But France wasn't the only example of a republic at that time, and what even inspired the French revolution was the United States establishing itself after breaking away from England. The monarchies and empires of Europe feared republics because by definition, it means a country ruled without a monarch, and there were two successful examples popping up one after another, and inspiring republicans and other revolutionaries all around the world.
The term had negative connotations between monarchs, nobles, and conservatives because to them it meant losing the power they had spent centuries convincing people was their right by God. But to serfs, peasants, workers, and liberals, it was an aspirational term. The politics of the 19th century were defined by European monarchs trying to justify their rule, consolidate as much power as possible, and perpetuate their regimes as long as they possibly could, because many of them could see the writing on the wall.
The issue with the term Communism in the 21st century is it was mostly the poor and the marginalized that suffered under the Soviet Warsaw block, and Asian regimes. They see the symbols of communism and think not of liberation, equality, and unity, but of their former oppressors. There are probably plenty of former officers of officials that are Nostalgic for their Soviet past, one of them is waging a war against Ukraine right now. But to the people who the term is supposed to inspire, it brings pain to many of them.
I understand the appeals of the communist label as a westerner, because ever since the beginnings of the 20th century it has been demonized, almost to the point of seeming cool. Not to mention a lot of the same things the US has criticized the USSR of doing, it was guilty of itself. There will probably be a day when the US fades away as an empire, and all that will remain are its history, its symbols and its legacy. and I hope people are just as critical to those who ignore their history, bask in their symbols and glorify their legacy.
The difference between Hitler and the countries I mentioned is that Hitler already has a word associated with his regime: Nazi. When you here it in public, that is the connection you make. Unfortunately that is the same connection people make with communism and people like Stalin or Mao. Regardless of whether the Soviet Union was truly communist or not, it is the country most people associate with the term. Hell, even many leftists make that association, which is why the Soviet flag, communist leaders, and propaganda prints are featured heavily in many communist memes. I agree that the word communism shouldn't be tied to these regimes forever, but its hard to make a case for reclaiming it when many communist continue to push the association themselves.
Like I said, I mostly agree with the ideal expressed by Engels and Marx, but because of it's association most people make between communism and the the regimes mentioned above, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice by continuing to gather around symbols and iconography many people in Eastern Europe and Asians associate with imperialism, genocide, and tyranny.
I agree with your second point, which is why I do call myself an anarchist. I believe power is an irresistibly corrupting force, and it doesn't matter what the intentions are of the people who seize it, if there is too much of it concentrated in the hands of one person, organization, class, or country, it is going to corrupt them. That is why my ideal world would be one with no states, no large governments, no class divisions. where communities can more or less govern themselves according to their needs, and through cooperation and mutual aid, these communities can keep each other afloat, and stand together in times of need. Overly simplified, Let's say I listen to John Lennon's Imagine, and wish that could be us.
Yeah, and I've seen you around too, and you seem pretty cool, which I why I wanted to carry on this discussion. Forgive me that this thread kinda turned into a communist dunk as that actually wasn't my intention. I was more to show the types of people I usually see arguing in the threads. And no need for the push, I think anarchists are awesome, and its kinda the journey I took from being a conservative to a leftist. There is still a lot I'm learning and trying to unlearn from my past though.
I'm all for reclaiming the flag, especially in queer circles where many are facing very real threats of violence. Just because we're transgender doesn't mean we're transtender!
I recommend the pokemon anime, especially if you grew up with the English dub. It's a kid's anime, so the difficulty level isn't very high, and if you are familiar with the episodes, it can help you fill in the gaps to where your comprehension ends. Plus its really interesting seeing the subtle differences in the music, edited scenes restored, and even getting to see outright banned episodes.
The reason I don't call myself a communist is because I feel it has taken on a different meaning than the one Marx and Engels originally assigned to it. The Soviet Union, The People's Republic of China, Kampuchia, Cuba, and formerly North Korea have all used the name to describe their governments despite not meeting the criteria by Marx, and they had committed unspeakable evils in its name. I feel utilizing the names, symbols, and legacy of communism without taking the historical weight of them into consideration does a great disservice to the goals of communism. It's why I even refuse to associate with the hammer and sickle, because to many people, that symbol carries as much weight as a swastika or the rising sun.
It's actually pretty late for me, but I do want to continue talking later. I'll even give the reading material a look. I just wanted to air out my grievances with the communist label, and put some context to why I abhor tankies as much as I do fascists.
Just because I consider myself a leftist doesn't mean I'm a pure communist. If any of my posts have made clear, I am anti-authoritarian first and foremost, and I believe in compromise rather than fundamentalism.
I believe in mutual aid, and pooling resources as a community, but I don't think it works at a state level, hence why many states that called themselves communist failed or implemented capitalism to some degree. There are instances of it working at smaller scales like through certain Native American tribes, and attempts made in Spain during the Spanish Civil War.
As long as you are someone who truly believes in human rights and civil liberties, I'll likely get along with you. I don't care what you label yourself. If you stand against authoritarians, and are there to help the weak and marginalized, I will call you friend.
I like the concepts of Anarchism. Rather than being run by a leader or following a bureaucracy,I believe people can come together as a community to provide the basic needs to each other. I am also queer, a believer in science, an atheist, and anything else that could possibly get me labeled as a "liberal". Personally I think things work better in moderation rather than as an all or nothing. I may be an anarchists, but I may share some values with a libertarian or an-cap who believes in capitalism. I'm not about to start a fight over which economic system is better, and will likely rely on them for help and resources. I just hope if we are facing down a tyrant or someone who wishes to do harm to the weak and vulnerable within our communities, we would stand together and help each other out.
I do have what would be considered more leftist tendencies, but I'm not a fundamentalist either. I feel through compromise, and mutual aid is how we as humans have survived since antiquity.
But France wasn't the only example of a republic at that time, and what even inspired the French revolution was the United States establishing itself after breaking away from England. The monarchies and empires of Europe feared republics because by definition, it means a country ruled without a monarch, and there were two successful examples popping up one after another, and inspiring republicans and other revolutionaries all around the world.
The term had negative connotations between monarchs, nobles, and conservatives because to them it meant losing the power they had spent centuries convincing people was their right by God. But to serfs, peasants, workers, and liberals, it was an aspirational term. The politics of the 19th century were defined by European monarchs trying to justify their rule, consolidate as much power as possible, and perpetuate their regimes as long as they possibly could, because many of them could see the writing on the wall.
The issue with the term Communism in the 21st century is it was mostly the poor and the marginalized that suffered under the Soviet Warsaw block, and Asian regimes. They see the symbols of communism and think not of liberation, equality, and unity, but of their former oppressors. There are probably plenty of former officers of officials that are Nostalgic for their Soviet past, one of them is waging a war against Ukraine right now. But to the people who the term is supposed to inspire, it brings pain to many of them.
I understand the appeals of the communist label as a westerner, because ever since the beginnings of the 20th century it has been demonized, almost to the point of seeming cool. Not to mention a lot of the same things the US has criticized the USSR of doing, it was guilty of itself. There will probably be a day when the US fades away as an empire, and all that will remain are its history, its symbols and its legacy. and I hope people are just as critical to those who ignore their history, bask in their symbols and glorify their legacy.