Hello Comrades !

Hi fellas !

I am a Frenchman currently studying Political Sciences in Russia.

I am very new in the forum but I kinda like the idea, I feel quite alone when I talk about socialism or communism, even among my friends as everyone mostly regard those political concepts as too "oldfashion"...

Anyway, I am not sure about in which sections I should ask this or this stuff but anyway, as I am starting a new topic I'll continue in this one.

Just to brievly speak about my political ideas :

As I wrote before, I am currently in Russia and I am, "of course", really interested in Cold War and former USSR.

I don't really believe that the end of the Cold War led to the "end of History" as Fukuyama wrote, but on the opposite, a world of complete chaos.

There are no obstacles to neo-liberalism, deepening the gap, while marketing, advertising and entertainment are more and more weakening any idea of social contestation, or let's say revolution. Individualism seems to be the only motto, especially in the West.

I studies international relations & political sciences I am focusing more on international aspects of politics and political struggle as well.

Therefore, I don't even know if I can consider myself as a guenine "communist" in the marx-leninist term, but maybe more trostkiyst.

I am clearly ashamed to see the current situation in Lybia and Ivory Coast for example, as a clear manifestation of nowadays' imperialism towards poorer countries in the name of "protecting civilians" (gosh it is not genocide, it is a civil war... What are they waiting for to intervene in Palestine then ?).

I am not really specialized in economy as well, but anyway I do not believe that socialist/communist countries can compete with other liberal countries. Free education, high salaries and so on can not challenge social dumping, that's why I do think spreading communist ideology is the only viable option.

I would like now to ask you several questions :

1) At first, how do you conceive the communist approach on a, let's say, vertical dimension ? Do you think that it should be in a "bottom-top" vertical, meaning that idea and legitimacy come from the people only ?

Or, in the other hand, it could be "top-bottom", meanings that instauration of communist state by small amount of people (elites, military or whatever) can also be legitimated (with popular support etc) ?

2) How do you see the role of religion ? I know that, for instance, Chavez is more or less using christianism in his own ideology. It can be for populism of course, as christianism is quite spread in Latin America, but even if I am agnostic, I consider part of the Christian values as quite good. Principle of sharing, solidarity, love, tolerance, openminding... I think that protestantism is more, somehow, responsible for the rise of capitalism and liberalism rather other religions, while emphasizing on material values and personal wealth.

3) How do you consider communism today ? According to you, do you know any single state which can be say communism ? (do not tell me China please).

4) Any ideas/solutions for the next decades/centuries ?

I don't know my questions were clear or not...

Thanks for future answers

Welcome to SE. Please read our forum rules.

This is your intro thread. We would like to see your answers to that questions, which are pretty good ones.

There are already several threads on those subjects, if you want to see how we stand on those issues. There are no homogeneous answer to the first 3. Some would say focoism is possible, I don't think it's the only way. Ohhh and the religious issue is very sensitive, some are hardcore atheist, some believe religion shouldn't mix with politics and some thing they're actually supporting each other.
No state is really communist-- but there are different kinds of socialism. I think Cuba is the closest to the "model" one can see nowadays.

Anyway, as this is an intro, all discussions derived from this topic will be moved to the correct forum.

I've also studied international relations and I'm very interested in russian politics. How did you end up studying there? Are you on a scholarship or a programme?

Welcome to S-E. Those are a lot of questions that I can't answer now, but I might come back
EDIT: Fukuyama is an idiot, so is Huntington. From one International Relations major to another, stick with neo-Marxist and constructivist paradigms

Well focoism, if I am not mistaken, was the tactics operated by Che Guevarra ? Regarding tactics, I believe more in blanquism...

How I ended in Russia ? That's a good question

I studies international relations in France, especially international security & defense. I lived in South East Asia (Thailand and then Cambodia), but I really wanted something different. I've been always attracted by USSR, so I began to be interested in its transition and the current Russia today. I am in Master degree about politics & economics of Eurasia, quite broad but interesting as well !

And living in Russia nowadays is an experience !

Regarding religion, I'll have look for some threads regarding the question

@ proletarian : I do agree that Fukuyama is an idiot, but hopefully he changed his mind apparently in another book (America at the crossroads or something like this). I am currently reading Huntington, I didn't finish the book yet but I have to admit that this is quite interesting.

Regarding IR's litterature : any neo-marxist & constructivists' authors to read in particular ?

Thank you comrades !

Welcome

Hello and welcome

Welcome to SE!

Wow kontrol. It's nice to see someone from a foreign country (two, in fact) that has a good grasp of the English language and puts in effort to maintain standards of grammar even on an internet forum. Especially one as eloquent yourself. I often wonder if there is a difference in cognition between languages other than how direction is perceived and tense issues. So it's nice to see someone who probably knows multiple languages (I'm presuming) who has a more developed ideology.

Quote:

2) How do you see the role of religion ? I know that, for instance, Chavez is more or less using christianism in his own ideology. It can be for populism of course, as christianism is quite spread in Latin America, but even if I am agnostic, I consider part of the Christian values as quite good. Principle of sharing, solidarity, love, tolerance, openminding... I think that protestantism is more, somehow, responsible for the rise of capitalism and liberalism rather other religions, while emphasizing on material values and personal wealth.

I think Christianity COULD be used to further the goals of socialism. It really depends on what the primary advocates in the particular country actually believe. For instance, I'm pretty sure that Christian socialism has been around for about as long as Marxism itself has been around, and perhaps longer. And in fact, it's questionable whether or not stifling of religious institutions was due to an actual opposition to the church, or if it was primarily based in the fact that the church wielded power in the community that needed to be forfeit to the worker's state.

I would say that Christians individually can advocate whatever they want, but that religious institutions themselves should not be controlled by a central power or for profit. The community can be responsible for building new churches and synagogues and whatever else the citizens of a community desire, and people who are versed in Christian theology can run it.

I'd go into further details if you made a thread about it.

Anyway, welcome to the forum and I look forward to seeing more posts from you.

Welcome to S-E Kontrol

Quote:

I do agree that Fukuyama is an idiot, but hopefully he changed his mind apparently in another book (America at the crossroads or something like this). I am currently reading Huntington, I didn't finish the book yet but I have to admit that this is quite interesting.

Regarding IR's litterature : any neo-marxist & constructivists' authors to read in particular ?

Fukuyama's new book will still reflect a liberal paradigm, so it is ideological incorrect from a dialectical point of view. Huntington is necessary to read for any IR buff, but his work was laughed at until 9/11.

I suggest Gramsci as a good start for IR from a Marxist point of view. Anything from the Frankfurt school is good. Anything on Dependency theory is useful too.

For constructivism, Adler and Wendt are the biggest names.

Thank you comrades for your answers, I'll have a look at those authors.

And thank you Rob-O for the compliment

Is there already some topics about religion so far ? Otherwise yes, it could be interesting to create one. So many sections so far, I am quite lost

Quote:

Is there already some topics about religion so far ?

Yes Kontrol, some comrades here were already create threads about religion. You can find it in cafe mir, vote and polls, etc.

Quote:

Otherwise yes, it could be interesting to create one

Sounds great. Waiting for your posting !

Welcome to S-E.com

Wow that's an impressive intro post. I hope you stick around. Welcome.