Total Pageviews

Saturday 7 November 2009

不雅明信片譏馬英九 台博出位畫家被捕





不雅明信片譏馬英九 台博出位畫家被捕 2009年11月6日


明報駐台記者彭孝維專電】台灣開放美國牛肉進口引發政治風暴,畫家林國武更繪製總統馬英九與美國國務卿希拉莉的不雅明信片到處寄發,警方5日逮捕林國武時,他坦承已寄出1.5萬張不雅明信片。

「懷才不遇想走紅」 寄出1.5萬張

台北縣議員金介壽4日拿出收到的明信片指出,明信片上馬英九打?赤膊站在兩個石墩上,下方則是美國務卿希拉莉,畫面不堪入目,圖片上署名「林國武」,更寫有2009年的日期。金介壽向本報表示,明信片以馬英九、希拉莉為目標,讓人直覺是衝?美國牛肉進口爭議而來。

金介壽批評這是侮辱總統的行為,原以為「林國武」是化名,但經查後卻發現確有其人,現年47歲,畢業於文化大學美術系,專長油畫、雕刻和水墨畫,大都以「性」為作畫題材。

警方5日循線在台北市逮捕林國武,並搜出很多明信片,林向警方坦承已寄出1.5萬張不雅明信片,至於作畫動機,他說,因為畫畫10多年,一直無法走紅,自認懷才不遇,才畫了這麼多張明信片寄給政治人物,警方則依「散佈猥褻文字、圖片罪」將其移送法辦。

2009/11/06 (自由時報)



惡搞政治人物 爛出名也喊爽

〔記者黃立翔/台北報導〕畫圖狎弄歷任元首13年來沒沒無聞,畫家林國武最近轉而嘲弄馬英九,昨天被警逮捕,果然一舉成名,他還為能出名而感到欣慰。

老媽說兒子走火入魔

台 北縣議員金介壽近日接獲明信片,上面畫有馬英九偕希拉蕊的不雅素描,北縣警方查出是畫家林國武所為,發現他在13年內,寄出至少5000封政治人物的不雅 素描明信片,包括李登輝、陳水扁,卻無人理會,這次他乾脆將頭像換成馬英九與希拉蕊,昨天就被逮捕,他說:「早知道能引來這麼多記者,我就直接寄給警 察!」

金介壽前幾天接獲不明來源明信片,印有男上女下的「九九神功式交媾畫面」,並將馬英九總統、美國國務卿希拉蕊圖片,移花接木到男女主角頭上,金介壽向警方告發明信片有「汙辱元首」之嫌,警方24小時內逮捕林國武,查扣2份原稿、明信片,名人名冊等證物。

警方原以為林國武是政治狂熱者,但檢視明信片「惡搞」的對象,另有中國領導人胡錦濤、西藏精神領袖達賴,這下讓人摸不清用意何在。

自封悍屌社 別名屌行者

而被查扣的素描人體肌理分明、畫工精細,仔細追問,才知林國武是畫家,姓名收錄在文建會「國家文化資料庫網站」,1993年在藝廊舉辦帝王神功大展,2001舉辦九九帝王神功展,自稱台北畫派悍屌社,別名「屌行者」。

48歲的林國武畢業於文化大學美術系,以派報為生,每月僅賺1萬元,13年前就以同樣模式創作李登輝、陳水扁系列,但都沒有引起外界的注意,始終沒沒無聞,沒想到最近創作馬英九系列,被捕反而獲得媒體關注。

林某母親解釋,10幾年前兒子接觸九九神功後,個性就變了,希望警方放過她兒子;林某則稱,「為了藝術生命,坐牢也無妨」。

警方訊後將他依妨害風化罪嫌移送,至於被移花接木的畫像主角或政治人物,若認為己身權利受侵犯也可提告。

繪馬英九希拉里不雅圖男子被捕
2009-11-5


【大公網訊】一張畫有馬英九與美國國務卿希拉里不雅圖的明信片,最近出現在台灣政壇,寄發者署名「林國武」。警方進行追查後,發現「林國武」確有其人,還是個畫家,今天上午這名林姓畫家被警方約談到案,他坦承這些不雅的明信片,就是他寄出來的。

林國武表示,因為畫畫畫了10多年,一直都沒辦法紅,認為自己是懷才不遇,所以才會畫了這麼多張的明信片,寄給政治人物。驚方查出,林國武一共寄了1萬5千多張的不雅明信片,依照散步猥褻文字、圖片罪嫌,將林國武移送法辦。

這次事件由台北縣議員金介壽揭發,他日前收到這張明信片,畫著馬英九和美國國務卿希拉里2人的不雅圖案,他認為,侮辱台灣「總統」,侮辱美國國務卿,因為最近是為了美國政府,強迫把他們的牛肉進口到台灣來。

中評社台北11月5日電



繪小馬哥不雅圖 畫家被逮

[2009-11-06]

本報訊
一幅畫有台灣的總統馬英九與美國國務卿希拉莉不雅圖的明信片(圖),最近在島內政壇流傳,寄發者署名「林國武」。警方追查後,發現確有其人,還是個畫家。他5日被警方帶走調查,坦承為了出名而寄出不雅圖,他還為能出名而感到欣慰。
金介壽前幾天接獲不明來源明信片,印有男上女下的「九九神功式交媾畫面」,並將馬英九、希拉莉圖片,移花接木到男女主角頭上,金介壽向警方告發,警方24小時內逮捕林國武,查扣兩份原稿、明信片,名人名冊等證物。
警方原以為林國武是政治狂熱者,但檢視明信片「惡搞」的對象,另有大陸領導人胡錦濤、西藏精神領袖達賴,這下讓人摸不清用意何在。
而被查扣的素描人體肌理分明、畫工精細,仔細追問,才知林國武是畫家,姓名收錄在文建會「文化資料庫網站」,1993年在藝廊舉辦帝王神功大展,2001舉辦九九帝王神功展,自稱台北畫派悍屌社,別名「屌行者」。
《自由時報》報道,47歲的林國武畢業於文化大學美術系,以派報為生,每月僅賺一萬元,13年前就以同樣模式創作李登輝、陳水扁系列,但都沒有引起外界的注意,始終沒沒無聞,沒想到最近創作馬英九系列,被捕反而獲得媒體關注。
林國武母親解釋,十幾年前兒子接觸九九神功後,個性就變了,希望警方放過她兒子。林某則稱,「為了藝術生命,坐牢也無妨」。
警方訊後將林國武依妨害風化罪嫌移送,至於被移花接木的畫像主角,若認為己身權利受侵犯也可提告


惡搞政治人物 爛出名也喊爽

〔記者黃立翔/台北報導〕畫圖狎弄歷任元首13年來沒沒無聞,畫家林國武最近轉而嘲弄馬英九,昨天被警逮捕,果然一舉成名,他還為能出名而感到欣慰。

老媽說兒子走火入魔

台北縣議員金介壽近日接獲明信片,上面畫有馬英九偕希拉蕊的不雅素描,北縣警方查出是畫家林國武所為,發現他在13年內,寄出至少5000封政治人物的不 雅素描明信片,包括李登輝、陳水扁,卻無人理會,這次他乾脆將頭像換成馬英九與希拉蕊,昨天就被逮捕,他說:「早知道能引來這麼多記者,我就直接寄給警 察!」

