Can anyone succinctly explain communism? Everything I’ve read in the past said that the state owns the means of production and in practice (in real life) that seems to be the reality. However I encountered a random idiot on the Internet that claimed in communism, there is no state and it is a stateless society. I immediately rejected this idea because it was counter to what I knew about communism irl. In searching using these keywords, I came across the ideas that in communism, it does strive to be a stateless society. So which one is it? If it’s supposed to be a stateless society, why are all real-life forms of communism authoritarian in nature?

  • Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    4 months ago

    The notion of “state” differs wildly across people, so that probably adds to the confusion.

    The core concept is that ownership of a thing belongs to the people of the thing. This is where it clashes with feudalism and capitalism, where ownership of e.g. a farm is not held by the farm workers.

    The organizational unit is “group of people cooperating”, or a “commune”. This can be small, like a hippie farm, or it can be big - a traditional state.

    A democratic state can be communist if it forbids private ownership of common resources. I.e. your house is your house and your car is your car but some rich fuck can’t decide to build a fence around the local hiking trail.

    An authoritarian state may technically be communist if it is strongly democratic. That is theoretical. The ones currently claiming communism are dictatorships.

  • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I think a lot of the disagreement here stems from the current circumstances vs the ideal. Or reality vs expectations, if you will.

    IDEALLY there wouldn’t be a state. But in practice there must be an organizing body. Sure, the workers can own and control everything themselves, but imagine how hard it must be to organize this ad-hoc for and with everyone. So from a managerial perspective, the state still has a function.

    Sidenote: IDEALLY, the society would be without money as well, at least according to Lenin, but he quickly learned that this too presented practical problems to the point where it was simply easier to keep money around.

    Note, I’m not a communist, I am just roughly explaining communism as I understand it in the context of the question, as neutrally as I can.

    EDIT: Also see that other persons comment about Vanguardism, as that is also an important aspect of difference between the ideal and the practical.

  • marcos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    One of those is the ideal version that Marx described as the ultimate goal and that can never be made by humans anyway because humans just don’t behave like that. The other one is what you actually get if you follow the Marx Manifesto and his idea of an “intermediate state” that could bring you to the end goal. (And if you go compare it with plain OG Fascism, both look way too much alike.)

    There are other things called “communism”, both the word and the concept are way older than Marx. There are even ideas that begun in that umbrella but we don’t actually group in any singular concept, and instead are “just the way things are” nowadays.

  • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Communism is essentially the next step after socialism, which is basically Anarchy (As in you get rid of the state)

    In my humble opinion, You cannot achieve Communism