Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Do you believe Communism will ever take foothold in the US?

POST REPLY

Do you believe Communism will ever take foothold in the US?

Yes, the nation as a whole
3
17%
No, never
6
33%
Possibly, but factions are more likely
7
39%
Other (please elaborate)
2
11%
 
Total votes : 18
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2507
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 09 May 2004, 21:17
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Party Bureaucrat
Post 20 Jul 2014, 05:43
And by the US, I'm referring to the entire continental United States, via a mass-revolution.

I honestly don't. The country is far too fragmented politically and ethnically for which to end up, as a whole, unified under any sort of red banner.

The Pacific Northwest seems to have the greatest likelihood of becoming its own Socialist state, however, and breaking off, so I could easily foresee the often joked about "Cascadia" being a reality.
Soviet cogitations: 12389
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Apr 2010, 04:44
Ideology: None
Philosophized
Post 20 Jul 2014, 21:02
Voted "Other".

The nation as a whole? Not very likely. Teabaggerdom is too strong in much of the present nation. It's more likely a new Klan state would be established in the South as a reaction to abortion, gay rights, and (especially) the mounting immigration issue.

Of course, any massive shakeup that brought about a new Klan state in the South would also bring about factionalization in other areas of the country. It could be that the Cascadia region could go more or less "democratic Socialist" as a result. Other areas of the country would see similar transformations, based on their regional character. For example, I think New England and the upper Midwest would continue on a Clinton/Obama style liberal "reform" capitalist basis.
Miss Strangelove: "You feed giants laxatives so goblins can mine their poop before the gnomes get to it."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 417
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 Nov 2012, 01:18
Komsomol
Post 20 Jul 2014, 21:39
Quote:
It's more likely a new Klan state would be established in the South as a reaction to abortion, gay rights, and (especially) the mounting immigration issue.

Yep, a donbass-like ultra-reactionary mess seems likely in the South.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 20 Jul 2014, 22:12
Wait, Sans, how is Donbass the reactionary region here? What kind of analogy is that?

As to the poll, I agree with with you FK (and welkome back by the way) and with Order. I cannot see the entire country turning to socialism/communism without breaking up and or inflaming a civil war. In addition to Cascadia, I can see the Mexican irredentists -I'm speaking about those living in the southwest of the US but who consider their Mexican heritage as seriously or more seriously than their American identity- turning to progressive nationalist socialism similar to that experimented with throughout the developing world in the 20th century. Whether this turns into full-blown socialism or communism would probably depend on external factors -like the complete destruction of the global financial system; I figure the same can be said for socialism in any part of North America.

P.S. If there is no socialist superpower in existence willing to back up and support the fledgling socialist state(s) in N.A., I can't see it/them surviving for long, given the traditional military superiority and gun-ho mentality of the less progressive of America's states.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 20 Jul 2014, 23:45
And what makes you people think that American communism wouldn't be able to defeat the reaction just like it in 1865? The Mexican irredentists would be even easier to deal with. If American capitalism didn't tolerate slavery and backwardness ( by the standards of those times ) then why should we not act against the redneck degenerates?

American communism will have all the reasons ( and the means ) to sweep up anyone trying to challenge the red hegemony from Boston to Buenos Aires.

Also i find it quite ridiculous to talk about those deluded Mexican nationalists and "Brown berets" as progressive in any way whatsoever. The time of "national liberation" in the whole of America is over. Especially since Mexico is such a failed state that it can't even deal with the mafia controlling a good part of its territory and killing thousands each year.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1201
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 09 May 2008, 14:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Forum Commissar
Post 21 Jul 2014, 00:45
No.

I'm of the opinion that what we call "The United States of America" will cease to exist before anything resembling a communist government is in power. The number of factors in place to defeat any sort of genuinely progressive movement, let alone a revolutionary one, are too many, too natural, and too firmly entrenched and established to expect anything less. There's no current political movement of any kind capable of threatening the established order in the United States, communist, reactionary or otherwise, and there's no real sign of that changing any time soon. Sweeping changes to the very structure of the government and the nature of American politics would have to have before such a thing even became feasible.
Image


Forum Rules

Red_Son: Bob Avakian is the Glenn Beck of communism.
"Le prolétariat; c'est moi." - King Indigo XIV
Soviet cogitations: 216
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Jul 2013, 05:04
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 21 Jul 2014, 14:53
It could be possible for communism to take hold in the United States but it would likely only come about after a major catastrophe such as an economic collapse so large that the capitalist state could not manage it or some form of environmental disaster. However, American culture is very individualistic, so even in the face of a disaster I think communism would have a tough time gaining ground.

I don't think it was just a coincidence that Russia was the first major socialist state. Pre-Soviet Russian culture already contained elements of collectivism in the form of the obshchina or mir (peasant commune) and the Orthodox Christian theory of sobornost, which places cooperation above individualism.

Communism will have a tough time gaining any foothold in the U.S. or really anywhere in much of the industrialized West because individualism has a strong hold on people's minds and behavior.
Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 11879
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 06 Dec 2009, 23:17
Philosophized
Post 21 Jul 2014, 17:36
Quote:
I don't think it was just a coincidence that Russia was the first major socialist state. Pre-Soviet Russian culture already contained elements of collectivism in the form of the obshchina or mir (peasant commune) and the Orthodox Christian theory of sobornost, which places cooperation above individualism.