金介壽前幾天接獲不明來源明信片,印有男上女下的「九九神功式交媾畫面」,並將馬英九總統、美國國務卿希拉蕊圖片,移花接木到男女主角頭上,金介壽向警方告發明信片有「汙辱元首」之嫌,警方24小時內逮捕林國武,查扣2份原稿、明信片,名人名冊等證物。

警方原以為林國武是政治狂熱者,但檢視明信片「惡搞」的對象,另有中國領導人胡錦濤、西藏精神領袖達賴,這下讓人摸不清用意何在。

自封悍屌社 別名屌行者

而被查扣的素描人體肌理分明、畫工精細,仔細追問,才知林國武是畫家,姓名收錄在文建會「國家文化資料庫網站」,1993年在藝廊舉辦帝王神功大展,2001舉辦九九帝王神功展,自稱台北畫派悍屌社,別名「屌行者」。

48歲的林國武畢業於文化大學美術系,以派報為生,每月僅賺1萬元,13年前就以同樣模式創作李登輝、陳水扁系列,但都沒有引起外界的注意,始終沒沒無聞,沒想到最近創作馬英九系列,被捕反而獲得媒體關注。

林某母親解釋,10幾年前兒子接觸九九神功後,個性就變了,希望警方放過她兒子;林某則稱,「為了藝術生命,坐牢也無妨」。

警方訊後將他依妨害風化罪嫌移送,至於被移花接木的畫像主角或政治人物,若認為己身權利受侵犯也可提告。

Wednesday 6 May 2009

對領袖無情,是偉大民族的標誌



蘋論對領袖無情,是偉大民族的標誌
2009年05月06日

2002年, BBC舉行一個「最偉大的 100名英國人」的調查,結果是英國戰時首相邱吉爾獲選為有史以來最偉大的英國人。
這位反對綏靖政策,領導英國堅決與德國納粹決戰到底並贏得勝利的「最偉大的英國人」,戰後卻立即被英國選民拋棄了,由於工黨提出福利國家的目標對戰後一貧如洗的英國社會有吸引力,導致保守黨慘敗。 1945年 7月邱吉爾卸下首相職務,他後來引用古希臘歷史學家普魯塔克的話說:「對政治領袖無情,是偉大民族的標誌。」這句話因邱吉爾引用而成為傳世名言。
最近,民建聯創黨主席曾鈺成談六四,他說「中央肯定是錯的」;並說,在六四事件中,鄧小平是下令軍隊開槍的人,也是要負責的人。但他說,如果講死人,文革比六四不知多幾多倍。需要負上責任的毛澤東,他的肖像仍懸掛在天安門,他的思想仍寫在黨章、憲法之內。「毛澤東是中國人民的領導還是敵人?如果你否定他,好多中國現在行緊的嘢都要否定。」同樣,如果平反六四,會不會「郁鄧小平」?「會郁到何地步」?中國會怎麼走?他說,「最關注中國是否能夠走一條繼續改革開放,越來越開明、進步的道路。」
倘若曾鈺成關於對毛鄧不能否定的看法,是反映內地主流意見的話,那麼對比邱吉爾關於偉大民族的說法,我們也許不得不產生一個可悲的結論:中國民族不但與偉大民族無緣,甚至可稱之為渺小、劣敗的民族。
首先,且不說偉大民族了,一個正常民族,都會正視自己的歷史。倘若為了一個人的聲譽,而不能面對歷史作符合事實的評價,這民族還有希望嗎?曾鈺成說,中央的六四鎮壓「肯定是錯的」。事實上,中共從指八九民運是「暴亂」,到說是「風波」,到現在絕口不提,當然也是對六四的錯誤做法,心中有數,只是因鄧小平這神主牌而不能正視事實。 13億中國人的多數,似乎也聽之任之。
其次,對人的評價與對事的評價,應予分開。中共對毛的評價是一回事,但不影響對文革評價為「一場浩劫」。鄧的改革開放之路走對了,也不等於六四下令鎮壓的事也是對的,更不等於中央對六四的定性不應平反。
其三,毛澤東縱使對中共建政有功,但建政後的反右、大躍進尤其是文革,則給人民帶來了極大災難,為甚麼他的像還掛在天安門?鄧小平縱使改革開放有功,但為甚麼不能提他「肯定做錯」的事?為甚麼平反六四就會影響中國走改革開放的路?邱吉爾在戰時立下赫赫功勛,為甚麼戰爭剛結束,英國人民就對他如此無情?
答案是:主要原因不是英國民族比中國民族優秀,而是英國的民主制度使人民有權。有權的人民才可以對政治人物無情,有權的人民才能夠自己選擇掌政者,才能夠按照現實需要而不是揹着歷史包袱去投票選出領導人。而中國人民則長期處於無權狀態,現在的所謂「崛起」,也正如魯迅闡釋「漢族發達時代」、「漢族中興時代」一樣,說穿了就是老百姓永遠交互處於兩個狀態之下:一,想做奴隸而不得的時代;二,暫時做穩了奴隸的時代。
無論那一個時代,領袖都是強加在奴隸身上的統治者。國家施政不是按人民的要求,而是按領袖的喜惡與思維方向。因此,對領袖犯錯的批評就會動搖他的地位,他的施政路線也可能受影響而變更。

當然,「有怎樣的人民就有怎樣的政府」,做慣了奴隸的中國民族,沒有強烈爭取民主政治權利,是無法成為偉大民族的原因。若曾鈺成真的希望中國「越來越開明、進步」,恐怕還須鼓勵仍有自由的香港人去認識六四,討論六四。張文光議員提出動議修訂,要政府將六四事件加入中學中史課程綱要內,令中學生可以了解這段歷史,確實是應該支持的動議。
我們不希望下一代中國人,仍交替生活在魯迅所說的兩個不幸時代裏,我們希望中國民族有一天成為偉大民族。因此,下一代的民主薪傳至為重要。

