No replies to this topic

[cloudship]

There has been some talk about Rick Santorum versus his rather liberal family in Italy. Seems there is some talk about how some members were staunch Communists. The far right often throws the term Communism around as it's arch enemy, labeling it liberalism to the extreme. But is Communism really liberal?

I think Communism is, in fact, ultimate conservativism in practice. With Communism as it is practiced, you have a rather insulated controling faction, in this case the Communist Party, acting supposedly in the best interests of the general population, but mostly towards the betterment of that party. To be recognized or to advance you have to prove your dedication to that party, or you are shunned or discriminated against. Supposedly actions for the betterment of the group above the individual are recognized, but in practice it is usually the actions which promote the initiatives of the party versus those of the average person which are most admired.

If we were to compare the Soviet Style of Communism, they still had the big companies but called them bureaus. They were run by leaders who were dedicated to the party. In most cases there were more than one bureau focused on a particular trade area, so you cant even claim monopoly there. In the Soviet style economy, production was directed towards the interests of the party, not the consumer. But if you were to compare this to the Us style, it would be like production being directed towards what proved of interest to the stock market versus the consumer here.

The big difference I can come up with is that here the average person has a chance to partake, if on a very small level and with some pains, the stock market. Yet, is that not also a possibility for the Communists, in that they can participate in teh Communist party?