Portal talk:Communism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] General discussion

[edit] Welcome

Welcome to the newly-created Communism portal. Please edit it mercilessly!

[edit] "To do" box

I've searched some of the backlogs in order to find content suitable for the "to do" box. If you have articles that can be included, just add them to the list. Thanks! Mário 17:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Topics" box

Please, suggest a structure to the topics box. Mário 17:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Improve the box, please. Mário 18:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Selected content discussion

I propose that the selected article, picture and biography stays in the portal for 2 weeks. What do you say? Mário 20:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal looks great

Nice job in setting up the portal. I think it looks great. -Aude (talk contribs) 00:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Great work. --Zoz (t) 18:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice work Silva, really impressive.--Jersey Devil 06:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Best-looking portal yet. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 08:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The picture

The selected picture is inappropriate for this portal, as it has nothing to do with communism. It's like showing the Iwo Jima picture to illustrate the concept of capitalism. Zocky | picture popups 12:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It represents the communist victory in WWII, it features the communist flag, it is a symbol of the anti-fascist movement, what do you want more? Mário 12:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

That's the flag of the Soviet Union, not the communist flag. It could also be argued that the American flag is a symbol of capitalism. The picture represents the fall of Berlin, which was not a communist revolution, but an anti-fascist victory in an international war, and not all anti-fascists were communists, even in countries where communist parties lead the struggle against fascism. Zocky | picture popups 13:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
The flag of Soviet Union is the flag of communism, hence the hammer and sickle, the star and the red. Shortly before, the anthem of the Soviet Union was the Internationale. The Soviet symbols were the communist symbols, not the opposite. I believe this may be a hard concept to understand, but because the Soviet Union was a worker's state, it was communism in its practical application. Therefore, a Soviet victory was a communist victory. The Great Patriotic War was a war between communists and nazis, an ideological conflict. Iwo Jima may be a representation of the victory of the American political system, not the victory of America's economic system. Furthermore, the Japanese economy was also a capitalist economy. That's the origin of your confusion. While communism is both a political and economic system, capitalism in its strict sense, is not. While capitalists cannot celebrate the end of WWII as a victory of their own, the communists can. Mário 14:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I'd say that my primary and secondary school history which I learned in socialist Yugoslavia, makes me informed enough to know what communists claimed and didn't claim as their own. A single-handed victory of communism over nazism is one of the things they didn't. WWII was a war between fascists and anti-fascists, and all countries had both. The international war was between countries where fascists and antifascists were in power. The name Great patriotic war was chosen in the Soviet Union exactly to represent the wide front against German invasion, much wider than just communist. The communist party was the avantgarde, and most Soviet citizens and soldiers were not members, and the Soviet Union didn't claim to be a communist country. USSR means Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, not Communist republics.
The fact that USSR used a communist flag (there are others) as its own does not make it the same thing. The flag was raised in Berlin as the Soviet, not communist flag. Zocky | picture popups 14:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
As a member of a marxist-leninist party I can assure you that the communist movement celebrates the Soviet victory with joy. The difference between communist and socialist state is away from what we are discussing here - while USSR never became a communist state, it had achieving communism as its major objective, following the marxist-leninist way of reaching it. I'm not claiming that the victory is only a communist victory, I'm just claiming that it was also a communist victory, therefore, having the picture in the portal is a fair thing. Along with that, making ideological comparisons between socialist Yugoslavia and Soviet Union is a theoretical fault. Mário 14:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
What the communist movement in your parts celebrates with joy has nothing to do with this. The question is what the picture represents. "Victory of Soviet Union over Germany" or "Fall of Berlin" would be correct answers, "Communism" is a wrong answer. Zocky | picture popups 15:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
So, topics related to Soviet Union are not communism-related? Mário 15:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Not automatically, no. The Romanoff dinasty, Estonian composers, bridge construction in 1970s in Siberia, etc. are all related to Soviet Union, but putting a picture of any of them on this portal would look very much wrong. Zocky | picture popups 15:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
You are right, but Soviet military victories are. The deeds of communist countries are communism related, because of the ideological motivation behind such deeds. Or do you believe that Soviet Union had won the war without the anti-fascist motivation? Such motivation was given by the country's ideology. The communists had a major role in almost every resistance movement. As a Yugoslavian you certainly know that, you liberated yourselves from nazism, about that, probably, I only have things to learn from you. My final conclusion is that the victory in Berlin was motivated by the fierce will of the communists and soviets in general to defeat the nazis, in the same way, if the Germans had captured Moscow, a picture from such victory would be a fair presence in a nazism portal. Mário 15:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
The problem is that "lead by communists" is not the same as "communist". In Yugoslavia, the national liberation army was lead by communists, but the communist party didn't have its own units or its own victories, and neither did it in the Soviet Union. Look at it this way, would a picture of a dead quisling, who was killed by communists because he betrayed his country, not because he was not a communist, be a good illustration of communism? Zocky | picture popups 15:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Of course it wouldn't be the best illustration of communism but would be an illustration of a certain manner of dealing with loyalty and patriotism inside the communist movements. The soviet army has its roots on the people's army gathered during the civil war. But this discussion will lead us to no way, I promise to choose less problematic pictures in the future, I invite you to keep visiting the portal and presenting your opinion about the content every time you want. Thanks! Mário 16:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I kind of agree with Zocky on this. The Soviet flag on the Reichstag isn't really represntative of a "Communist victory" but rather just part of Soviet history. Two very different things. Just my two cents.--Jersey Devil 22:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