Apple Daily: Be ruthless to the leader, is a sign of a great nation
May 6, 2009

In 2002, BBC held a "100 Greatest Britons" of the investigation, the results of a British wartime prime minister Winston Churchill was elected as the greatest Briton ever.
The opposition to a policy of appeasement, the leadership of Nazi Germany, the UK firm and decisive win in the end and the "greatest Briton", immediately after the war was abandoned by the British voters, as the Labor Party has proposed the goal of the welfare state of post-war Britain penniless attractive community, leading to defeat the Conservative Party. July 1945 Prime Minister Winston Churchill to unload positions, he was the ancient Greek historian Plutarch quoted as saying: "To be ruthless to the political leaders, is a sign of a great nation." This quote by Winston Churchill handed down to become famous.
Recently, the DAB TSANG Yok-sing, chairman of the party on record 64, he said "Central is definitely a misconception"; and said that in the June 4 incident, and Deng Xiaoping ordered the army is the one who fired the shots, but also to be responsible. But he said that if the dead man say, I do not know the Cultural Revolution more than a few times 64. To be held responsible for the Mao Zedong and his portrait still hanging in Tiananmen Square, his thoughts are still in the party constitution, the Constitution. "Mao Zedong led the Chinese people or the enemy? If you deny him, many Chinese firms now have to deny anything tight." Similarly, if rehabilitated 64, will "Yu Deng Xiaoping"? "He will be to the point where Alice"? How China will go from here? He said, "most concerned about whether China can continue to follow a reform and opening up, more enlightened, the path of progress."
If Jasper can not be denied on the Mao-Deng's view reflect the mainstream views of the mainland, then the contrast of Churchill on the great nation that we may have a sad conclusion: not only the Chinese nation missed the great national and even as a small, poor lost people.
First of all, not to mention a great nation, a normal nation, will face up to its own history. If the order to a person's reputation, but not the face of history in line with the evaluation of the facts, this nation still hope? Jasper said that the suppression of the central 64 "is definitely wrong." In fact, the Chinese Communist movement from the 89 refers to the "violence" to it was "storm", and now no mention, of course, is the wrong practice of 64, a pretty good idea, but because of Deng Xiaoping, Kannushi license and can not face the facts. 1.3 billion Chinese people, the majority seem to have let matters drift.
Secondly, people's evaluation and assessment of the matter and should be separate. Assessment of China's Mao is one thing, but does not affect the evaluation of the Cultural Revolution as "a catastrophe." Deng's reform and opening up the road on the right track, it does not mean 64 ordered the suppression of the matter is, more does not mean that central to the characterization of 64 should not be rehabilitated.
Third, even if Mao Zedong on中共建政meritorious, but after the anti-rightist Jianzheng, especially the Cultural Revolution, Great Leap Forward, to the people of a great disaster, like why he has hung in Tiananmen Square? Deng Xiaoping's reform and opening up, even if meritorious, but why not mention he was "definitely wrong" thing? Why China will affect the 64 rehabilitated go the way of reform and opening up? Churchill in wartime exploits made illustrious, why the war had just ended and the British people he is so ruthless on?
The answer is: The main reason is not a British national quality than the Chinese nation, but the British people have the right to a democratic system. People have the right to political figures can be merciless on the right of the people can choose to exercise administrative control, and only in accordance with practical needs rather than carrying the burden of history to go to the polls to elect leaders. The Chinese people are not entitled to a state of long-term, the so-called "rise", as Lu explained, "the rapid development of the Han", "Chung Hsing Han era", the truth is always the ordinary people in two state interaction: First, I would like to times and not be slaves; Second, do the time being the slave era of stability.
No matter which era of leaders who are imposed on the rulers of the slave. National policy is not in accordance with the requirements of the people, but by the leaders of likes and dislikes and thinking. Therefore, criticism of the mistakes made by leaders of his position will be shaken, his policy line may also be affected by the changes.

Of course, "What kind of government the people there," the slaves who used the Chinese people who are not strong for the rights of democratic politics is not the reason to become a great nation. Jasper, if China really wants "more open, progressive", I am afraid there is still need to encourage Hong Kong people to understand the freedom of 64 to discuss 64. CHEUNG Man-kwong to move an amendment to the Government will join the 64 events in the history of secondary school syllabus so that students can understand this period of history, indeed should support the motion.
We do not want the next generation of Chinese people still live in Lu said the turn of the era of the two, unfortunately, we hope that one day the Chinese nation to become a great nation. Therefore, the next generation the importance of democracy spread to pay.

Friday 24 April 2009

Maoism

Maoism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Maoism, variably and officially known as Mao Zedong Thought (traditional Chinese: 毛澤東思想; simplified Chinese: 毛泽东思想; pinyin: Máo Zédōng Sīxiǎng), is a variant of Marxism derived from the teachings of the late Chinese leader Mao Zedong (Wade-Giles Romanization: "Mao Tse-tung"), widely applied as the political and military guiding ideology in the Communist Party of China (CPC) from Mao's ascendancy to its leadership until the inception of Deng Xiaoping Theory and Chinese economic reforms in 1978. It is also applied internationally in contemporary times. Maoist parties and groups exist throughout the world, with notable groups in Peru, India, and Nepal, where they won the country's first free elections in 2008.

The basic tenets of Maoism include revolutionary struggle of the vast majority of people against what they term the exploiting classes and their state structures, termed a People's War. Usually involving peasants, its military strategies have involved guerrilla war tactics focused on surrounding the cities from the countryside, with a heavy emphasis on political transformation through the mass involvement of the basic people of the society. Maoism departs from conventional European-inspired Marxism in that its focus is on the agrarian countryside, rather than the industrial urban forces. Notably, successful Maoist parties in Peru, Nepal and Philippines have adopted equal stresses on urban and rural areas, depending on the country's level of development.

In its post-revolutionary period, Mao Zedong Thought is defined in the CPC's Constitution as "Marxism-Leninism applied in a Chinese context", synthesized by Mao Zedong and China's first-generation leaders. It asserts that class struggle continues even if the proletariat has already overthrown the bourgeoisie, and there are bourgeois restorationist elements within the Communist Party itself. It provided the CPC's first comprehensive theoretical guideline with regards to how to continue socialist revolution, the creation of a socialist society, socialist military construction, and highlights various contradictions in society to be addressed by what is termed "socialist construction". The ideology survives in name today on the Communist Party's Constitution; it is described as the guiding thought that created "new China" and a revolutionary concept against imperialism and feudalism.[1]

Maoism broke with the state capitalist framework of the Soviet Union under Nikita Khrushchev and dismisses it as modern revisionism, a traditional pejorative term among communists referring to those who fight for capitalism in the name of socialism. Some critics claim that Maoists see Joseph Stalin as the last true socialist leader of the Soviet Union, although allowing the Maoist assessments of Stalin vary between the extremely positive and the more ambivalent.[2] Some political philosophers[who?] have seen in Maoism an attempt to combine Confucianism and Socialism - what one such called 'a third way between communism and capitalism'[3]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Maoism in China

People's Republic of China

This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
the People's Republic of China


Government
Central People's Government
Constitution
Past versions: 1954, 1975, 1978
Guiding Political Ideologies

Mao Zedong: Mao Zedong Thought
Deng Xiaoping: Deng Xiaoping Theory
Jiang Zemin: Three Represents
Hu Jintao: Scientific Development Concept

President: Hu Jintao
National People's Congress
NPC Standing Committee
NPCSC Chairman: Wu Bangguo
Legislative system
Premier: Wen Jiabao
State Council
People's Liberation Army
Central Military Commission
Law
Supreme People's Court
Supreme People's Procuratorate
Judicial system
Communist Party of China
General Secretary
National Congress
Central Committee
Secretariat
Politburo (Standing Committee)
Political Consultative Conference
Minor political parties
Elections (2008)
Administrative divisions
Human rights
Foreign relations / aid
See also
Politics of Hong Kong
Politics of Macau

Other countries · Atlas
Politics portal

Since the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, and the authoritarian capitalist reforms of Deng Xiaoping starting in 1978, the role of Mao's ideology within the PRC has radically changed.[4] Although Mao Zedong Thought nominally remains the state ideology, Deng's admonition to seek truth from facts means that state policies are judged on their practical consequences and the role of ideology in determining policy has been considerably reduced. Deng also separated Mao from Maoism, making it clear that Mao was fallible and hence that the truth of Maoism comes from observing social consequences rather than by using Mao's quotations as holy writ, as was done in Mao's lifetime.

In addition, the party constitution has been rewritten to give the authoritarian capitalist ideas of Deng Xiaoping prominence over those of Mao. One consequence of this is that groups outside China which describe themselves as Maoist generally regard China as having repudiated Maoism and restored capitalism, and there is a wide perception both in and out of China that China has abandoned Maoism. However, while it is now permissible to question particular actions of Mao and to talk about excesses taken in the name of Maoism, there is a prohibition in China on either publicly questioning the validity of Maoism or questioning whether the current actions of the CCP are "Maoist."

