Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

What Is Communism? – ThoughtCo

What Is Communism?

Communism is a political ideology that believes that societies can achieve full social equality by eliminating private property. The concept of communism began with Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 1840sbut eventually spread around the world, being adapted for use in the Soviet Union, China, East Germany, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, and elsewhere.

After World War II, this quick spread of communism threatened capitalist countries and led to the Cold War.

By the 1970s, almost a hundred years after Marxs death, more than one-third of the worlds population lived under some form of communism. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, however, communism has been on the decline.

Generally, it is the German philosopher and theorist Karl Marx (1818-1883) who is credited with founding the modern concept of communism. Marx and his friend, German socialist philosopher Friedrich Engels (1820-1895), first laid down the framework for the idea of communism in their seminal work, The Communist Manifesto (originally published in German in 1848).

The philosophy laid out by Marx and Engels has since been termed Marxism, as it differs fundamentally from the various forms of communism that succeeded it.

Karl Marxs views came from his materialist view of history, meaning that he saw the unfolding of historical events as a product of the relationship between the differing classes of any given society.

The concept of class, in Marxs view, was determined by whether any individual or group of individuals had access to theproperty and to the wealth that such property could potentially generate.

Traditionally, this concept was defined along very basic lines. In medieval Europe, for example, society was clearly divided between those who owned land and those who worked for those who owned the land.

With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, the class lines now fell between those who owned the factories and those who worked in the factories. Marx called these factory owners the bourgeoisie (French for middle class) and the workers, the proletariat (from a Latin word that described a person with little or no property).

Marx believed that it was these basic class divisions, dependent on the concept of property, that lead to revolutions and conflicts in societies; thus ultimately determining the direction of historical outcomes. As he stated in the opening paragraph of the first part of The Communist Manifesto:

The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.

Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.*

Marx believed that it would be this type of opposition and tensionbetween the ruling and the working classesthat would eventually reach a boiling point and lead to a socialist revolution.

This, in turn, would lead to a system of government in which the large majority of the people, not just a small ruling elite, would dominate.

Unfortunately, Marx was vague about what type of political system would materialize after a socialist revolution. He imagined the gradual emergence of a type of egalitarian utopiacommunismthat would witness the elimination of elitism and the homogenization of the masses along economic and political lines. Indeed, Marx believed that as this communism emerged, it would gradually eliminate the very need for a state, government, or economic system altogether.

In the interim, however, Marx felt there would be the need for a type of political system before communism could emerge out of the ashes of a socialist revolutiona temporary and transitional state that would have to be administered by the people themselves.

Marx termed this interim system the dictatorship of the proletariat. Marx only mentioned the idea of this interim system a few timesand did not elaborate much further on it, which left the concept open to interpretation by subsequent communist revolutionaries and leaders.

Thus, while Marx may have provided the comprehensive framework for the philosophical idea of communism, the ideology changed in subsequent years as leaders like Vladimir Lenin (Leninism), Josef Stalin (Stalinism), Mao Zedong (Maoism), and others attempted to implement communism as a practical system of governance. Each of these leaders reshaped the fundamental elements of communism to meet their personal power interests or the interests and peculiarities of their respective societies and cultures.

Russia was to become the first country to implement communism. However, it did not do so with an upsurge of the proletariat as Marx had predicted; instead, it was conducted by a small group of intellectuals led by Vladimir Lenin.

After the first Russian Revolution took place in February of 1917 and saw the overthrow of the last of Russias czars, the Provisional Government was established. However, the Provisional Government that ruled in the czars stead was unable to administer the states affairs successfully and came under strong fire from its opponents, among them a very vocal party known as the Bolsheviks (led by Lenin).

The Bolsheviks appealed to a large segment of the Russian population, most of them peasants, who had grown weary of World War I and the misery it had brought them. Lenins simple slogan of Peace, Land, Bread and the promise of an egalitarian society under the auspices of communism appealed to the population. In October of 1917with popular supportthe Bolsheviks managed to roust the Provisional Government and assume power, becoming the first communist party ever to rule.

Holding onto power, on the other hand, proved to be challenging. Between 1917 and 1921, the Bolsheviks lost considerable support amongst the peasantry and even faced heavy opposition from within their own ranks.

As a result, the new state clamped down heavily on free speech and political freedom. Opposition parties were banned from 1921 on and party members were not allowed to form opposing political factions amongst themselves.

Economically, however, the new regime turned out to be more liberal, at least for as long as Vladimir Lenin remained alive. Small-scale capitalism and private enterprise were encouraged to help the economy recover and thus offset the discontent felt by the population.

When Lenin died in January of 1924, the ensuing power vacuum further destabilized the regime. The emerging victor of this power struggle was Joseph Stalin, considered by many in the Communist Party (the new name of the Bolsheviks) to be a reconcilera conciliatory influence who could bring the opposing party factions together. Stalin managed to reignite the enthusiasm felt for the socialist revolution during its first days by appealing to the emotions and patriotism of his countrymen.

