Comrades,

recently I debated on the Che Guevara Discussion area
the relation between the military and socialism.
During the debate, I brought up a very controversal
possibility that I felt should be debated. I said that
the workers may have to continue maintaining armed
bodies of men even when humanity has reached
communism. 

I'm not saying I'm 100% correct here, after all we
have never seen a true modern communist society. These
are simply observations I have made. This also bleeds
into other observations I've made.

Of course, Marx said that communism abolishes all war,
but does it? Thats what communism is supposed to do in
theory, but not necessary what it is going to do in
practice. Marx was wrong on many things, even when
describing some aspects of what socialism would be
like.

War has been with man since the early cavemen. Many of
the sports we play today for recreation originated for
a martial purpose. In fact the earliest sports were
combat sports. Humans' agressive tendencies have been
a driving factor of war, but many of the biggest wars
in human history have been over economical prizes.  

Early communal societies(ex. Celts, Ancient Slavs,
Vikings, Germanic tribes, Mongols), which are seen as
the examples for modern communism, placed a high
empasis on warriors and combat training in young
children. We even see this today with socialist
nations, which are very militarized. 

Opposition to communism will probally be a common
problem, even after the victory of the international
revolution. You really can't completely destroy
opposition permentally, theres always going to be
people who oppose the system(whatever the system is).
I'll explain more later.

We also have to consider the national question. Stalin
and paticularly Juche have said that revolutions must
often adapt to the conditions to each individual
nation. This is something Marx never really thought
of, since he though it was simply the whole bourgeious
vs. the whole proletariat. Stalin proved its more
complicated.

Of course, as communists we call for the abolishment
of countries' boundaries, but I don't think this
applies to cultural boundaries. Lenin claimed that
national & languages differences would still exist
after the fulfilment of the dictatorship of the
proletariat in the whole world even still for very
much longer. 

The USSR promoted its ethnic minorites to take pride
in their cultural heritage. China has done so too, and
so has Cuba with its Afro-Cuban population. 

But could these differences truely dissappear once we
achieve communism? I really doubt that.

This allows the possibilities of inter-ethnic
conflict. The USSR, although made huge progress in
uniting its 150 different ethnic groups, still faced
occasional ethnic warfare. Between 1945-1991, the USSR
engaged in around 50 different ethnic conflicts.

I'm not saying that unity between different races and
ethnic groups is impossible, but yet we'll always have
those hard-liners who want to start trouble.

Because of these possibilities I've observed, I said
that it might be possible to maintain armed groups to
protect workers rule even into communism. 

I don't doubt that communism will get rid of the big
major conflicts that capitalism has created.  However.
I do believe that small-scale conflicts, more in the
forms of tribal and guerrilla warfare, could continue
under communism.

Like I said before, these are simply observations I've
have made, I am in no way saying I'm 100% correct! If
I'm wrong in many areas, than please tell me.

I brought this topic up, because so many times things
don't go exactly according to plan, whether in poltics
or personal life. 

your comrade-in-arms,
Spetsnaz
http://www.geocities.com/john_boget

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Get organized for the holidays!
http://calendar.yahoo.com/

Reply via email to