Although Mao Zedong Thought is still listed as one of the four cardinal principles of the People's Republic of China, its historical role has been re-assessed. The Communist Party now says that Maoism was necessary to break China free from its feudal past, but that the actions of Mao are seen to have led to excesses during the Cultural Revolution. The official view is that China has now reached an economic and political stage, known as the primary stage of socialism, in which China faces new and different problems completely unforeseen by Mao, and as such the solutions that Mao advocated are no longer relevant to China's current conditions. The official proclamation of the new CPC stand came in June 1981, when the Sixth Plenum of the Eleventh National Party Congress Central Committee took place. The 35,000-word "Resolution on Certain Questions in the History of Our Party Since the Founding of the People's Republic of China" reads:

"Mao Zedong is the Chinese people's savior!", an old slogan painted on the brick wall of a temple

"Chief responsibility for the grave `Left' error of the `cultural revolution,' an error comprehensive in magnitude and protracted in duration, does indeed lie with Comrade Mao Zedong . . . . [and] far from making a correct analysis of many problems, he confused right and wrong and the people with the enemy. . . . Herein lies his tragedy."[5]

Both Maoist critics outside China and most Western commentators see this re-working of the definition of Maoism as providing an ideological justification for what they see as the restoration of the essentials of capitalism in China by Deng and his successors.

Mao himself is officially regarded by the CCP as a "great revolutionary leader" for his role in fighting the Japanese and creating the People's Republic of China, but Maoism as implemented between 1959 and 1976 is regarded by today's CPC as an economic and political disaster. In Deng's day, support of radical Maoism was regarded as a form of "left deviationism" and being based on a cult of personality, although these 'errors' are officially attributed to the Gang of Four rather than to Mao himself. Thousands of Maoists were arrested in the Hua Guafeng period after 1976, with prominent Maoists sentenced to death.

These distinctions were very important in the early 1980s, when the Chinese government was faced with the dilemma of how to impose capitalism on a population that wasn't demanding it.

[edit] Debate within China

Many regret the erosion of guaranteed employment, education, health care, and other gains of the revolution that have been largely lost in the new profit-driven economy. This is reflected in a strain of Chinese Neo-Leftism in the country that sees China's future in an advance towards socialism under changed conditions.

Some Western Marxist scholars[citation needed] argue that China's rapid industrialization and relatively quick recovery from the brutal period of civil wars 1911-1949 was a positive impact of Maoism, and contrast its development specifically to that of Southeast Asia, Russia and India.[citation needed] While others see it as catastrophe for the environment, with Maoism specifically engaged in a battle to dominate and subdue nature.[6]

[edit] Maoism outside China

From 1962 onwards, the challenge to the Soviet hegemony in the World Communist Movement made by the CPC resulted in various divisions in communist parties around the world. At an early stage, the Albanian Party of Labour sided with the CPC. So did many of the mainstream (non-splinter group) communist parties in South-East Asia, like the Burmese Communist Party, Communist Party of Thailand, and Communist Party of Indonesia. Some Asian parties, like the Workers Party of Vietnam and the Workers Party of Korea attempted to take a middle-ground position.

In the west and south, a plethora of parties and organizations were formed that upheld links to the CPC. Often they took names such as Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) or Revolutionary Communist Party to distinguish themselves from the traditional pro-Soviet communist parties. The pro-CPC movements were, in many cases, based amongst the wave of student radicalism that engulfed the world in the 1960s and 1970s.

Only one Western classic communist party sided with CPC, the Communist Party of New Zealand. Under the leadership of CPC and Mao Zedong, a parallel international communist movement emerged to rival that of the Soviets, although it was never as formalized and homogeneous as the pro-Soviet tendency.

After the death of Mao in 1976 and the resulting power-struggles in China that followed, the international Maoist movement was divided into three camps. One group, composed of various ideologically nonaligned groups, gave weak support to the new Chinese leadership under Deng Xiaoping. Another camp denounced the new leadership as traitors to the cause of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought. The third camp sided with the Albanians in denouncing the Three Worlds Theory of the CPC (see Sino-Albanian Split.)

The pro-Albanian camp would start to function as an international group,[7] led by Enver Hoxha and the APL, and was able to amalgamate many of the communist groups in Latin America, including the Communist Party of Brazil.

The new Chinese leadership showed little interest in the various foreign groups supporting Mao's China. Many of the foreign parties that were fraternal parties aligned with the Chinese government before 1975 either disbanded, abandoned the new Chinese government entirely, or even renounced Marxism-Leninism and developed into non-communist, social democratic parties. What is today called the "international Maoist movement" evolved out of the second camp – the parties that opposed Deng and claimed to uphold the legacy of Mao.

During the 1980s two parallel regrouping efforts emerged, one centered around the Communist Party of the Philippines, which gave birth to the ICMLPO, and one that birthed the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement, which the Shining Path communist guerrilla group and the Revolutionary Communist Party USA played a leading role in forming.

Both the International Conference and the RIM tendencies claimed to uphold Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, although RIM was later to substitute that ideology with what they termed 'Marxism-Leninism-Maoism'.

[edit] Maoism today

Today, Maoist organizations, grouped in RIM, have their greatest influence in South Asia. They have been involved in violent struggles in Bangladesh and, until recently, Nepal. The Nepalese Maoist militant struggles have ended and the Maoists have peacefully negotiated to become the majority party in the newly formed republic. There are also minor groups active in Afghanistan, Peru[8] and Turkey[9][10].

In the Philippines, the Communist Party of the Philippines, which is not part of the RIM, leads an armed struggle through its military wing, the New People's Army.

In Peru, several columns of the Communist Party of Peru/SL are fighting a sporadic war. Since the capture of their leadership, Chairman Gonzalo and other members of their central committee in 1992, the PCP/SL no longer has initiative in the fight. Several different political positions are supported by the leadership of the PCP/SL.

In India, the Communist Party of India (Maoist) have been fighting a protracted war.[11] Formed by the merger of the People's War Group and the Maoist Communist Center ("notorious for its macabre killings") originating from the 25 May 1967 peasant uprising.[12], they have expanded their range of operations to over half of India and have been listed by the Prime Minister as the "greatest internal security threat" to the Indian republic since it was founded.[13][14][15]

In Germany, the ICMLPO-affiliated MLPD is the largest unambiguously-Marxist group in the country.

A Nepalese Maoist insurgency fought a drawn out insurgency against the Royal Nepalese Army and other supporters of the Shah Dynasty of Nepal. The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) (CPN (M)), a RIM member, has conditionally halted its armed struggle under a UNMIN. It participated and won the largest number of seats in the 2008 Nepalese Constituent Assembly election[16] and now leads a coalition government under Prime Minister and party chairman Prachanda. The party led the successful effort to arrange for a peaceful dissolution of the monarchy and formation of a republic.

True revolutionary Maoism appears doomed to extinction, however, with the rise of a powerful pro-Western faction of Chinese Communist Party apparatchiks in Peking, made affluent through the growth of global capitalism.