His style of governing, however, would tell a very different story. Stalin believed that the major powers of the world would try everything they could to oppose a communist regime in the Soviet Union (the new name of Russia). Indeed, the foreign investment needed to rebuild the economy was not forthcoming and Stalin believed he needed to generate the funds for the Soviet Unions industrialization from within.

Stalin turned to collecting surpluses from the peasantry and to foment a more socialist consciousness amongst them by collectivizing farms, thus forcing any individualist farmers to become more collectively oriented. In this way, Stalin believed he could further the states success on an ideological level, while also organizing the peasants in a more efficient manner so as to generate the necessary wealth for the industrialization of Russias major cities.

Farmers had other ideas, however. They had originally supported the Bolsheviks due to the promise of land, which they would be able to run individually without interference. Stalins collectivization policies now seemed like a breaking of that promise. Furthermore, the new agrarian policies and the collection of surpluses had led to a famine in the countryside. By the 1930s, many of the Soviet Unions peasants had become deeply anti-communist.

Stalin decided to respond to this opposition by using force to coerce farmers into collectives and to quell any political or ideological opposition. This unleashed years of bloodletting known as the Great Terror, during which an estimated 20 million people suffered and died.

In reality, Stalin led a totalitarian government, in which he was the dictator with absolute powers. His communist policies did not lead to the egalitarian utopia envisioned by Marx; instead, it led to the mass murder of his own people.

Mao Zedong, already proudly nationalist and anti-Western, first became interested in Marxism-Leninism around 1919-20. Then, when Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek cracked down on Communism in China in 1927, Mao went into hiding. For 20 years, Mao worked on building up a guerrilla army.

Contrary to Leninism, which believed a communist revolution needed to be instigated by a small group of intellectuals, Mao believed that Chinas huge class of peasants could rise up and start the communist revolution in China. In 1949, with the support of Chinas peasants, Mao successfully took over China and made it a communist state.

At first, Mao tried to follow Stalinism, but after Stalins death, he took his own path. From 1958 to 1960, Mao instigated the highly unsuccessful Great Leap Forward, in which he tried to force the Chinese population into communes in an attempt to jump-start industrialization through such things as backyard furnaces. Mao believed in nationalism and the peasants.

Next, worried that China was going in the wrong direction ideologically, Mao ordered the Cultural Revolution in 1966, in which Mao advocated for anti-intellectualism and a return to the revolutionary spirit. The result was terror and anarchy.

Although Maoism proved different than Stalinism in many ways, both China and the Soviet Union ended up with dictators who were willing to do anything to stay in power and who held a complete disregard for human rights.

The global proliferation of communism was thought to be inevitable by its supporters, even though prior to the World War II, Mongolia was the only other nation under communist rule besides the Soviet Union. By the end of World War II, however, much of Eastern Europe had fallen under communist rule, primarily due to Stalins imposition of puppet regimes in those nations that had lain in the wake of the Soviet armys advance towards Berlin.

Following its defeat in 1945, Germany itself was divided into four occupied zones, eventually being split into West Germany (capitalist) and East Germany (Communist). Even Germanys capital was split in half, with the Berlin Wall that divided it becoming an icon of the Cold War.

East Germany wasnt the only country that became Communist after World War II. Poland and Bulgaria became Communist in 1945 and 1946, respectively. This was followed shortly by Hungary in 1947 and Czechoslovakia in 1948.

Then North Korea became Communist in 1948, Cuba in 1961, Angola and Cambodia in 1975, Vietnam (after the Vietnam War) in 1976, and Ethiopia in 1987. There were others as well.

Despite the seeming success of communism, there were starting to be problems within many of these countries. Find out what caused the downfall of communism.

* Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto. (New York, NY: Signet Classic, 1998) 50.

Visit link:
What Is Communism? - ThoughtCo

What? Amazon’s New Anti-Communist Satire Mocks Lefties – NewsBusters (press release) (blog)


NewsBusters (press release) (blog)
What? Amazon's New Anti-Communist Satire Mocks Lefties
NewsBusters (press release) (blog)
They then brought in such talent as Channing Tatum and Joseph Gordon-Levitt to dub over the original Romanian dialogue. In reality, this is a new show created to make fun of these old propaganda pieces, and mocks their love of communism and fear of the ...

Originally posted here:
What? Amazon's New Anti-Communist Satire Mocks Lefties - NewsBusters (press release) (blog)

Fear of communism saw Nazis resettled in Australia – Defence Connect

A Lancaster bomber of 463 Squadron RAAF, at RAF Base Waddington, England. (This aircraft, number ME701 code JO-F, with nose art of a cow titled "Whoa Bessie" was the camera aircraft for the bombing mission which sank the German battleship "Tirpitz" in September 1944.) Image via Department of Defence.

