Is True Communism Possible?

[Jewish Underground State]

Some communists say that states like the USSR and China were not "True Communist" Societies. So why don't we have a true communist society?

But what is True Communism? True communism is the belief that workers must unite to overthrow the capitalist government in their nation. They would turn their state into a society with no social classes, no private property and everyone was equal. The government would own all property and control the economy to ensure that everyone was equal.

So why hasn't this vision of a society ever been carried out successfully? Their have been attempts to carry out this vision but why haven't they worked?

[Araznan]

Probably the threat of Democratic Nations like USA pressing them to not Become ''Full Communist''

There Communist Nations That Are Basically Modern Russian Communism. Cuba, Vietnam, Laos

[Washington Resistance Army]

Not currently, at our current rate of technological development it might be in a century or two, assuming climate change just stops and nothing happens on that front so the hypothetical can work.

It's also worth pointing out that neither the USSR nor PRC claim to be communist societies. Both were and are in the process of working towards communism, at least on paper.

[Washington Resistance Army]

-doublepost-

[Jewish Underground State]

Not currently, at our current rate of technological development it might be in a century or two, assuming climate change just stops and nothing happens on that front so the hypothetical can work.

It's also worth pointing out that neither the USSR nor PRC claim to be communist societies. Both were and are in the process of working towards communism, at least on paper.

Yes but many communists claim they weren't due to their dictatorships

(Mainly Trotskyites)

[The United Penguin Commonwealth]

there have been socialist communes that have shown success, but whether such a system could function on a large scale is hard to tell. it would probably require a lack of foreign intervention.

[Jewish Underground State]

there have been socialist communes that have shown success, but whether such a system could function on a large scale is hard to tell. it would probably require a lack of foreign intervention.

So in a country like russia there would be too many threats to the vision so the vision would fail due to the state's size?

[Prima Scriptura]

No.

[Nimzonia]

I don't think actual communism is possible unless you're talking about a post-scarcity world where the concept of personal property has effectively become meaningless because anyone can obtain any product or resource at any time. That is hundreds of years away at the very least.

However, some form of socialism will become necessary in the relatively nearer future when most labour becomes automated and it is literally no longer possible for the majority of the population to work because there isn't any work left for them to do. I can't see how capitalism would be sustainable at that point as there will be hardly anyone left who can actually buy anything. When we reach that stage, either we nationalise the means of production or we eventually reach a world where Elon Musk owns everything and everyone else is his plaything.

[Santa Claus the Gift Giver]

Umm..Umm...*looks back at child* So about that super intelligent AI you wanted to create....

[Santa Claus the Gift Giver]

Umm..Umm...*looks back at child* So about that super intelligent AI you wanted to create....

If you don't understand, the answer is a simple no. Don't push me into giving more details even though I can.

[The Orwell Society]

True communism is not possible in today's society. Socialism itself is failing countries such as Venezuela, and communism would only enhance the effects of socialism's many downsides.

[Meadowfields]

Probably the threat of Democratic Nations like USA pressing them to not Become ''Full Communist''

There Communist Nations That Are Basically Modern Russian Communism. Cuba, Vietnam, Laos

The thing is that "Modern Russian Communism" is not communism. And communism can be democratic, it isn't necessarily authoritarian as an ideology. It's only just that almost all the societies that have claimed to be communist, with the exception of some short-lived anarchic communes, have been authoritarian.

[Technoscience Leftwing]

> So why do we not have a real communist state?

Marx writes that communism can arise only if there is a material and technical base. Nimzonia correctly writes that this base means universal automation, when all the routine, hard work is done by machines controlled by artificial intelligence, and this technosphere maintains and repairs itself without human intervention. Something like Arthur Clarke in the book "The City and the Stars" - there the city supports itself, and people are busy with creativity or entertainment. In the 20th century, such a base was not created, and therefore communism did not arise.

> The government will own all property and control the economy to ensure equality for all.

Equality can only be guaranteed in receiving a decent and satisfying social package, equal protection from poverty, homelessness, disease, boredom and illiteracy. It is possible to achieve the growth of this social package, expanding the variability of its range, as technologies develop. But at the same time, goods from rare materials, labor-intensive, luxury goods will remain, and there will be paid access in this sector. With the development of technology and the development of space resources, it will become easier to produce goods, a smaller proportion of goods will be labor intensive, an increasing proportion of goods will be available in the free sector. The gradual movement from paid to free of charge of an increasing number of goods, and there is a movement towards communism.

Is this development inevitable? I think Marx was too much of an optimist. Other paths of development are quite possible: a world war between the imperialists, which will destroy all of humanity; or an ecological catastrophe with the same result; or the emergence of totalitarian regimes dominated by monopolies and bureaucracy (under the guise of socialism, such as Orwell's 1984, or under the flag of capitalism and religion, as in Jack London's Iron Heel). But these are very tragic scenarios, and in an effort to avoid them, people hope for the feasibility of a humanistic version of communism.

[Bear Stearns]

give it a try and let us know what happens

[The Islands of Versilia]

Communism is the very definition of failure.

[Ethel mermania]

No

[New haven america]

yes

[Willtime]

Possible,but not now.
I hate this idea(about not now),it is a shame,but……I am sorry,not now.
Damn it.

[Rusticus I Damianus]

Short answer: No.

Long answer: No.

[The Jamesian Republic]

Not on a large scale. Maybe if your nation was like a village or suburb or a loose confederation of them.

[Saralonia]

Que viva el Ejercito Zapatista de Liberación Nacional.
I personally believe that the EZLN in southern Mexico and other revolutionary movements are the closest to Communism we'll get to in a long while.

[Ifreann]

Communism is inevitable.

[Adamede]

Maybe in a anarcho-primitivist-commune sure, otherwise no.

[Adamede]

Communism is inevitable.

Russia and China sure are taking a strange path towards it then.