You both fail in understanding that the Soviet Union was communism (in its socialist stage) put in practice. That's why it had the red flag and the internationale (until 1944) as national symbols instead of just manipulating the former national flag or finding another anthem. It doesn't matter if the first worker's state in history was the Soviet Union, because internationalism is a major guideline of every marxist-leninist state, hence the star in the flag. The Soviet Union was the first territory the workers claimed as their own, so, a Soviet victory means a victory of the workers. The first article of the 1936 constitution was The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a socialist state of workers and peasants. What other state in the world claimed to be the state of workers and peasants? Soviet union was not the state of the soviets or the russians, just like the majority of the states that claimed to be the state of a certain people, no, and I repeat, it was the state of the workers, that makes the victory of Berlin a victory of the workers, of the labour movement, the communist-influenced labour movement. That makes it a communist victory. Of course the communists didn't won the war alone. Nevertheless, they won it too. (If you can't interpret any part of my reply, just ask, I'd explain myself better in Portuguese) Mário 23:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I think there could be disagreement that the Soviet Union itself was Communism in it's transitional Socialist stage especially after Stalin took power and killed all the Old Bolsheviks of whom it could be said "truly" followed Marxist/Marxist-Leninist doctrine i.e., if the picture was of say, Lenin making a speech during the October Revolution that would be more appropriate but this picture is more reflective of Soviet history in general. Anyway, this thing all seems to be settled now.--Jersey Devil 09:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm reading this exchange long after the fact, and I'm in textmode and haven't seen the picture and don't know what was eventually decided, if anything; but it troubles me that someone taking on the job of managing something as important as this portal refuses to seriously contemplate the very real difference between the concepts "communist" and "socialist" (not that he's the the only one), and sticks to a too-familiar doctrinaire stance. Like we all aren't aware of what he means or something.
Zocky | picture popups is clearly correct here. If the picture hasn't been changed to something less obscure, especially to the uninitiated -- this is a public encyclopedia, after all -- then the subject-matter and the movement are being done a small disservice. No matter what else is exemplary, or otherwise, about the portal.
Pazouzou 02:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Communist Parties in Europe" template

I noted the template "Communist Parties in Europe" on the page of Communist Party of Sweden (1995). This template assigns one communist party to each country of Europe, but surely there must exist many different communist parties in each country? --213.65.178.172 12:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The template more or less corresponds to the mainstream of the European communist movement, by which there is usually one referent parties in each country. --Soman 13:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
What is the source for the statement that these parties are "the mainstream"? And if there is "usually" one "mainstream" party, I guess there are cases where there are more than one. In Italy, for example, there are two communist parties in the governing coalition. In Sweden, there are lots of small communist parties, neither of which has any chance of entering the parliament. --213.65.178.19 14:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Oaxaca

Are you thinking on doing/writing something about the revolt in Oaxaca? [1]

[edit] Is communism always "Radical"?

