Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
in first world nations we are insidiously brainwashed to believe that there WERE NO SUCCESSES among Communist movements.
awareness of those successes must be promoted.
start with “hey this really successful thing happened” AND THEN reveal “btw that was communism”
This.
Removed by mod
I’ve always assumed communism works really well the smaller the group but at the scale of hundreds of millions it becomes very difficult logistically and also of course all those people need to agree with it so they’re not actively trying to sabotage it. I don’t see any danger in smaller nations being communist and never understood why people do consider it dangerous, outside of the obvious capitalist reasons and of course the dictators who used it as a front
Unless the example is similar in size and scope to the country I live in I struggle to find true relevance in the subject of communism as a national government
I think you’re confusing decentralized communes with Marxist Communism, a fully publicly owned and planned global economy run democratically (oversimplified, of course). Communes can only work at small scale, perhaps with some level of federation, but the Communism Marxists aspire for is an extremely global and industrialized mode of production. Further, “dictators using it as a front” are relatively small in number, such as Pol Pot.