this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
1231 points (96.3% liked)

Memes

49519 readers
2177 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Paddy66@lemmy.ml 1 points 17 hours ago

How about (instead of communism) aiming for an economy made up predominantly of co-operatives, like in the Basque country in Spain? The Mondragon federation of co-ops.

That way money is distruted quite evenly but you don't have to get into the whole politics thing.

[–] skozzii@lemmy.ca 40 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That's because there are no brown people in their version of heaven.

[–] udc@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

Ah now it all makes sense

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 28 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Heaven was literally [re]invented to be a description of utopia specifically so that toiling workers wouldn't get distracted trying to create it on Earth.

"oooh heaven is a place on earth" take that shit literally, fam

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] A_Kanuck@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago

Communism is just people trying to create heaven on earth but without God.

[–] ProbablyBaysean@lemmy.ca 9 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Well, something that the Mormons have is they tried out communism. They called it the law of consecration. They had some fun times with trying to handle being productive and redistribution and poligamous. They ultimately concluded that they weren't ready for it yet so they went back to default capitalism with tithing and poor/fast offerings.

Tl;dr: Mormons believe in a kind of communism in heaven, and they go hungry for 2 meals (24 hrs) to remember to give generously to the poor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_consecration?wprov=sfla1

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 7 points 6 days ago

‘They’ didn’t decide they weren’t ready. It was used to fleece the pathetic true believers for a short period until the inner circle felt sufficiently capitalized.

[–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 8 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I don't think communism is a moneyless system. Pretty sure people paid money for things in the USSR. Have there been any communist countries without money?

[–] aeshna_cyanea@lemm.ee 28 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Yes, which is why the USSR never once in its history claimed to have built communism. The best they claimed was "developed socialism" with promises to build Communism someday

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 20 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

Communism is a post-Socialist society, it must be global, highly developed, and have full public ownership, or close enough to those. The Soviet Union was, instead, Socialist, ie an economy where public ownership is the principle aspect. That being said, there were attempts at Cybernetics, and moving beyond money. These are actually incredibly interesting, and anyone interested in Socialism should look into those attempts.

If you want to learn more about Socialism and Communism, I recommend checking out my introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list.

[–] Nakoichi@hexbear.net 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Oh shit, I need to watch that! Thanks, comrade!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] carrion0409@lemm.ee 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 days ago

I do be mentioning Marx

[–] CapriciousDay@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

To understand this you need to understand the theory. Marx outlined that socialism and communism each had to be transitioned to after reaching a given level of social/economic development. In particular there is the notion of "withering away of the state" which would happen after a global revolution, which is the aim of this classless/moniless society they outlined.

The communist manifesto is a short read!

In fact the USSR implemented explicit market policies, a sort of contained capitalism, which was designed to facilitate reaching the necessary preconditions for socialism and communism. Essentially all of the "communist" states we've seen so far have been some play on the notion of just "socialism in one country" in the Marxist-Leninist version of communist parties, who have/had the goal of eventually reaching communism.

What's probably most interesting is that the idea behind the USSR wasn't initially to have the state direct everything from the top, but in fact to facilitate worker councils (soviets) to direct their workplaces.

But you have to remember this all happened in the context of a state which had recently undergone a revolution, was rife with counterrevolutonary action (see revolutionary France and civil war Britain to see how this played out during the birth of liberalism) and was then plunged into WW2 where most states involved were acting fairly dictatorially for the duration of it. Followed shortly by the US making it an explicit goal to prevent world communism through e.g. CIA intervention because they feared "domino theory"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›