[edit] Military strategy

Mao is widely regarded in China as a brilliant military strategist even among those who oppose his political or economic ideas.[citation needed] His writings on guerrilla warfare, most notably in his groundbreaking primer On Guerrilla Warfare,[17] and the notion of people's war are now generally considered to be essential reading,[citation needed]both for those who wish to conduct irregular revolts and for those who oppose them.[citation needed]

As with his economic and political ideas, Maoist military credo seems to have more relevance at the start of the 21st century outside of the People's Republic of China than within it. There is a consensus both within and outside the PRC that the military context that the PRC faces in the early 21st century are very different from the one faced by China in the 1930s. As a result, within the inner circle of the People's Liberation Army there has been extensive debate over whether and how to relate Mao's military doctrines to 21st-century military ideas, especially the idea of a revolution in military affairs.

Communism

Communism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Communist)
Jump to: navigation, search

Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general.[1][2][3] Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, which would be achieved through a proletarian revolution. "Pure communism" in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life.

As a political ideology, communism is usually considered to be a branch of socialism; a broad group of economic and political philosophies that draw on the various political and intellectual movements with origins in the work of theorists of the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution.[4] Communism attempts to offer an alternative to the problems with the capitalist market economy and the legacy of imperialism and nationalism. Marx states that the only way to solve these problems is for the working class (proletariat), who according to Marx are the main producers of wealth in society and are exploited by the Capitalist-class (bourgeoisie), to replace the bourgeoisie as the ruling class in order to establish a free society, without class or racial divisions.[2] The dominant forms of communism, such as Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism and Trotskyism are based on Marxism, but non-Marxist versions of communism (such as Christian communism and anarcho-communism) also exist.

Karl Marx never provided a detailed description as to how communism would function as an economic system, but it is understood that a communist economy would consist of common ownership of the means of production, culminating in the negation of the concept of private ownership of capital, which referred to the means of production in Marxian terminology. In modern usage, communism is often used to refer to Bolshevism or Marxism-Leninism.

Contents

[hide]

Terminology

In the schema of historical materialism, communism is the idea of a free society with no division or alienation, where mankind is free from oppression and scarcity. A communist society would have no governments, countries, or class divisions. In Marxist theory, the dictatorship of the proletariat is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism, when the government is in the process of changing the means of ownership from privatism, to collective ownership.[5] In political science, the term "communism" is sometimes used to refer to communist states, a form of government in which the state operates under a one-party system and declares allegiance to Marxism-Leninism or a derivative thereof.

Marxist schools of communism

"To build communism it is necessary, simultaneous with the new material foundations, to build the new man and woman."

Che Guevara, Marxist revolutionary [6]

Self-identified communists hold a variety of views, including Marxism-Leninism, Trotskyism, council communism, Luxemburgism, anarchist communism, Christian communism, and various currents of left communism. However, the offshoots of the Marxist-Leninist interpretations of Marxism are the most well-known of these and have been a driving force in international relations during most of the 20th century.[2]

Marxism

Like other socialists, Marx and Engels sought an end to capitalism and the systems which they perceived to be responsible for the exploitation of workers. But whereas earlier socialists often favored longer-term social reform, Marx and Engels believed that popular revolution was all but inevitable, and the only path to the socialist state.[7]

According to the Marxist argument for communism, the main characteristic of human life in class society is alienation; and communism is desirable because it entails the full realization of human freedom.[8] Marx here follows Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel in conceiving freedom not merely as an absence of restraints but as action with content.[9] According to Marx, Communism's outlook on freedom was based on an agent, obstacle, and goal. The agent is the common/working people; the obstacles are class divisions, economic inequalities, unequal life-chances, and false consciousness; and the goal is the fulfillment of human needs including satisfying work, and fair share of the product.[10][11] They believed that communism allowed people to do what they want, but also put humans in such conditions and such relations with one another that they would not wish to exploit, or have any need to. Whereas for Hegel the unfolding of this ethical life in history is mainly driven by the realm of ideas, for Marx, communism emerged from material forces, particularly the development of the means of production.[9]

Marxism holds that a process of class conflict and revolutionary struggle will result in victory for the proletariat and the establishment of a communist society in which private ownership is abolished over time and the means of production and subsistence belong to the community. Marx himself wrote little about life under communism, giving only the most general indication as to what constituted a communist society. It is clear that it entails abundance in which there is little limit to the projects that humans may undertake.[citation needed] In the popular slogan that was adopted by the communist movement, communism was a world in which each gave according to their abilities, and received according to their needs. The German Ideology (1845) was one of Marx's few writings to elaborate on the communist future:

"In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic."[12]

Marx's lasting vision was to add this vision to a theory of how society was moving in a law-governed way toward communism, and, with some tension, a political theory that explained why revolutionary activity was required to bring it about.[9]

In the late 19th century, the terms "socialism" and "communism" were often used interchangeably. However, Marx and Engels argued that communism would not emerge from capitalism in a fully developed state, but would pass through a "first phase" in which most productive property was owned in common, but with some class differences remaining. The "first phase" would eventually evolve into a "higher phase" in which class differences were eliminated, and a state was no longer needed. Lenin frequently used the term "socialism" to refer to Marx and Engels' supposed "first phase" of communism and used the term "communism" interchangeably with Marx and Engels' "higher phase" of communism.[3]

These later aspects, particularly as developed by Lenin, provided the underpinning for the mobilizing features of 20th century Communist parties. Later writers such as Louis Althusser and Nicos Poulantzas modified Marx's vision by allotting a central place to the state in the development of such societies, by arguing for a prolonged transition period of socialism prior to the attainment of full communism.[citation needed]

Marxism-Leninism

Marxism-Leninism is a version of socialism adopted by the Soviet Union and most Communist Parties across the world today. It shaped the Soviet Union and influenced Communist Parties worldwide. It was heralded as a possibility of building communism via a massive program of industrialization and collectivization. Historically, under the ideology of Marxism-Leninism the rapid development of industry, and above all the victory of the Soviet Union in the Second World War occurred alongside a third of the world being lead by Marxist-Leninist inspired parties. Despite the fall of the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc countries, many communist Parties of the world today still lay claim to uphold the Marxist-Leninist banner. Marxism-Leninism expands on Marxists thoughts by bringing the theories to what Lenin and other Communists considered, the age of capitalist imperialism, and a renewed focus on party building, the development of a socialist state, and democratic centralism as an organizational principle.

Stalinism

"Stalinism" refers to the political system of the Soviet Union, and the countries within the Soviet sphere of influence, during the leadership of Joseph Stalin. The term usually defines the style of a government rather than an ideology. The ideology was "Marxism-Leninism theory", reflecting that Stalin himself was not a theoretician, in contrast to Marx and Lenin, and prided himself on maintaining the legacy of Lenin as a founding father for the Soviet Union and the future Socialist world. Stalinism is an interpretation of their ideas, and a certain political regime claiming to apply those ideas in ways fitting the changing needs of society, as with the transition from "socialism at a snail's pace" in the mid-twenties to the rapid industrialization of the Five-Year Plans.

The main contributions of Stalin to communist theory were:

Trotskyism

Trotsky and his supporters organized into the Left Opposition and their platform became known as Trotskyism. Stalin eventually succeeded in gaining control of the Soviet regime and Trotskyist attempts to remove Stalin from power resulted in Trotsky's exile from the Soviet Union in 1929. During Trotsky's exile, world communism fractured into two distinct branches: Marxism-Leninism and Trotskyism.[2] Trotsky later founded the Fourth International, a Trotskyist rival to the Comintern, in 1938.

