to his own, long, affection for Soviet-style governments.

I was nervous about his alleged connections to certain South American governments, though I honestly don't know enough about Latin American history to have an opinion over whether those states failed due to internal policies or external exploitation. Either way, that is not the sort of thing one ought to be idealizing.

As for being defensive about the word "socialist," I imagine that's more of an age group thing. I don't think the same stigma is attached to the word for people who didn't live through the Cold War, or at least it isn't for anyone I know.

 

[Albion]

But socialism is clearly based on coveting other peoples property!

Interestingly, the early Christian settlers believed in socialism, until they nearly all starved to death because far too many couldn't be bothered to pull their weight.

They then turned back to capitalism and salvation came.

Actually--and this is an important point--the early Christians were NOT Socialist or Socialistic, although the claim that they were is often heard.

They voluntarily shared their goods, and did so for a religious purpose. Both of those are antithetical to all forms of true Socialism.

 

[Silmarien]

But socialism is clearly based on coveting other peoples property!

Interestingly, the early Christian settlers believed in socialism, until they nearly all starved to death because far too many couldn't be bothered to pull their weight.

They then turned back to capitalism and salvation came.

Not really. At least in the Christian context, it would be about doing away with property altogether and living communally as the earliest Christians did. There are some pretty radical statements about wealth that show up in the Gospels (Matthew 19:21, Luke 12:33), so I am not sure how capitalism could possibly be considered an ideal economic system from a biblical perspective. Any system focused on wealth seems inherently sinful.

Mind you, I don't think socialism or communism are easy answers, since human failings will manifest themselves no matter what system you're working with, and secular utopianism tends to not take this into account. But capitalism absolutely ties into the powers of the world--the motivation at heart is pure self-interest.

 

[Albion]

Not really. At least in the Christian context, it would be about doing away with property altogether and living communally as the earliest Christians did. .

That's not Socialism or Marxism or Communism. It might be called communitarianism or something else, but it's not Socialism, even if people through the last several centuries thought they could fashion some hybrid that they'd call "Christian Socialism." The term itself is an oxymoron, however.

 

[Francis Drake]

Actually--and this is an important point--the early Christians were NOT Socialist or Socialistic, although the claim that they were is often heard.

They voluntarily shared their goods, and did so for a religious purpose. Both of those are antithetical to all forms of true Socialism.

The fact you claim their volunteerism is antithetical to true socialism illustrates my point.

Socialism takes other people's possessions by force, and that's what makes it so sinful.

Exodus20v17
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Socialism points the finger at your neighbour's nice house, donkey, car, house, money etc. and says, "Vote for me and I will make him give his money to you!"

Its theft driven by covetousness, but if we call it taxes we can get away with it.

I cannot see how any Christian can fear God and be a socialist. The two are mutually exclusive.

 

[Silmarien]

That's not Socialism or Marxism or Communism. It might be called communitarianism or something else, but it's not Socialism, even if people through the last several centuries thought they could fashion some hybrid that they'd call "Christian Socialism." The term itself is an oxymoron, however.

I'm not so sure. A socialist critique of capitalism is what it is, whether couched in Marxist language or Christian theology. A Christian "socialism" ought to reject certain aspects of Marxism as well, and really should not cede too much ground to secular ideals, but I think it still fits within the same larger tent. Socialism is a collection of related ideologies, not one overarching thing.

Though I suppose the alternative is to call socialism a Christian heresy.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

My question is where is communism working for the good of the people today?

There must be a better example than China?

M-Bob

 

[Albion]

The fact you claim their volunteerism is antithetical to true socialism illustrates my point.

That's right, and you did make that point in your earlier post. Socialism operates by force, even though that might not take the form of concentration camps and the like.

Socialism takes other people's possessions by force, and that's what makes it so sinful.

Exodus20v17
“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Socialism points the finger at your neighbour's nice house, donkey, car, house, money etc. and says, "Vote for me and I will make him give his money to you!"

Its theft driven by covetousness, but if we call it taxes we can get away with it.

I cannot see how any Christian can fear God and be a socialist. The two are mutually exclusive.

Agreed.

 

[Albion]

I'm not so sure. A socialist critique of capitalism is what it is, whether couched in Marxist language or Christian theology.

But even if that critique were on target, the response to it, the particular approach to solving what is considered lacking in "Capitalism," involves theft and force, as was explained by "Francis Drake" on this thread.

 

[Silmarien]

But even if that critique were on target, the response to it, the particular approach to solving what is considered lacking in "Capitalism," involves theft and force, as was explained by "Francis Drake" on this thread.

I think that @Francis Drake is completely off with his analysis. For one thing, government always involves force, whether it be democratic or autocratic, communist or capitalist. The threat of force is an inescapable aspect of what it means to be governed, and Paul tells us in Romans 13:1-7 that Christians are supposed to respect legitimate authority and pay their taxes. So I don't think that this particular criticism of socialism stands up.

Now, a Christian should probably not be taking advantage of government benefits, but I'm not sure why it would be legitimate for the state to use taxes to finance a war but not to support its people. I think communism is un-Christian in that it involves a too rosy picture of what we can achieve through our own efforts, but I don't think the government's use of power is itself an issue.

 

[Albion]

I think that @Francis Drake is completely off with his analysis. For one thing, government always involves force, whether it be democratic or autocratic, communist or capitalist.

All right, but not every form of government posits that all material goods are the government's to distribute.

The threat of force is an inescapable aspect of what it means to be governed, and Paul tells us in Romans 13:1-7 that Christians are supposed to respect legitimate authority and pay their taxes. So I don't think that this particular criticism of socialism stands up.

You've misstated the issue. Christians are to respect legitimate authority, but that does not mean that the government or the form of the government has any Christian seal of approval!

Now, a Christian should probably not be taking advantage of government benefits, but I'm not sure why it would be legitimate for the state to use taxes to finance a war but not to support its people.

When you use vague wording like 'support the people' it is possible to make just about any action the government undertakes seem to be "for the people." Every monstrous action ordered by the Soviet government, for example, was considered to be for the people's own good--as defined by the government, that is.

I think communism is un-Christian in that it involves a too rosy pivcture of what we can achieve through our own efforts, but I don't think the government's use of power is itself an issue.

Ouch. Communism's use of power is not an issue????? Wow. I guess we cannot reach any agreement on this matter.