I really wonder why not all non-rich people are communists, as they would likely see their own condition improved in such a society. I suppose the possible reasons could be:

  1. They don't understand how the current system exploit us
  2. They don't know communism or misunderstand it
  3. They fear changing the current system for the “unknown”
  4. They think it can't work
  5. They are not interested in politics at all
  6. They think that one day they will be rich too
  7. They are too busy being fascist
  8. Something else

I know it's probably a mix of all of these, but in what proportions exactly? What are the most common reasons?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Well, in the West, proletarians are still beneficiaries of imperialist superprofits, making them support the actions of the bourgeoisie and become a 'bourgeois-proletariat' as was described by Lenin in Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (which he had observed in England at the time). In the global south, it's likely a large combination of factors. The most dominant one being that imperialism shatters the ability to educate the population, and installing puppet governments while violently repressing or castrating any effective communist creates a cultural hegemony largely free of class consciousness. Add to this the massive swathes of fascism that leak out of the imperial core in the form of propaganda and false narratives and you end up with a largely impotent proletarian movement in much of the global south. The average worker doesn't know enough and is more worried about 'getting by', helping their local community, or not getting blown up or killed by USian orc firing squads than organizing to overthrow Capitalism. With imperialism being the primary contradiction in the lives of millions of global southerners, the ones exploiting them are not visibly their national bourgeoisie, but rather the overseas American and European bourgeoisie. Thus the question for many radical sects in the GS becomes one of national liberation from the USA rather than the liberation of their class from Capitalism. Just look at modern Iran and Russia, which are becoming ever more galvanized against the USA while still being a predominantly right-wing nation/economy.

Despite all of those things being absolutely crushing, communism still finds its way into many liberation movements across the globe, and there are still many successful communist parties in the global south (some better than others).

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 10 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Thank you for your answer.

    For the West, I understand your point, even though there is still a large portion of the population that barely earns enough to live decently. In my country, this mainly affects the younger generation and single parents. However, they blame the government more than capitalism, which I don’t understand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    The Western proletarians are still beneficiaries of imperial superprofits from a multitude of avenues even despite their struggles at times. Most people in the West aren't actively cheering for imperialism, they just simply allow it to continue because they, on some level, refuse to educate themselves on where it all comes from or have fully drank the capitalist kool aid. Their material conditions define them, and their material conditions tell them that their state is supreme. To the average paycheck-to-paycheck worker in an imperial core country, they get given things—often referred to as 'treats'—like universal healthcare, infrastructure investments, full bellies, time off from work, a 'dignified' national identity, things that they know other nations don't have. They never question why people don't have them, whether it be because of their own prejudices or because of pure ignorance.

    To the average Western worker, when struggle and austerity hits, it is a failure of the state to not allocate enough imperial superprofits to their needs. The state and its bureaucracy is all they know, and they know it keeps them fed and clothed, so they try to force concessions through it. When the older generation tell them of times that 'things were better' and say 'this country has gone to shit,' they literally observe the fact that the bourgeoisie have rescinded their concessions because they no longer feel threatened, but never internalize it. The bourgeois-proletariat has only ever known the state and understood the state. They don't see the bourgeoisie taking back what they gave, but rather they see the state as being incompetent at resource allocation or otherwise corrupt because they do not understand that the state itself is a tool used to oppress them. Mamdanites and Bernie Bros in the US are an example of this. They never question how the USA became the wealthiest, most opulent nation on the planet, they simply desire that that wealth be distributed amongst Americans as opposed to amongst the proletarian class.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    Thank you for your great answer again.

    In my experience, many people simply want the government to improve their living conditions—whether through higher wages or lower prices. In other words, they seek to improve capitalism rather than replace the economic system entirely with something better. You are right: most Western proletarians do not actively challenge their state’s imperialist stance. But even so, why don’t they want to nationalize their largest corporations, instead of just raising their tax for example?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago* (4 children)

    tbf, I'm still curious about why does Communism still persists so much.

    like, a lot of communist books are available online. I don't know why communist sites aren't crushed like piracy sites.

    (I know online Marxism is really small compared to meatspace Marxism, but why is it allowed at all?)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Well really, this is somewhat conjecture to speak on, but I see it as a list of things. In the West, communism is microscopic, but is allowed to exist in its current fashion because:

    1. In its current form, proper Marxism-Leninism of the West is impotent, and not threatening to Empire. The West is more concerned with crushing anti-imperialist nations, extracting superprofits, and tightening its loosening grip on the global south.
    2. It would 'show the empire's hand' to crackdown on Marxist sites that get only a couple thousand views per day, mostly from the same users. For the population of the West to stay subservient, and continue allowing the bourgeoisie to exploit the Earth, they need to believe they're in peaceful freedom-of-speech land and aren't at risk of government crackdown by visiting the wrong site.
    3. The resources necessary to track and destroy all gatherings of Communism online are more costly that its worth. The internet is not a real place, and nothing that happens on it is real. Crushing every single site registers by a suspected Marxist is a lot more difficult than flooding every website with anticommunist botfarms, manipulating the highest traffic sites to be pro-empire, and using algorithms to discourage communist content. When things get hairy, you crush the movements organizing in real life. If some workers in Indonesia wanna read Capital, let them, it's more of a pain to try and stop them considering there's hundreds of ways they could access it. If they start striking and shutting down factories, send in the blackwater mercs and the problem solves itself.
    4. Capitalists were overconfident. Many of them are competent enough to be brutal imperialists, but when the USSR fell, many of them felt it was 'the End of History' and that Capitalism had won its final victory. There was no need to crush marxist bookstores or ML YouTubers because their ideology was dead, all that they were now were ways to generate some small amount of capital from views and ad clicks.

    All of these reasons are visibly starting to become more trouble than their worth for the bourgeoisie. More nations are passing anti-communist media laws and actively banning leftist speech or artworks, denouncing 'far-left terrorism', and generally taking steps to behead very large online communist gatherings are all things happening right now in the face of the rise of China, which will trigger another Red Scare. During that Red Scare, the tiny Marxist sites you speak of will be deplatformed as soon as possible, and if they aren't they'll be used as honeypots for when someone who visits Marxist Archive gets their PC subpoenaed for evidence in a court case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago

    Piracy sites persist too. You just need to know where to look.

    Ultimately, this is knowledge you can't just suppress. Even if all theory was burned and deleted tomorrow (an impossible task), people would still be able to pass the knowledge on to each other, and even if that failed, as we know, socialism and eventually communism is part of the natural progression of things so it will arise in one form or another eventually either way.

  • source
  • parent