If that were true the. There would not be any Soviet Union or Cold War. However in order for this to happen the lower classes would need to be satisfied with the capitalist system. Workplace conditions would need to be improved and there would need to be far less economic exploitation of the working class. Perhaps a proto welfare state would exist for the poor and downtrodden so they don’t become inpoverished.
What if there was no communist or socialist rule or parties during the 19th and 20th centuries?
- Thread starter Karlmarx900
- Start date
well are we just shooting marx and engels, and thus "communism" and "socialism" are drastically different than otl (and also why its in this board) or is it just "russia and china are marginally not awful to live in during the early 1900s"
What do you mean by no communist or socialist rule? No one-party state under a leftist regime, or no left-wing government elected within a democratic government?
I mean some form of communism is inevitable….. socialist and communist ideas existed long before Marx and Engels. Hell, the first “communist revolution” was foiled before it could happen in 1796, during the French Revolution, by a group of proto-socialists (look up the “Conspiracy of the Equals”). The ideologies, regardless of what you think of them, were borne by the hardships the working class suffered from, and the general oppression worldwide. To butterfly it away, you need to change a lot.
Last edited:
Counterpoint to all of you anarchism and syndicalism succeed
They were the dominant ideology before communism,(well marxs to be specific)
Let those play out, please! I beg you more can be done with these concepts
mial42
Gone Fishin'
True superpower (actual peer of the US economically, culturally, and scientifically, not just militarily) Russia is quite likely, as is superpower China decades ahead of OTL's schedule. So the 20th century isn't nearly as much of a US-wank.
Workers were never the main force behind any Communist Party, and typically were satisfied with the capitalist system once productivity got high enough for them to earn solid wages. Communist Party leadership was generally middle-class intellectuals. Workers usually made up most of the numerical base, but didn't create, run, lead, or organize the Party, serving mainly as a vote bloc and militia.
aWell in Britain for eg it could con inveably not have happened if there were no Liberal Party split A general move to a more sucessful Social Liberal movement could together with Christian democratic style collectism very much limit Socialism and prevent majority Socialist govts Howeverer with PR it is unlikely they would not get into coalition sometimes They could end up like most Gpeen Parties An incentivesr for the other parties and ideas generator for others. However the policies followed by successful Social Liberals may well be more radical than theoretically socialist parties liee Labour
Last edited:
In what fucking way? How does averting the death of hundreds of millions somehow make the world a worse place?
You do realise capitalism and the poverty it requires (which socialist ideas emerged as a solution to) regularly results in the death of hundreds of millions?
Late Victorian Holocausts - Wikipedia
Speaking About How Many People Die from Hunger Each Year
We all know how powerful world hunger can be and is, indeed. All that being said, how many people die from hunger each year?
borgenproject.org
If only everyone else had copied the only advanced economy which in the 2020's is still without universal healthcare. Which has the highest incarceration rate in the world and one of the highest crime rates in the OECD.
If only Scandinavia, Germany, New Zealand etc were more like the American paradise.
Just about every anarchist/syndicalist considered themselves part of the socialist movement. And at their most successful, they had ministers in government. Most of the CNT membership did not want a revolution, they just wanted to threaten the ruling classes enough to get some sort of democratic-socialist compromise. Only when Franco pulled his coup did they put into effect plans which to all but a few fanatics had been brinksmanship.
Juan García Oliver - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Define Rule?
are we saying that no communist party in charge of governments, ie no USSR or PRC, etc? or do we extend that to socialist and social democratic parties like the SPD ad Labour Party?
marktaha
Banned
My few criticisms of the Yanks involve no NHS and a propensity to overdo things.If only everyone else had copied the only advanced economy which in the 2020's is still without universal healthcare. Which has the highest incarceration rate in the world and one of the highest crime rates in the OECD.
If only Scandinavia, Germany, New Zealand etc were more like the American paradise.
Capitalism doesn't require poverty. The proletariat in capitalism largely chose those jobs as preferable over the misery of feudal peasantry. Almost all the definitional "poor" in modern Western society are classified as such because we have moved the poverty line upwards beyond the circumstances of 90% of the population in previous systems.You do realise capitalism and the poverty it requires (which socialist ideas emerged as a solution to) regularly results in the death of hundreds of millions?
Like even today, poverty kills over 100 million every 5 years or so?Late Victorian Holocausts - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Speaking About How Many People Die from Hunger Each Year
We all know how powerful world hunger can be and is, indeed. All that being said, how many people die from hunger each year?
Scandinavia and New Zealand have never had a socialist economy. The Nordic model is a form of capitalism. Germany only had socialism in its Western third and it is notably poorer than its continuously capitalist West.If only everyone else had copied the only advanced economy which in the 2020's is still without universal healthcare. Which has the highest incarceration rate in the world and one of the highest crime rates in the OECD.
If only Scandinavia, Germany, New Zealand etc were more like the American paradise.
Well, this really depends how you define socialism. By this definition, Tony Benn was not a socialist, Karl Kautsky was not a socialist and neither were most of the ordinary people who considered themselves socialists in the 20th century, nor most of the infuential people who most historians considered Socialists. Most Historians accept The British Labour Party, The German SPD etc as part of the socialist tradition.
In Scandinavia it is even more complicated. I guess you didnt know that the Norwegian Labour Party, which has held power in Norway for many years and built the Norwegian welfare state was part of the Comintern between 1918 and 1923. This party currently holds the most paliamentary seats of any party in Norway and is the dominent force in the coalition whch is the Norwegian government. Even by your reductive definition the OP question would involve this party never coming to power.
The Nordic Model is the most leftwing example of what is usually called a mixed economy having both capitalist and socialist features. You are being reductive and simplistic.
Labour Party (Norway) - Wikipedia
Last edited:
“Hundreds of millions” lol, the only place that makes that claim is the Black Book of Communism, and it’s such an absurdly biased source that three of its contributors publicly disassociated themselves from it because they saw how obsessed Courtois was with reaching the “100 million” number. If you actually want to prove socialism is an awful, irredeemable ideology that’s never done any good ever, maybe don’t include aborted fetuses and Nazi soldiers in your death count?