Communism is one of the most successful ideologies in human history multiple nations have adopted it so therefore I would wonder: what if communism didn’t exist?
What if communism didn’t exist
- Thread starter Karlmarx900
- Start date
And how many are still communist?
Anyways without Communism would Fascism be a thing? Mussolini who helped bring Fascism to the forefront was a communist beforehand so without it would he ever think of fascism?
Non adopted it, they adopted socialism. not commie. because in communism there is no goverment AKA stateless society, private property, and capitalistic sentiments, socialists countries have businesseses and that. The self proclaimed governments that are commie are not communist but socialists.
Last edited:
Capitalism and Feudalism reigns free but does reforms to prevent that mad ideology from taking in
I am assuming he is referring to the russian modal of socialism post 1917 or Marxism in general if you want to go earlyer (since this is posted in pre 1900), which would make diffrent forms of Socialism like Syndicalism or Christian Socialism still fair game as alternitives.
Last edited:
Without communism in Russia could be much economically strong.
The only resource the Russian are shirt of is cookable coal for making steel. This can be imported from Germany or elsewhere.
With the grain-growing areas in Russia and Ukraine, they could be the breadbasket of Europe.
With the resources and manpower Russia had in the 20th century, they could become the dominant power in Europe.
The only resource the Russian are shirt of is cookable coal for making steel. This can be imported from Germany or elsewhere.
With the grain-growing areas in Russia and Ukraine, they could be the breadbasket of Europe.
With the resources and manpower Russia had in the 20th century, they could become the dominant power in Europe.
Last edited:
What no Russia was a backwards shithole before the five year plans. The Tzar had reason to maintain Russia has a peasant based economy. The whole power structure was built around it.
I lot of those are built around Marxism too. I think means that the writing of Karl Marx are never published or quickly fade into irrelevance.
Not to be too political, but so long as there is industrial capitalism and its mechanisms, there will be a working class, and so long as there is a working class, there will be communism, ergo, a "movement to abolish the present state of affairs" in Marx's words. The only way to prevent this at all would be maintaining Europe as a backwards and feudal society forever, which is easier said than done, honestly.
I am not sure what a "backwards shithole" means.
The Tzar had lost power before the communist took over. Russia had begun to industrialise before and during WW1.
I don't think communism its self is a inevitable development as it seems largly defined as referring to either Marxism and Russia socialism post 1917 and their corresponding utopian end states. I can see a argument for socialism as a broader concept as communism is to narrow. The biggest catalysts for the development of proto socialism in the modern era was French republicanism (before it was highjacked by Maximilien and Napoleon)
Jacobins - Wikipedia
Syndicalism - Wikipedia
Christian socialism - Wikipedia
- James 5:1-6 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have corroded, and their corrosion will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure in the last days. Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. ...
Last edited:
I saw The Cynical Historian's Soviet Myths. Cypher there said that communist nations did apply communism, but not in its entirety.
Most of what we call "communist" states were better named "developmental dictatorships" (I know what you're thinking - is he one of those "the USSR and its satellites weren't really socialist" people? Well, yes and no. I agree those regimes betrayed the intentions and ideals of the socialist movement, but at the same time they are the only long-term experiments we have in non-market capitalist economics, so . . . ).
And I think the idea of the developmental dictatorship was already implicit in the rise of modern technologies and what they implied for rivalry between states, especially between first adopters (the workshop of the world) and their imitators in the imperial peripheries.
IOTL, Stalin famously said "we are one hundred years behind the west, we have ten years to make good the difference, or they will crush us". In another time and place, Premier Djugashvili might well have gone to the Tsar and told him "we are one hundred years behind the west, we have ten years etc. etc."
You see the problem.
And I think the idea of the developmental dictatorship was already implicit in the rise of modern technologies and what they implied for rivalry between states, especially between first adopters (the workshop of the world) and their imitators in the imperial peripheries.