Again this thing based on a letter Marx once wrote. In actuality the obschinas and mirs were reactionary leftovers of feudalism as Lenin had nicely explained in his earlier works. And what with the Russian Orthodox ( one of the most reactionary major Christian churches then ) medieval crap. Chinese Confucianism has somewhat similar "theories" and ideas which didn't make them any less backwards.
It wasn't coincidence that Russia was the first major socialist state, but that was not only because of its backwardness as weakness as the most rotten link in the chain of imperialism but even more importantly because of its communists who took over the torch of Marxism from Westerners and because of its extremely advanced working class.

Quote:
Communism will have a tough time gaining any foothold in the U.S. or really anywhere in much of the industrialized West because individualism has a strong hold on people's minds and behavior.

And it doesn't in China or Russia or Brazil or Africa?
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 417
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 Nov 2012, 01:18
Komsomol
Post 21 Jul 2014, 23:50
Pre-capitalist collectivism is indeed very reactionary and was always an obstacle to rural progress, as well as one of the pillars of monarchy, patriarchy and religious obscurantism. Communism can't even begin to take shape until all forms of pre-capitalist "tribal" collectivism are erased and society totally atomised.

Quote:
Wait, Sans, how is Donbass the reactionary region here? What kind of analogy is that?

It's the same blend of revanchism (white/monarchist vs. confederate), religious jihadism (orthodox vs. evangelical), redneckism (rednecks vs. cossacks). Right now the donbass is overrun with the worst of the worst reactionaries, and the same can happen in the southern states; it's separatism would attract the same type of scumbags from all over NA. "Novorossia" even uses a neo-confederate flag, lol. In both cases, I hope the Ukr army/ US army takes these KKK denikinites out by the thousand and by the tens of thousands.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 237
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jul 2014, 21:53
Ideology: Other Leftist
Pioneer
Post 22 Jul 2014, 01:06
Change is often the result of necessity.

Unless some economic collapse creates the need for change (and communists presents socialism to the masses as a valid way to solve common life economic problems) there wont be a revolution in USA.

Man is a simple creature. They can be fascist, xenophobic, racist, any pejorative -ist all day long, while it is working. As soon as bread starts to be rationalized, they will turn to anything that looks like a way to put bread in the table again, even marxism.

There is a tendency in USA to export jobs, due to cheaper price of labour in Asia and BRICS, while USA (and europe to some extent) concentrated itself into service and technology development. This was actually quite good for the ruling elite. But not so good for the proletariat. Money started to concentrate into the hands of the few. (Wait, i will reach a conclusion, i am just building steam.)

On the other hand the ammount of capital concentrated in so little number hands generated a surplus of credit.

That surplus of credit was a perfect solution to the unemployment generated by the export of jobs : Lend money to common people in order to incentive consume. And there we got the 2008 crisis.

The finantial market can maskarade the cyclic capitalist economic crises, but it cannot deter it.

When money is concentrated into the capitalist hands, theres no money left for the proletariat to buy, creating an overproduction/underconsumption crisis.

People borrow from banks in order to meet the consumption level that they were used to.

2008 crysis was not big enough to break the capitalist frame.

But, as the government did not deal with the root problem of USA economy, the causes were not dealt with, so they are bound to generate another crisis again, and again, ad infinitum.

There, i believe, is an window of opportunity for socialists, if they do their job right.
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 25 Jul 2014, 17:00
I think the CWI's 15 Now campaign (their candidate Kshama Savant got elected to Seattle council, which - independently of her - introduced a 15$ minimum wage, which they are now campaigning for to be spread nationwide, with admirable, though modest success) is symptomatic for the beginning of a period of attempts by the working class to establish a labor party. This will succeed sooner or later, but it could take ten years or more. There is no reason for the consciousness of the masses, even in the more reactionary parts of the US, not to undergo a radical change during this process. When the labor party, based on the unions, finally emerges, there is likewise no reason for it not to be successful in establishing socialism, if it has a Marxist leadership.

Also, it's quite appalling how indiscriminately sans-culotte equates the Eastern Ukrainian masses in popular revolt with their confused nationalist leaders, but such is the simplicity of left communism.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 238
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jun 2011, 15:14
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 30 Jul 2014, 03:10
sans-culotte wrote:
Right now the donbass is overrun with the worst of the worst reactionaries, and the same can happen in the southern states; it's separatism would attract the same type of scumbags from all over NA. "Novorossia" even uses a neo-confederate flag, lol.

As if the other side doesn't http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/us-backing-neo-nazis-ukraine?paging=off&current_page=1#bookmark, http://www.globalresearch.ca/democratization-and-anti-semitism-in-ukraine-neo-nazi-symbols-become-the-new-normal/5371919. I think that while both sides have their problematic elements, the Ukrainian coup government is worse. And, as to the op, I suppose that it would take balkanization, before any part of America would ever become Communist. Sort of like in the alternate history novel Fire on the Mountain.
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.