- This topic has 4 voices and 4 replies.
-
Posts
-
Until I began reading “Hammer and Hoe” by Robin D.G. Kelley I really had no idea there was a CP in the south during this time in our history! At first glance it seems odd, but then after reading more about it, I realize that the conditions in the south, esp. Alabama during the Depression made it ripe for the introduction of the party into the area. Just wondering if anyone has read more about this? Have any thoughts?
Blame literature. Many of the authors of that time and prior were Marxists or Communists. Much of their writing focused on class differences.
The theory of communism speaks to people that want something for nothing, or should I say people's innate laziness. That is its appeal. The problem with the communist approach is that Marx and Engels never really specified what happens after the establishment of the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat”. They seemed to assume that everyone would pull together out of a sense of brotherly love. Marx was long on pithy slogans but short on practical ideas of governance.
The theory of communism speaks to people that want something for nothing, or should I say people's innate laziness. That is its appeal. The problem with the communist approach is that Marx and Engels never really specified what happens after the establishment of the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat". They seemed to assume that everyone would pull together out of a sense of brotherly love. Marx was long on pithy slogans but short on practical ideas of governance.
I sincerely doubt that this was the case. After all, the communists and socialists were strongest among the farmers and laborers; not people who led lazy lives. What the communists and socialists promised was a more radical, faster, and easier way towards the just society that the Populists, Progressives, and the New Dealers were seeking.If you notice, the communists and socialists were at their strongest when liberal movements like the Populists, the Progressives, and then the New Deal seemed to stall. In other words, they turned to the more radical party because the moderate movements didn't seem to be getting where they said they'd go. Whenever those movements enjoyed a major success or had a charismatic leader like William Jennings Bryan, the more radical parties weakened again.
Perhaps a better way to put it is that Communism assumes that you can get something for nothing at the individual level. It says that everyone is equal and the products of labor should be distributed equally throughout society regardless of individual effort. In fact, under communism the system as it is supposed to work is a disincentive for working hard because the individual will not see any gain from working harder. In that way then yes, it does encourage laziness.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