Trotskyist ideas have continually found a modest echo among political movements in some countries in Latin America and Asia, especially in Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia and Sri Lanka. Many Trotskyist organizations are also active in more stable, developed countries in North America and Western Europe. Trotsky's politics differed sharply from those of Stalin and Mao, most importantly in declaring the need for an international proletarian revolution (rather than socialism in one country) and unwavering support for a true dictatorship of the proletariat based on democratic principles.

However, as a whole, Trotsky's theories and attitudes were never accepted in worldwide mainstream Communist circles after Trotsky's expulsion, either within or outside of the Soviet bloc. This remained the case even after the Secret Speech and subsequent events critics claim exposed the fallibility of Stalin.

Some criticize Trotskyism as incapable of using concrete analysis on its theories, rather resorting to phrases and abstract notions.[14][15][16]

Maoism

This poster shows Mao Zedong as continuing the legacy set by former Communist leaders.[17]

Maoism is the Marxist-Leninist trend of Communism associated with Mao Zedong and was mostly practiced within the People's Republic of China. Khrushchev's reforms heightened ideological differences between the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union, which became increasingly apparent in the 1960s. As the Sino-Soviet Split in the international Communist movement turned toward open hostility, China portrayed itself as a leader of the underdeveloped world against the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union.[citation needed]

Parties and groups that supported the Communist Party of China (CPC) in their criticism against the new Soviet leadership proclaimed themselves as 'anti-revisionist' and denounced the CPSU and the parties aligned with it as revisionist "capitalist-roaders." The Sino-Soviet Split resulted in divisions amongst communist parties around the world. Notably, the Party of Labour of Albania sided with the People's Republic of China. Effectively, the CPC under Mao's leadership became the rallying forces of a parallel international Communist tendency. The ideology of CPC, Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought (generally referred to as 'Maoism'), was adopted by many of these groups.[citation needed]

After Mao's death and his replacement by Deng Xiaoping, the international Maoist movement diverged. One sector accepted the new leadership in China; a second renounced the new leadership and reaffirmed their commitment to Mao's legacy; and a third renounced Maoism altogether and aligned with Albania.[citation needed]

Hoxhaism

This poster shows Hoxha continuing the path set by Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin.

Another variant of anti-revisionist Marxism-Leninism appeared after the ideological row between the Communist Party of China and the Party of Labour of Albania in 1978. The Albanians rallied a new separate international tendency. This tendency would demarcate itself by a strict defense of the legacy of Joseph Stalin and fierce criticism of virtually all other Communist groupings as revisionism. Critical of the United States, Soviet Union, and China, Enver Hoxha declared the latter two to be social-imperialist and condemned the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia by withdrawing from the Warsaw Pact in response. Hoxha declared Albania to be the world's only Marxist-Leninist state after 1978. The Albanians were able to win over a large share of the Maoists, mainly in Latin America such as the Popular Liberation Army, but also had a significant international following in general. This tendency has occasionally been labeled as 'Hoxhaism' after him.

After the fall of the Communist government in Albania, the pro-Albanian parties are grouped around an international conference and the publication 'Unity and Struggle'.

Titoism

Elements of Titoism are characterized by policies and practices based on the principle that in each country, the means of attaining ultimate communist goals must be dictated by the conditions of that particular country, rather than by a pattern set in another country. During Tito’s era, this specifically meant that the communist goal should be pursued independently of (and often in opposition to) the policies of the Soviet Union.

The term was originally meant as a pejorative, and was labeled by Moscow as a heresy during the period of tensions between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia known as the Informbiro period from 1948 to 1955.

Unlike the rest of East Europe, which fell under Stalin's influence post-World War II, Yugoslavia, due to the strong leadership of Marshal Tito and the fact that the Yugoslav Partisans liberated Yugoslavia with only limited help from the Red Army, remained independent from Moscow. It became the only country in the Balkans to resist pressure from Moscow to join the Warsaw Pact and remained "socialist, but independent" right up until the collapse of Soviet socialism in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Throughout his time in office, Tito prided himself on Yugoslavia's independence from Russia, with Yugoslavia never accepting full membership of the Comecon and Tito's open rejection of many aspects of Stalinism as the most obvious manifestations of this.

Eurocommunism

Since the early 1970s, the term Eurocommunism was used to refer to moderate, reformist Communist parties in western Europe. These parties did not support the Soviet Union and denounced its policies. Such parties were politically active and electorally significant in Italy (PCI), France (PCF), and Spain (PCE).[3]

Council communism

Council communism is a far-left movement originating in Germany and the Netherlands in the 1920s. Its primary organization was the Communist Workers Party of Germany (KAPD). Council communism continues today as a theoretical and activist position within both left-wing Marxism and libertarian socialism.

The central argument of council communism, in contrast to those of social democracy and Leninist Communism, is that democratic workers' councils arising in the factories and municipalities are the natural form of working class organisation and governmental power. This view is opposed to both the reformist and the Leninist ideologies, with their stress on, respectively, parliaments and institutional government (i.e., by applying social reforms), on the one hand, and vanguard parties and participative democratic centralism on the other).

The core principle of council communism is that the government and the economy should be managed by workers' councils composed of delegates elected at workplaces and recallable at any moment. As such, council communists oppose state-run authoritarian "State socialism"/"State capitalism". They also oppose the idea of a "revolutionary party", since council communists believe that a revolution led by a party will necessarily produce a party dictatorship. Council communists support a worker's democracy, which they want to produce through a federation of workers' councils. Council communism (and other types of "anti-authoritarian and Anti-leninist Marxism" such as Autonomism) are often viewed as being similar to Anarchism because they criticize Leninist ideologies for being authoritarian and reject the idea of a vanguard party.

Juche

In 1992, Juche replaced Marxism-Leninism in the revised North Korean constitution as the official state ideology, this being a response to the Sino-Soviet split. Juche was originally defined as a creative application of Marxism-Leninism, but after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union (North Korea’s greatest economic benefactor), all reference to Marxism-Leninism was dropped in the revised 1998 constitution. The establishment of the Songun doctrine in the mid-1990s has formally designated the military, not the proletariat or working class, as the main revolutionary force in North Korea.

According to Kim Jong-il's On the Juche Idea, the application of Juche in state policy entails the following:

  1. The people must have independence (chajusong) in thought and politics, economic self-sufficiency, and self-reliance in defense.
  2. Policy must reflect the will and aspirations of the masses and employ them fully in revolution and construction.
  3. Methods of revolution and construction must be suitable to the situation of the country.
  4. The most important work of revolution and construction is molding people ideologically as communists and mobilizing them to constructive action.

Prachandapath

Prachanda, giving a speech at the Nepalese city of Pokhara.

Prachanda Path refers to the ideological line of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist). This thought doesn't make an ideological break with Marxism,Leninism and Maoism but it is an extension of these ideologies totally based on home-ground politics of Nepal. The doctrine came into existence after it was realized that the ideology of Marxism, Leninism and Maoism couldn't be practiced completely as it were done in the past. And an ideology suitable, based on the ground reality of Nepalese politics was adopted by the party.

After five years of armed struggle, the party realized that none of the proletarian revolutions of the past could be carried out on Nepal’s context. So moving further ahead than Marxism, Leninism and Maoism, the party determined its own ideology, Prachanda Path.