I do not agree with the introduction of this Communism Portal. I think communism does not have to be necessarily a radical ideology (I believe myself to be an example of this, and the procedure of the communist party in my country, Spain, during the transition period to democracy, is a much better one). In my opinion, the word "radical" should be deleted from the article. I hope many more people who visit this page (even the radical ones) will understand that not all communists have to be radical. It would be great if they explain here their opinion too, so as to make the word be finally wipped out. Thanks a lot. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.55.200.239 (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC).

My reading of that word "radical" was in reference to the "Left, Right, Center" school of political distinction, not as a commentary on the people involved in a this particular political ideology. See: Radicalism. Also see: Left-Right_politics for a rundown of left vs. right political thoughts and halfway through the article, a brief history of the French Revolutions political system that brought these terms into being.

But you would be correct. One would not have to be "Radical" in order to believe in a communist ideology, but in the political spectrum, it is seen as extreme. Hope that all makes some sense. Bone in thigh 13:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

That was the first thing I noticed on the portal too. And not the only thing. It's great that someone took the initiative to create and maintain this project; but most of all, this portal now requires some professional, expert attention to detail. Afer all: it now represents the communist movement to a large body of people on the Internet.
So I would suggest an, ah... committee effort to look into crossing the "t's" and dotting the "i's" here.
 ;-)
Pazouzou 03:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Communism by its very nature is revolutionary and always radical. To say otherwise is not being said by a communist, but rather a reformer or perhaps socialist.

[edit] Portals Communism and Portals Marxism

I will add the links to Portals Marxism (Fr:Portail:Marxisme (in construction) and De:Portal:Marxismus), subjects are sames. To talk : here !.

[edit] Visual symbols

Howdy... While I'm a great student of this subject matter and a very interested person, I wonder about using the soviet sybolism for this portal. The USSR was a test in communism, but certainly not a perfect marxian representation of the social/economic system. By all means this social construct was home to many very powerful artistic devices, I wonder if perhaps a visual character which did not envoke the USSR and it's possible failure would be more appropriate to a more "universal" understanding of communism. Bone in thigh 04:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Help! Communism against free trade?

Hey. I'm not sure if this is the place to ask questions about communism but I wonder if someone could point me in the direction of an article that shows very clearly that communism is against free trade somehow? Thanks in advance! 85.228.200.162 14:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article proposal!

I would like to see the Taistoism article in English Wikipedia. Taistoism (taistolaisuus in Finnish) was the idea of the people who were in "the opposition" of Communist Party of Finland. Taistoism "blossomed" in 1970's but is still great topic in Finnish media. 84.251.73.218 14:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)Leif

[edit] Can we make a neutral portal?

I noticed that the featured quotes (21 April 2008) are all violent and negative. --212.99.225.66 (talk) 10:23, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist." is violent and negative? Zazaban (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I was talking about the ones who are featured now. --212.99.225.66 (talk) 16:15, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
That one is featured now. Zazaban (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
"Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. Working men of all countries, unite!"
Karl Marx
“Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become…”
Che Guevara
"Whether you like it or not. history is on our side. We will bury you!"
Nikita Khrushchev
"You are pitiful isolated individuals; you are bankrupts; your role is played out. Go where you belong from now on -- into the dustbin of history!"
Leon Trotsky
And right under Trotsky we find this quote:
"The devotion of such titans of spirit as Lenin to an Ideal must bear fruit. The nobility of his selflessness will be an example through centuries to come, and his Ideal will reach perfection."
Mahatma Gandhi --Hillawiya (talk) 16:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm well aware of those, but the quote I mention was there too. So not ALL of them are violent and negative.
Ah, well, I hope you get the point anyways. --Hillawiya (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)