According to Frank Walkers new book Traitors, an overwhelming fear of communism saw some of the most reprehensible Nazis helped to resettle in Australia, once World War II had ended.

Walker said that after the war ended, the intelligence agencies that went out and kidnapped or recruited German and Japanese scientists, ultimately did so to ensure that the Allies had the edge in developing the next generation of warfare, which started with the atomic bomb.

Speaking to Defence Connects Phillip Tarrant, Walker said that in order to underpin his main theme of the betrayal of the Allied soldiers by their own governments, he was able to draw on a wide range of sources and archives.

I wanted for the reader to be able to perceive that this was a much wider happening in history than just a few isolated cases, he said. But I think the moral of the story, that we can see today, is that we've got to remember what we're fighting for.

Why do we have a defence industry [and] why do we have a defence of Australia, asked Walker, adding: who are our real enemies?

Walker also highlighted another pressing and rather sobering question around the issue of certain high-profile US companies which had conducted business with Germany in the lead-up to the war, continued to do so through back doors into Germany.

That was all for profit, he argued. It wasn't a great ideological war.

To hear more from Frank Walker, staytuned for ourexclusive podcast.

See the original post here:
Fear of communism saw Nazis resettled in Australia - Defence Connect

Comrade Detective is a wickedly funny new series streaming on Amazon Prime. – National Review

To the entertainment industry, the McCarthy-era blacklist, which led to unemployment for a few dozen Hollywood types, and Communism, the international terror scheme that subjugated hundreds of millions, have traditionally been treated as though theyre of roughly equal historical interest. Rarely has Hollywood handled Communism with the antagonism it deserved, and when it did so it was usually in crude Sylvester Stallone parables.

Even more rarely did Communisms multifarious self-contradictions generate outright ridicule from top comedy writers. Comrade Detective, a wickedly funny new half-hour show on the Amazon Prime streaming service, is an honorable exception to the rule. It amounts to a comedy shooting range where ludicrous Communist propositions repeatedly get targeted. WFB probably spent more time appearing on television than watching it, but if he were with us today its hard to imagine he wouldnt get a chuckle out of Comrade Detective.

The concept is a sort of triangulation between The Naked Gun and The Americans. According to an earnestly delivered prologue, what were watching is found footage: An actual Romanian buddy-cop TV show from the 1980s. The look and feel of the show (which was actually shot last year) are absolutely dead-on recreations, exactly what youd expect if you happened to be watching prime-time state TV in Bucharest circa 1988. The actors are Romanian, the mustaches are thick, the art direction is lavishly gray. Everything is played with a completely straight face, and the series was actually filmed in Eastern Europe, which apparently still features lots of locations suffering from Soviet Bloc hangover. If you turned off the sound, youd swear you were actually watching the Romanian Simon & Simon.

What makes Comrade Detective a comedy is the (intentionally ungainly) dubbing: Channing Tatum and Joseph Gordon-Levitt provide the voices of the mismatched detectives, Gregor Anghel and Iosif Baciu (played impeccably onscreen by Romanians Florin Piersic Jr. and Corneliu Ulici), and such familiar actors as Chlo Sevigny, Daniel Craig, Jake Johnson, Kim Basinger, Jenny Slate, and Mahershala Ali dub supporting characters. Nick Offerman, voicing the crusty, no-nonsense police chief, is especially fine.

You could call Comrade Detective a one-joke affair, but that could also be said of Airplane. Inside that one joke, series creators Brian Gatewood and Alessandro Tanaka have built a deep reservoir of comedy. Occasionally the show merely gives a tweak to cop-show clichs the protagonists are constantly being needled by a rival pair of detectives at the same precinct and they say things like, The guy has a rap sheet a kilometer long. But for the most part the comedy is specifically and sharply anti-Communist. Episodes begin with a fake approval certificate from the state censor: Ministerul de Divertisment Acceptabil. At a hospital that looks like a Victorian lunatic asylum, a doctor who looks like a hot-dog vendor says, Of course hes going to recover. Hes receiving the best health care in the entire world. Cops keep passing along horror stories about Western capitalism: About a Romanian who went to America and ran a car wash, one detective asks, What the [heck] is a car wash? He is gravely told, Americans are so lazy they cant be bothered to wash their own cars. They exploit the poor to do it for them.

Explaining the board game Monopoly, which plays a surprising role in the plot, devolves into pained disbelief: The more rent you get paid the more money you make, says an expert on the West. Youre telling me that the purpose of this game is to drive your fellow citizens into poverty so that you may get rich? says one of the cops. Black-market racketeers inspire a near-riot amid desperate demand for their wares and protect themselves with machine guns...in the process of selling Jordache jeans. Because were watching Iron Curtain propaganda, a visit to the U.S. embassy reveals that average Americans are eating huge piles of hamburgers at all times, even at the office. Looming offscreen like the Emperor in Star Wars or Voldemort in Harry Potter, the ultimate source of bone-chilling unease is...Ronald Reagan.