Having analyzed the serious challenges and growing changes in the global arena, the party started moving on its own doctrine. Prachanda Path in essence is a different kind of uprising, which can be described as the fusion of a protracted people’s war strategy which was adopted by Mao in China and the Russian model of armed revolution. Most of the Maoist leaders think that the adoption of Prachanda Path after the second national conference is what nudged the party into moving ahead with a clear vision ahead after five years of ‘people’s war’.

Senior Maoist leader Mohan Vaidya alias Kiran says, ‘Just as Marxism was born in Germany, Leninism in Russia and Maoism in China and Prachanda Path is Nepal’s identity of revolution. Just as Marxism has three facets- philosophy, political economy and scientific socialism, Prachanda Path is a combination of all three totally in Nepal’s political context.’ Talking about the party’s philosophy, Maoist chairman Prachanda says, ‘The party considers Prachanda path as an enrichment of Marxism, Leninism and Maoism.’ After the party brought forward its new doctrine, the government was trying to comprehend the new ideology, Prachanda Path.

see also: 'People's Revolution' In Nepal

Non-Marxist schools

The dominant forms of communism, such as Leninism, Trotskyism and Maoism, are based on Marxism, but non-Marxist versions of communism (such as Christian communism and anarchist communism) also exist and are growing in importance since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Anarcho-communism

Some of Marx's contemporaries espoused similar ideas, but differed in their views of how to reach to a classless society. Following the split between those associated with Marx and Mikhail Bakunin at the First International, the anarchists formed the International Workers Association.[18] Anarchists argued that capitalism and the state were inseparable and that one could not be abolished without the other. Anarchist-communists such as Peter Kropotkin theorized an immediate transition to one society with no classes. Anarcho-syndicalism became one of the dominant forms of anarchist organization, arguing that labor unions, as opposed to Communist parties, are the organizations that can change society. Consequently, many anarchists have been in opposition to Marxist communism to this day.[citation needed]

Christian communism

Christian communism is a form of religious communism centered on Christianity. It is a theological and political theory based upon the view that the teachings of Jesus Christ urge Christians to support communism as the ideal social system. Christian communists trace the origins of their practice to teachings in the New Testament, such as this one from Acts of the Apostles at chapter 2 and verses 42, 44, and 45:

42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and in fellowship [...] 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (King James Version)

Christian communism can be seen as a radical form of Christian socialism. Also, due to the fact that many Christian communists have formed independent stateless communes in the past, there is also a link between Christian communism and Christian anarchism. Christian communists may or may not agree with various parts of Marxism.

Christian communists also share some of the political goals of Marxists, for example replacing capitalism with socialism, which should in turn be followed by communism at a later point in the future. However, Christian communists sometimes disagree with Marxists (and particularly with Leninists) on the way a socialist or communist society should be organized.

History

Early communism

Karl Heinrich Marx saw primitive communism as the original, hunter-gatherer state of humankind from which it arose. For Marx, only after humanity was capable of producing surplus, did private property develop.[citation needed]

In the history of Western thought, certain elements of the idea of a society based on common ownership of property can be traced back to ancient times .[3] Examples include the Spartacus slave revolt in Rome.[19] The fifth century Mazdak movement in what is now Iran has been described as "communistic" for challenging the enormous privileges of the noble classes and the clergy, criticizing the institution of private property and for striving for an egalitarian society.[20]

At one time or another, various small communist communities existed, generally under the inspiration of Scripture.[21] In the medieval Christian church, for example, some monastic communities and religious orders shared their land and other property (see religious communism and Christian communism). These groups often believed that concern with private property was a distraction from religious service to God and neighbor.[3]

Communist thought has also been traced back to the work of 16th century English writer Thomas More. In his treatise Utopia (1516), More portrayed a society based on common ownership of property, whose rulers administered it through the application of reason.[3] In the 17th century, communist thought arguably surfaced again in England. In 17th century England, a Puritan religious group known as the Diggers advocated the abolition of private ownership of land.[citation needed] Eduard Bernstein, in his 1895 Cromwell and Communism[22] argued that several groupings in the English Civil War, especially the Diggers espoused clear communistic, agrarian ideals, and that Oliver Cromwell's attitude to these groups was at best ambivalent and often hostile.[23]

Criticism of the idea of private property continued into the Age of Enlightenment of the 18th century, through such thinkers as Jean Jacques Rousseau in France.[3] Later, following the upheaval of the French Revolution, communism emerged as a political doctrine.[24] François Noël Babeuf, in particular, espoused the goals of common ownership of land and total economic and political equality among citizens.[3]

Various social reformers in the early 19th century founded communities based on common ownership. But unlike many previous communist communities, they replaced the religious emphasis with a rational and philanthropic basis.[21] Notable among them were Robert Owen, who founded New Harmony in Indiana (1825), and Charles Fourier, whose followers organized other settlements in the United States such as Brook Farm (1841–47).[21] Later in the 19th century, Karl Marx described these social reformers as "utopian socialists" to contrast them with his program of "scientific socialism" (a term coined by Friedrich Engels). Other writers described by Marx as "utopian socialists" included Saint-Simon.

In its modern form, communism grew out of the socialist movement of 19th century Europe.[3] As the Industrial Revolution advanced, socialist critics blamed capitalism for the misery of the proletariat — a new class of urban factory workers who labored under often-hazardous conditions. Foremost among these critics were the German philosopher Karl Marx and his associate Friedrich Engels. In 1848, Marx and Engels offered a new definition of communism and popularized the term in their famous pamphlet The Communist Manifesto.[21] Engels, who lived in Manchester, observed the organization of the Chartist movement (see History of British socialism), while Marx departed from his university comrades to meet the proletariat in France and Germany.[citation needed]

Growth of modern communism

Vladimir Lenin, following his return to Petrograd.

In the late 19th century, Russian Marxism developed a distinct character. The first major figure of Russian Marxism was Georgi Plekhanov. Underlying the work of Plekhanov was the assumption that Russia, less urbanized and industrialized than Western Europe, had many years to go before society would be ready for proletarian revolution to occur, and a transitional period of a bourgeois democratic regime would be required to replace Tsarism with a socialist and later communist society. (EB)

In Russia, the 1917 October Revolution was the first time any party with an avowedly Marxist orientation, in this case the Bolshevik Party, seized state power. The assumption of state power by the Bolsheviks generated a great deal of practical and theoretical debate within the Marxist movement. Marx predicted that socialism and communism would be built upon foundations laid by the most advanced capitalist development. Russia, however, was one of the poorest countries in Europe with an enormous, largely illiterate peasantry and a minority of industrial workers. Marx had explicitly stated that Russia might be able to skip the stage of bourgeoisie capitalism.[25] Other socialists also believed that a Russian revolution could be the precursor of workers' revolutions in the West.

