FAQs
FAQs on socialist theory
Q: what is Marxism.
A: We recommend that you read Marx yourself in order to gain an understanding of his theories, however basically Marxism is a form of ontology called "dialectical materialism". This is basically the understanding that people and societies as a whole make decisions based upon their material surroundings in a way which develops towards social progress. He showed that global history had moved from slave based society, into a feudal society, and then on into a capitalist society. He the recognised that under capitalism, workers are subjected to "wage-slavery" in which workers are given a wage for performing a set task. This profit goes to the bourgeois for owning the means of production rather than the workers, whose labour is exploited by the capitalists. Marx envisioned a world in which the workers cast off the chains of wage-slavery, and took the means of production.
Q: Doesn't socialism breed a lack of innovation?
A: Actually, within the frame of capitalism innovation is always limited by profit. Any idea will only be allowed to be followed through if the capitalist can see a way of making profit from it. Under communism, however, ideas are explored in order to further human understanding and better everyone's quality of life. For example, despite being in many senses a third world country, Cuba had managed to create a number of vaccines against some harmful diseases which it has given to its people for free.
FAQs on socialist history.
Q: Wasn't Stalin morally abhorrent?
A: For many people, they look at the Soviet Union as a great advancement for socialism until Stalin took power. However the socialist advancements of the USSR didn't end with Stalin taking power. In fact Stalin pushed forward many socialist policies, including the industrialisation of the nation, converting a third world, 'backwards' country into a massive industrial power. He advocated the theory of socialism in one country, which many argue was one of the central reasons behind the survival of the USSR. His leadership in the Second World War, whilst often flawed, allowed socialist Russia to defeat the Nazis. [for a more substantial view of Stalin, not tainted by western propaganda, see L. Martens' "Another view on Stalin."]
Stalin is often also blamed for the many deaths in the famines that followed the first few years of his reign. Whilst much of the blame for this famine may lay with Stalin attempting to force collective farming in an undue time frame, the fault is not his alone to bear, and certainly claims of this act being an intentional genocide are subject to much debate. There may be some evidence to suggest that with limited food available, Stalin decided to withhold food from rebellious elements of society, particularly the Kulaks in the Ukraine; however even on that, there is little evidence to suggest an intentionality behind this. Stalin, as defacto leader at the time, must however bare some blame for the events that took place.
There are many other areas of controversy surrounding the leader, including his homophobia and refusing to allow LGBT rights to prevail in Russia, however there were also many advancements for Marxist Leninism under him. Thus Stalin should be viewed with critical support, endorsing the areas in which he excelled, and criticising those in which he failed.
Q: Isn't the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea) anti-communist by nature?
A: In reality the DPRK is much more complex than western propaganda suggests.
At the outset of the Korean revolution, shortly after the end of world war 2, the US were very fearful of the expanding communist influence in east Asia, and so decided to intervene in the civil war which the North were at the verge of winning.
In the war that followed the Americans were unable to defeat the North Koreans, even leading the US general McArthur to eagerly suggest the use of nuclear weapons against the North and their Chinese allies (this was refused on the sole grounds that it may lead to nuclear war with Russia). The war was caught to a standstill with the US unable to dislodge the DPRK despite the use of napalm and other chemical weapons and sanctions imposed by the vast majority of countries in the UN against North Korea.
To this day America maintains the 7th Fleet on the coat of Korea, and has occupies the demilitarised zone between the north and south with a large force.
Despite this and continued international sanctions, North Korea has managed to maintain a free healthcare system, a free education system and intends to be able to be self-sufficient in the near future. They have developed nuclear weaponry so that they may spend less money on defence systems, allowing them to spend money on other areas of society. The caution and mistrust that the north has when dealing with the south comes from the lessons they were taught by history.
Whilst the leadership may be rife with corruption and many elements of nepotism and despotism are clear, we still owe this socialist country much respect in its battle for freedom from US imperialism.
FAQs on religion.
Q: Is communism reconcilable with a religious world view?
A: Yes. Communism may fight against any institution that acts as an opiate for the masses or as a force for revisionist policy, however Lenin also clearly explained that if a cultural phenomenon is used as uniting point against imperialism, it is a success for communism. Certainly Islam has acted as a conductor for revolutionary thought previously, and a number of other world religions have the potential to act likewise.
Q: Surely the bible preaches against communism?
A: actually in Acts 2-3 the bible clearly explains that if one wanted to enter into the community of the early church, they were required to share all of their property equally amongst the community. The penalty for refusing seems to be suggested as death. Certainly the bible is anti-imperialist and anti-slavery, and it is our duty to refute the lies of the roman aristocracy that the bible supports inequality. Similarly homosexuality is never discussed within the bible in relation to the form it exists in today; instead when the bible discusses "homosexuality" it discusses stoic ideals rather than the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, whom should be supported by all good communists.
Q: isn't it true that religion started every war in history?
A: not at all. Religious institutions, as religion has been a part of almost every culture since the dawn of time, have often being involved in wars. However these institutions often are linked to the bourgeoisie or aristocracy, and historically most wars have been caused more by these imperialist, or at least, Feudal ideas.