So many of the premises beloved by the Communist propaganda machine satirized by Comrade Detective are shared by the ordinary contemporary lefty that the show amounts to giving todays progs a vigorous little noogie. For supplementary meta-comedy value I recommend watching Comrade Detective with whatever Bernie Bros you may number among your acquaintances. You may notice them squirming ever so slightly and asking, Wait a minute, whats so hilarious about harboring an unreasoning hatred for Ronald Reagan, Western institutions, and capitalism?

READ MORE: The Dark Tower: Imagination Gone Wild The Great Comet: Race Hysteria on Broadway Fast Times at Ridgemont High: A Conservative Sex Comedy

Kyle Smith is National Reviews critic-at-large.

See the original post:
Comrade Detective is a wickedly funny new series streaming on Amazon Prime. - National Review

Dems’ unstable ‘big tent,’ the Times’ nostalgia for communism & other comments – New York Post

From the left: Trump Drowns Out Dems Populist Push

President Trump is making life both too easy and very hard for Democrats, suggests Jacob Weisberg at the Financial Times. Easy, because any party can look capable and trustworthy in comparison. But Trump also sucks up all the political oxygen, making it difficult for Democrats to call attention to what they would do with power. Case in point: the small-town Virginia event at which Democratic leaders unveiled their Better Deal platform for the 2018 midterms. It was swamped for attention by Trumps attacks on Attorney General Jeff Sessions and his speech to the Boy Scouts. So no one focused on what, though thin on policy, was the Democrats first attempt to make the crucial leap from simple disgust with Mr. Trump to selling an affirmative agenda.

Conservative: Will Base Let Democrats Court Pro-Lifers?

Alexandra DeSanctis at National Review is skeptical of the declaration by Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, that there is not a litmus test for Democratic candidates on any issue, including abortion. After all, even Bernie Sanders came under fire in April for endorsing an Omaha mayoral candidate whod once backed a bill requiring abortion providers to inform pregnant women about a fetal. At the time, national Chairman Tom Perez declared support for unlimited abortion rights to be not negotiable for all Democrats. So its more than likely the powerful pro-abortion lobby will succeed in pressuring the Democratic Party into backing down, and abortion-on-demand will remain the Lefts highest sacrament.

Analyst: Bartman Saga Shows Risks of Losing Privacy

Eric Peterson at the Washington Examiner sees an important lesson in the story of Steve Bartman, the Chicago Cubs fan who caught hell when he prevented outfielder Moises Alou from catching a foul ball in an NLCS game the team would go on to lose. Beer and food began to fly down from the upper deck, along with chants of profanity, he recalls. The Chicago Sun-Times published not only Bartmans name, but his address and place of employment: He soon moved to Florida to escape the harassment, intimidation and even death threats. Now the Cubs, to make amends, have presented him with a 2016 World Series ring. But across the political spectrum, there has been a movement to erase the privacy of political opponents in attempts to intimidate and harass them into silence. Says Peterson: Stop eroding the personal privacy of those we disagree with and treat them more like human beings.

Foreign desk: Arab Moderates Cant Restrain Extremists

A growing number of those in the US foreign-policy establishment believe the influence of moderate Sunni Arab states that want to normalize relations with Israel can help to steer the Palestinians toward a two-state solution, notes Jonathan Tobin in Israel Hayom. But the recent uproar over Israel installing metal detectors by Jerusalems Temple Mount proves the truth is just the opposite. Instead of neighboring Jordan and its moderate monarch leading the Palestinians to be more reasonable, it was the rage of the Palestinian street . . . that forced Jordan to escalate the conflict. So as long as Israels illegitimacy remains a core belief among Palestinians, even the best-intentioned Arab leaders will find themselves incapable of breaking free of this dynamic. Media critic: The Times Nostalgia for Communism

The New York Times has been running a very selectively explored series on the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, says Robert Tracinski at The Federalist. Its full of fond, nostalgic recollections about the good old days of twentieth-century Communism the optimism, the idealism, the moral authority. But theres been precious little about the gulags, the squalor and the soul-crushing conformity. Indeed, the overall thrust of the series is summed up in a call to try Communism again, but maybe this time try not to have any gulags. Apparently, Western intellectuals now feel they can get away with downplaying Communisms crimes and failures and return to rapturous descriptions of its abstract ideals, without the need any longer to take a serious look at what those ideals really meant in practice.

Compiled by Eric Fettmann

Read the original here:
Dems' unstable 'big tent,' the Times' nostalgia for communism & other comments - New York Post