The moderate Mensheviks opposed Lenin's Bolshevik plan for socialist revolution before capitalism was more fully developed. The Bolsheviks' successful rise to power was based upon the slogans "peace, bread, and land" and "All power to the Soviets", slogans which tapped the massive public desire for an end to Russian involvement in the First World War, the peasants' demand for land reform, and popular support for the Soviets.[citation needed]

The usage of the terms "communism" and "socialism" shifted after 1917, when the Bolsheviks changed their name to the Communist Party and installed a single party regime devoted to the implementation of socialist policies under Leninism.[citation needed] The Second International had dissolved in 1916 over national divisions, as the separate national parties that composed it did not maintain a unified front against the war, instead generally supporting their respective nation's role. Lenin thus created the Third International (Comintern) in 1919 and sent the Twenty-one Conditions, which included democratic centralism, to all European socialist parties willing to adhere. In France, for example, the majority of the SFIO socialist party split in 1921 to form the SFIC (French Section of the Communist International).[citation needed] Henceforth, the term "Communism" was applied to the objective of the parties founded under the umbrella of the Comintern. Their program called for the uniting of workers of the world for revolution, which would be followed by the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat as well as the development of a socialist economy. Ultimately, if their program held, there would develop a harmonious classless society, with the withering away of the state.[citation needed]

A map of countries who declared themselves to be socialist states under the Marxist-Leninist or Maoist definition (in other words, "communist states") at some point in their history. The map uses present-day borders.

During the Russian Civil War (1918–1922), the Bolsheviks nationalized all productive property and imposed a policy of war communism, which put factories and railroads under strict government control, collected and rationed food, and introduced some bourgeois management of industry. After three years of war and the 1921 Kronstadt rebellion, Lenin declared the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1921, which was to give a "limited place for a limited time to capitalism." The NEP lasted until 1928, when Joseph Stalin achieved party leadership, and the introduction of the first Five Year Plan spelled the end of it. Following the Russian Civil War, the Bolsheviks formed in 1922 the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), or Soviet Union, from the former Russian Empire.

Following Lenin's democratic centralism, the Communist parties were organized on a hierarchical basis, with active cells of members as the broad base; they were made up only of elite cadres approved by higher members of the party as being reliable and completely subject to party discipline.[26]

After World War II, Communists consolidated power in Eastern Europe, and in 1949, the Communist Party of China (CPC) led by Mao Zedong established the People's Republic of China, which would later follow its own ideological path of Communist development.[citation needed] Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, and Mozambique were among the other countries in the Third World that adopted or imposed a pro-Communist government at some point. Although never formally unified as a single political entity, by the early 1980s almost one-third of the world's population lived in Communist states, including the former Soviet Union and People's Republic of China. By comparison, the British Empire had ruled up to one-quarter of the world's population at its greatest extent.[27]

Communist states such as Soviet Union and China succeeded in becoming industrial and technological powers, challenging the capitalists' powers in the arms race and space race and military conflicts.

Cold War years

USSR postage stamp depicting the communist state launching the first artificial satellite Sputnik 1.

By virtue of the Soviet Union's victory in the Second World War in 1945, the Soviet Army had occupied nations in both Eastern Europe and East Asia; as a result, communism as a movement spread to many new countries. This expansion of communism both in Europe and Asia gave rise to a few different branches of its own, such as Maoism.[citation needed]

Communism had been vastly strengthened by the winning of many new nations into the sphere of Soviet influence and strength in Eastern Europe. Governments modeled on Soviet Communism took power with Soviet assistance in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Poland, Hungary and Romania. A Communist government was also created under Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia, but Tito's independent policies led to the expulsion of Yugoslavia from the Cominform, which had replaced the Comintern. Titoism, a new branch in the world communist movement, was labeled deviationist. Albania also became an independent Communist nation after World War II.[citation needed]

By 1950, the Chinese Communists held all of Mainland China, thus controlling the most populous nation in the world. Other areas where rising Communist strength provoked dissension and in some cases led to actual fighting through conventional and guerrilla warfare include the Korean War, Laos, many nations of the Middle East and Africa, and notably succeeded in the case of the Vietnam War against the military power of the United States and its allies. With varying degrees of success, Communists attempted to unite with nationalist and socialist forces against what they saw as Western imperialism in these poor countries.

Fear of communism

A 1947 propaganda book published by the Catechetical Guild Educational Society "warning of the dangers" of a Communist takeover.

With the exception of the Soviet Union's, China's and the Italian resistance movement's great contribution in World War II, communism was seen as a rival, and a threat to western democracies and capitalism for most of the twentieth century.[3] This rivalry peaked during the Cold War, as the world's two remaining superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, polarized the world into two camps of nations (characterized in the West as "The Free World" vs. "Behind the Iron Curtain"); supported the spread of their economic and political systems (capitalism and democracy vs. communism); strengthened their military power, developed new weapon systems and stockpiled nuclear weapons; competed with each other in space exploration; and even fought each other through proxy client nations.

Near the beginning of the Cold War, on February 9, 1950, Senator Joseph McCarthy from Wisconsin accused 205 Americans working in the State Department of being "card-carrying Communists".[28] The fear of communism in the U.S. spurred aggressive investigations and the red-baiting, blacklisting, jailing and deportation of people suspected of following Communist or other left-wing ideology. Many famous actors and writers were put on a "blacklist" from 1950 to 1954, which meant they would not be hired and would be subject to public disdain.[29]

After the collapse of the Soviet Union

This map shows the states which today are officially run by a Communist party alone: People's Republic of China, North Korea, Laos, Vietnam and Cuba.

In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev became leader of the Soviet Union and relaxed central control, in accordance with reform policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring). The Soviet Union did not intervene as Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary all abandoned Communist rule by 1990. In 1991, the Soviet Union itself dissolved.

By the beginning of the 21st century, states controlled by Communist parties under a single-party system include the People's Republic of China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. Communist parties, or their descendant parties, remain politically important in many countries. President Vladimir Voronin of Moldova is a member of the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova, and President Dimitris Christofias of Cyprus is a member of the Progressive Party of Working People, but the countries are not run under single-party rule. In South Africa, the Communist Party is a partner in the ANC-led government. In India, communists lead the governments of three states, with a combined population of more than 115 million. In Nepal, communists hold a majority in the parliament.[30]

The People's Republic of China has reassessed many aspects of the Maoist legacy; and the People's Republic of China, Laos, Vietnam, and, to a far lesser degree, Cuba have reduced state control of the economy in order to stimulate growth. The People's Republic of China runs Special Economic Zones dedicated to market-oriented enterprise, free from central government control. Several other communist states have also attempted to implement market-based reforms, including Vietnam.

A tableau in a communist rally in Kerala, India, of a young farmer and worker.

Theories within Marxism as to why communism in Eastern Europe was not achieved after socialist revolutions pointed to such elements as the pressure of external capitalist states, the relative backwardness of the societies in which the revolutions occurred, and the emergence of a bureaucratic stratum or class that arrested or diverted the transition press in its own interests. (Scott and Marshall, 2005) Marxist critics of the Soviet Union, most notably Trotsky, referred to the Soviet system, along with other Communist states, as "degenerated" or "deformed workers' states", arguing that the Soviet system fell far short of Marx's communist ideal and he claimed the working class was politically dispossessed. The ruling stratum of the Soviet Union was held to be a bureaucratic caste, but not a new ruling class, despite their political control. Anarchists who adhere to Participatory economics claim that the Soviet Union became dominated by powerful intellectual elites who in a capitalist system crown the proletariat’s labor on behalf of the bourgeoisie.

Non-Marxists, in contrast, have often applied the term to any society ruled by a Communist Party and to any party aspiring to create a society similar to such existing nation-states. In the social sciences, societies ruled by Communist Parties are distinct for their single party control and their socialist economic bases. While some social and political scientists applied the concept of "totalitarianism" to these societies, others identified possibilities for independent political activity within them,[31][32] and stressed their continued evolution up to the point of the dissolution of the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern Europe during the late 1980s and early 1990s.[citati