let it all collapse, the icon for the www.punkerslut.com website
Home Articles Critiques Books Video
About Graphics CopyLeft Links Music

Dictatorship with Anti-Communism or Anti-Capitalism?

To Anti-Communist Action

By Punkerslut

By FreedomBin
Image: By FreedomBin, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Start Date: February 22, 2011
Finish Date: February 22, 2011

Info: Anti-Communist Action Homepage



     There are some very direct and interesting statements throughout your website, all about the inherently evil nature of Communism. Your purpose, which is proudly stated, is "to help rectify the support Canadian politicians have given to Communist dictators in the past and at present..." Or, even more boldly in your "Anti-Communist Action Mission Statement," you write, "Communism takes many forms, often appearing as 'pro-active' groups dedicated to 'fairness' and 'equality'. These are only covers to deceive and recruit unsuspecting idealists to the communist cause. The only equality that Communists care about is the equality of slavery."

     Elsewhere, still more dramatic rhetoric, "Anti-Communist Action plans direct action to challenge Communist propagandists where ever and when ever they surface. We will be there to challenge their lies and expose their true agenda. The disease of International Communism must be eradicated if freedom is to endure. This is not hatred, this is self-preservation."

     It seems that you are almost exclusively concerned with Communism in the style of the Soviet government. In this case, you have very little to be concerned about with Communism threatening "private property." According to the 2009 international trade data, China's top three, national partners in exports and imports are three notoriously Capitalist nations: the United States, Japan, and South Korea. (USChina.org) It doesn't look like Capitalists are very afraid of the Marxism-Maoism of China, now does it?

     After all, with the profits that they raise by distributing products in China, they're paying for the food and homes of the Chinese Communist Party, for the arms and bullets for its armies, for the leather in the whips at its sweatshop factories and for the steel in the chains on their slaves. How is it that Soviet-style Communism is here to threaten liberty, when its greatest partners are top-down, capitalist-statist nations? Take a country with a similar Soviet model of Socialism: Cuba. In 2008, its trade partners included: China (25%), Canada (20%), Spain (6%), and the Netherlands (4%). (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/cu.html)

     Does it look like top-down, hierarchical, State Communism is really here "to eliminate private property" and "to incite class warfare"? On the contrary, it looks like State Communist authorities are behaving just like State Capitalist authorities.

     You complain that Communists never mention their own concentration camps, but do you mention those of the United States? Do you mention the string of concentration camps throughout Russia during 1917 that were manned and operated by US troops with carbine rifles? Do you care that the police still manage forced labor? That the mass genocide of Jews in Yugoslavia was done with US arms and by US-aligned forces? That the gasoline to burn the corpses in Spain's "Al Baderra" camp was provided by the United States government? Do you care to mention any of these things? No, they seem to be forgotten, much like the "Communists" that you accuse of selective memory.

     Another point you make: "...whereas Communist organizations are in fact now calling for armed revolution, and that Communists have infiltrated our political institutions, trade unions and educational establishments..." Political institutions? Hardly. Every single so-called "Communist" or "Socialist" in government is a puppet of bourgeoisie Capitalism, with its abuses and exploitation directed under a different banner. Trade unions? That wouldn't be infiltration -- in the cases of the CIO, the IWW, the CNT, the UGT, the CGT, etc., etc., it was the Socialists and Communists who created these institutions, only to be expelled once they gained a popular following.

     And you accuse Communists of taking over educational establishments? After all, you state that you oppose Communism because it wants "to eliminate free speech and other forms of opposition." What exactly are you doing, except by eliminating free speech, by saying that there is a problem with Communist-thinking individuals in public offices? After all, you allow Conservative, Liberal, Socialist, Nationalist, even Racist individuals into office, without so much as a complaint. But now we need to drag out the Communists from public institutions, because they threaten our 'freedom of speech'? It seems like, on the contrary, that your so-called "Anti-Communism" is actually a bigger threat to freedom of speech than Communism ever could be.

     In many ways, you try to associate Communism with Racism. "...whereas Communist revisionism now denies the atrocities of Soviet Russia and of the greatest mass murder[er] of all time, Joesph Stalin..." This is a replay of the phrase "Holocaust revisionism," which is how modern Nazis describe their idea of denying the mass genocide of Jews during world war 2. What is curious is that you entirely invent the phrase "Communist revisionism." Do you know who revealed to the world the atrocities of the greatest mass murderer of all time? Oh, it was a Communist -- Nikita Krushkev. (Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, also Communists, revealed the concentration camps of Soviet Russia to the world, too, but those were ones built by Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky.)

     Now let's take your statement again, "Communist revisionism now denies the atrocities of Soviet Russia." Where did we get the idea of the atrocities committed by Soviet Russia? From the Communist revisionism of Nikita Krushkev. So, completely rewritten, "Communist revisionism now denies Communist revisionism..." That's a little awkward, isn't it? Of course there are some Communists who go so far as to say that Stalin was a good saint who was painted in bad colors by capitalist propagandists. Those Communists are an extreme rarity; on the contrary, most Communists today are opposed to Stalin. In fact, the greatest opponents of Stalin were Socialists and Communists: George Orwell to Anton Pannekoek.

     Opposition to Bolshevik and Soviet-style Communism is an honest part of any democratic organization. But opposition to Socialism and Communism, as a theory, means opposition to democratic control of society and economy. The greatest opposition that one can manage to throw against state domination, of any variety, is public control of the means of production. There is no other way that the people can be in a position to abolish all coercive forces that may threaten them. Genuine Socialism, then, far from being a threat to Democracy, is actually the only way of possibly achieving it.

     Thank you, for reading this far.

Andy Carloff

join the punkerslut.com
mailing list!

copyleft notice and
responsibility disclaimer