IOTL, Stalin famously said "we are one hundred years behind the west, we have ten years to make good the difference, or they will crush us". In another time and place, Premier Djugashvili might well have gone to the Tsar and told him "we are one hundred years behind the west, we have ten years etc. etc."
You see the problem.
Deleted member 160141
People of the world, there is an alternate history channel for all your woes! Whatifalthist
Just a thought.
Ultimately, there are only so many ways to actually run human activity, and ideologies tend to assume that either a.) their use of those same ways will lead to drastically different outcomes than everybody else will when they do it (because they're The One True Ideology, I guess), or b.) that they can invent a whole new, fictional way to do things. Either way, when they're actually ruling a country, they find that they're forced by the exigencies of the real world to use real methods in whatever tortured way their ideology allows.
Then again, I find Marxism and other utopian-end-goal ideologies to be missing the point: when your ideology presumes a race of perfect, incorruptible beings, it's not meant for human use. It's meant for aliens, and until we find some it's fucking useless!
Seriously, anybody who thinks the state will abolish itself, whether he be communitard or libertard or whatever kind of 'tard, seems to think that bureaucrats -- a group of people trained for their whole life in the skills of bureaucracy, whom you can't just retrain on a dime -- will somehow want to abolish their own source of food, and this doesn't even consider the fact that, no matter what, power will still accrete in some way and call itself a nation/tribe/state/whatever.
What if the Soviet Union Never Existed?, What if Communism Never Existed?, What if WW1 never happened?
If a certain line of revolutionary ideology keeps leading to a result it didn't predict for itself when its adherents get to run a country, then clearly there's a systemic problem with it. Perhaps it has a sequence of problems which add up to common features which distinguish the results of that ideology from those of other ideologies.
Just a thought.
Ultimately, there are only so many ways to actually run human activity, and ideologies tend to assume that either a.) their use of those same ways will lead to drastically different outcomes than everybody else will when they do it (because they're The One True Ideology, I guess), or b.) that they can invent a whole new, fictional way to do things. Either way, when they're actually ruling a country, they find that they're forced by the exigencies of the real world to use real methods in whatever tortured way their ideology allows.
Then again, I find Marxism and other utopian-end-goal ideologies to be missing the point: when your ideology presumes a race of perfect, incorruptible beings, it's not meant for human use. It's meant for aliens, and until we find some it's fucking useless!
Seriously, anybody who thinks the state will abolish itself, whether he be communitard or libertard or whatever kind of 'tard, seems to think that bureaucrats -- a group of people trained for their whole life in the skills of bureaucracy, whom you can't just retrain on a dime -- will somehow want to abolish their own source of food, and this doesn't even consider the fact that, no matter what, power will still accrete in some way and call itself a nation/tribe/state/whatever.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 160141
Oh, and why not this little gem as well? Came out on Whatifalthist's channel just recently.
And ironically, Marx agreed with that sentiment. So much so that he derided previous socialists for being too utopian -- in other words, disregarding the general state of industrial development (productive forces, relations of production) in defense of a form of socialism that would bring forth an utopian society instantaneously. What he defined as "communism" means an organic mass movement that is led by a working class, advocates for improvements in living standards for this class through the removal of political obstacles (landed gentry, colonialism through foreign enterprises, etc.), and displays a presence in every moment of revolutionary change, that can either continue to dictate affairs or be abated through a counter-revolution (be it led by Napoleon, Stalin, Deng Xiaoping, whoever).
Marx did not oppose movements in "backwards" countries for the development of capitalism through primitive accumulation. In fact, he supported them, as he believed the creation of new poles of economic influence to compete with the contemporaneous west would aggravate contradictions within the capitalist world order and strengthen the communist movement, putting it closer to its goal. For a more accurate assessment of Marx's ideology, i would suggest actually reading him rather than some niche youtube channel that specializes on AH.
Last edited:
Or with humans.
They have to become more mature, adult, think of others, too, rather than just themselves, their family, their nation, their race.
Or
Something to aspire to, something to strive for, something to work towards, and, in working towards it, improve, and get that much closer to your goal.