Communism

You know, I think the village- and city-part- level autonomous cooperative communities that sprang up during the Revolution (the original soviets, "councils", whose name the Bolsheviks misappropriated), and which also popped up like fungi after rain on the Republican side in the Spanish Civil War, actually worked pretty well for local governance. They weren't terribly good at stuff like fighting a war - as is painfully evident from the Spanish case - but I understand they could manage the day-to-day running of their locality quite well.

'Course, in both cases they all perished or were absorbed before any conclusions can be drawn of how well the system would've functioned in the long run and if they'd eventually started playing the classic state-building dominance games with each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaxfetish

There were several communities formed here in Utah during the early Mormon settlement that were basically communist
Ajax

---

Indeed many of the more idealistic followers of Christianity formed communes. "The Pilgrims" are a good example as they started off as a communal society and nearly perished because of it.

I don't think that a "primitive" society would benefit from this form of government. My understanding of the post-classical Incas is that they had a communistic redistributive economy which continued to stagnate and decline.

You sure it wasn't just the classic "dividing the spoils" scheme where the rulers distributed by various means their accumulated valuables to followers and underlings in return of loyalty and service ? I don't recall the exact term that sort of system is known as, but it was extremely common in comparatively limited and undeveloped economies. And, yes, it tended to hit its limits fairly soon too. Sooner or later you're simply going to run out of stuff to redistribute as rewards. That's really more an issue of production of wealth though.

Anyway, true Communism is an idea of the industrialized world. Antyhing pre-industrialized is "proto-communism" at best, although "every man an equal" has been an extraordinarily common rallying cry among millenial revolutionary movements over the course of history. A few I can name right off the bat are some of the ciliastic peasant rebellions that followed Luther's theses, and some of the Sengoku period Japanese Ikkis (what was the slogan of that one bunch ? "Cast Away Your Sins and Reach the Pure Land" or something ? Same old Paradise Now idea anyway). Assorted secluded puritanical sects have tended to be big on the idea too.

Which, of course, suggests an established income distribution scheme their followers found intolerable. Not too different from what triggered the Revolutions in Russia and China.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

You sure it wasn't just the classic "dividing the spoils" scheme where the rulers distributed by various means their accumulated valuables to followers and underlings in return of loyalty and service ? I don't recall the exact term that sort of system is known as, but it was extremely common in comparatively limited and undeveloped economies. And, yes, it tended to hit its limits fairly soon too. Sooner or later you're simply going to run out of stuff to redistribute as rewards. That's really more an issue of production of wealth though.

---

Which is a good question. Pre-Columbian South and Central American history is perhaps the most dynamic field in history with new, fascinating discoveries being made all the time. I do know that just before the arrival of the Spanish the Incans had defeated their northern rivals (Chimu?). What the records of the time may show that indeed, that evidence was influenced by the recent conquest (as the Spanish invaded from the Northern, recently conquered areas).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Indeed many of the more idealistic followers of Christianity formed communes. "The Pilgrims" are a good example as they started off as a communal society and nearly perished because of it.

I don't think that a "primitive" society would benefit from this form of government. My understanding of the post-classical Incas is that they had a communistic redistributive economy which continued to stagnate and decline.

---

One of the ten commandments is "love your neighbour". Assuming that you and your neighbour nurture the same extent of love for eachother that makes you both "equal"...Not quite much I'd say, but it appears it offers somekind of relief and appeasement to those not so clever, independent or resourceful enough to picture their lives out of the flock...(see quakers, amish and neoprotestant sects)

Actually, in certain harsh situations, communism may provide the only means to survive (see jewish kibbutz)...Unfortunately, it has been proven safe only when used in small communities so far. :2thumbsup: