Communism

Karl Marx via last.fm

Before I write anything else, some clarifications should be made. This is going to be a long read. It is less of an expository or persuasive essay than it is a topic lecture. Or a hybrid. Humor me.
The governments that have called themselves Communistic have all been intrinsically fascist governments.
Communism has never been seen in the world. It has never been tried. Nor socialism to the extent that it was described.
If the first statement is true, then it can also be assured that Fascism and Communism are mutually exclusive ideas.

Thus, the first contention. The governments that have been erected around the globe over the ages have all come to the same end. A revolutionary utopia of the working class, to the despair and darkness of fascism. Why is this? Some say it is because it is inherent in the ideology of revolution. Many believe revolution simply replaces one class of elites with another. This is consistent with the scientific theory of revolution. One radical regime shall be replaced by another. But of course, I disagree. Instead, I believe that the inherent problem with these communistic countries was not revolution itself, it was the manner it which it was carried out in every instance. This manifests in two ways.

One, the revolutions in all of these countries were led by an elite or a caste of elites, ie. the Russian Vanguard and the Maoist Jesus-Christ-ifacation of the Chairman. These are specifically doctrinal aspects of what Frederich Nietzsche the "over-man" or The Will to Power. They are foundational aspects of fascism as the "strong leader", an example of supreme existence to be modeled by the people. This was why one group of elites replaced the previous tyrannical ones in these countries. They were a ideological and dogmatic interpretation of philosophical communism which meant that these humans were handed too much power and it inevitably corrupted them.

The second point is tied to the first. The number one reason that communism has never actually be tried is because instituting a communist economic system in a society that has hardly gone through the capitalistic phase of human development is inherently going to lead to one thing: monopoly over all capital by the central government, not the abandoning of the idea of capital itself. Ownership to one totalitarian government rather than the abolition of ALL ownership. Dictatorship, economic and political and then social. The rhetorical ideas of Communism are potent and if used lightly will be corrupted in the worst possible ways, because there are parts of the ideology humans as a race are not ready for. Advocating a system of central government, nationalized industry, unity to the point of homogeneity and single-mindedness can only possibly be misconstrued as fascism in the current epoch. Here is why. Marx was not an ideologue. He was a scientist, one who outlined social rules and then a method. The doctrinaire interpretations of Leninist, Trotskyist, Stalinist, Maoist, Fidel-ist (the list could go on)communisms miss the point. The "science of the proletariat" (As labeled in Jack London's book The Iron Heel) IS NOT AN IDEOLOGY. That is what Marx meant when he said "I am not a Marxist". He meant that he did not subscribe to the new reactionary, algorithmic deviations of his science. Strictly speaking, communism is not even a political philosophy. Hegelian influences on Marx were technically very minimal, Marx really only adopted the dialectics, creation through conflict of opposing sides, in the context of his social law of "social evolution” and the historical interpretation of history through class antagonism. This is where the real reason that these governments were not communism manifests. They forgo "social evolution", instead adopting the all applicable dogma of the newly interpreted “Marxism and Leninism”, trying to apply the ideology as an algorithm capable of solving all worldly problems. This is inherently wrong. Social evolution specifically prescribes social developmental phases in between the 'predatory phase of human development' and communism. Not to confuse the reader, but a "communist government" is in itself a contradiction, the goal of communism being a stateless society. There must be a not only governmental and industrial development of the human race, but in that same manner, a gradual individual progress to be a better species. The understanding of the bigger picture, the value of the many over the few, the sacrifice of self interest for the common good must be learned if the human race is going to survive. There are intermittent points that need to be build upon, and by essentially jumping ahead of development, the 'communist governments' developed into a perverse and twisted brutalization of communism.


The time before the Proletariat Revolution in Russia, the early 1900's, during the age when Socialism was understood to be the most progressive of ideas, not an ideology or dogma. If Lenin knew how far he has set the human race back, he would have done it differently. By giving the elites fodder to attack what has been painted as 'communism', the old socialist truths of the 1900's have been lost beneath a propaganda flood of biblical proportions. The image of 'socialism' has gone from the people owning the means of production to becoming aligned with fascism.

I find it interesting that no Nazi Party or an offshoot of it has ever been outlawed in this country, while the Revolutionary Communist Party has bee outlawed numerous times over the past century. It makes you wonder what the elites intend for the people. Is it for the sake of ideologically confusing them to the point that buzz words like 'commie' and 'Nazi' mean the same thing? They seem to have succeeded.