Commune Thread

Commune-building isn’t really good praxis but I don’t think it is something to sperg out about. Jim Jones was unironically based though

Sure, but he is correct to suggest it is unlikely to go anywhere. The only way I could imagine communes expanding is if they offered a more efficient way of distributing goods to their participants. This is theoretically possible, but never has been achieved in a manner that is enticing to people. Instead you get cults, polyamorous sex groups that resemble some kind of 60s era nostalgia for the new way forward, and that is about all I'm aware of. I think a part of the reason they fail is because this is how they maintain social cohesion so far. Either everyone is fucking or there is a leader that is increasingly convincing everyone that there is a deep spiritual/ideological reason to commit.

Obligatory link: ic.org/ How deep innawoods is it? Is it so far from everything that commuting to a job in a city or village wouldn't be feasible for anybody? Are there any buildings? What about water and electricity?

Agreed, it might even be a positive influence if the commune grows in size, attracts many people, and then we put a fence around it and consequently rid the Left of the vegans, lifestylists and anarchists in one blow

Thread ended here.

THAT'S 100% WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT IF YOU ARE A FUCKING COMMUNIST, YOU IDIOT

Fuck you, we want communism to work.

Attached: 1457915919856-1.gif (400x225, 2.33M)

Thanks for the link. It's about a half an hour from where I live, which is near the state capital so it's not literally in the middle of nowhere, but it is still in a rural area which is not too densely populated, about 30,000 people live in the county. On the property there is currently a single cabin in the process of being renovated but the rest of the 40 acres is just trees, trees and more trees. Some neighbors are nearby but there's a good distance between the houses. I'd have to research a lot if I ever wanted to put something like this in action, not to mention gathering a group of committed people IRL. A lot of people are talking about cults and free-love shit, something I don't have in mind.

...

Honestly incels should form a commune, but they shouldn't make it overtly about being an incel. They should make it about freedom, spirituality and ending alienation etc. the usual mold. Then attract a bunch of disaffected hippie chicks to the commune and have weird sex orgies.

That is basically how a ton of these things go anyways. Incels probably couldn't get past their pathologies long enough to appear normal, though. As soon as a girl showed up to their commune they'd start stammering and insulting her to each other.

The idiot route:

The based route:

HURR, LET'S REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKES AGAIN AND AGAIN, HURRR

Attached: ad2946440410c4d4a5082f6143325aa89e4256e276cdc695a6cf5f281ab76000.gif (400x400, 8.37M)

Tsk tsk

Good to hear. It makes a huge difference when people can have a part-time job outside of that thing while still living there.

All the people railing against Communes as even simply a propaganda tool ITT are ignoring history quite a bit
The odds of a "revolutionary party" emerging in America in the near future are next to none and Marxist states such as the USSR / Cuba / DPRK have supported Utopian measures such as Jim Jones commune in Guyana as a propaganda tool to show the disaffection some Americans had with capitalism and racism

They are also ignoring that thousands of people literally do live in communes.

How, nigger, how? You wanna go Amish?
It's like you faggots keep inventing newer and newer superfluous steps in the way of actually doing what needs to be done. One gets the impression that you faggots don't want any kind of revolution, just wanna have fun on a hippy commune.
Fuck off and do actual work.

Fucking defeatist shill. It is EXACTLY BECAUSE people like OP waste their fucking time with pseudo-praxis, being afraid to face the stark realities and moving on to what really needs to be done, that the odds are against it.

You analysis intentionally leaves out the subjective element in the picture, hence amounts to: "Oh, well, if everybody is doing pseudo-praxis, we might as well too."

Nigger, "do" parties to represent the disaffected and win political victories.

And they are the very reason nothing gets done in America while you keep slaughtering the rest of the world.

That's right. Communes are the reason nothing gets done in America. And I am slaughtering the world, and I'm getting away with that because America is asleep, and it is asleep because you all live in communes. Yes. But America is waking up. Because of you. You got me…

And I would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for this meddling poster and his trusty crackpipe!

You realise that if you believe cooperative work and communal agriculture is impossible your basically saying higher stage Communism is impossible right?

Also why can't you both operate a collective Buisness / Agriculutre AND use it as a political tool
Find a socialist party to back and help organise it even if it's just some light-weights like the Democrat Cops of America Or whatever

How would money be raised? I'm sure there are a lot of ways, I'm sure you could get the trees chopped down and earn a good deal of money from that, as one example. I don't get why you are bringing up the Amish. I never even considered shunning modern technology, founding a Christian sect, growing a beard and speaking Pennsylvania Dutch and cutting myself off from modern society. Thanks for the suggestion, but there are enough Amish in my state already.
I'd rather be approved by Richard Wolff than retards here, honestly. I've seen nothing but positive things from Wolff and think he is one of the best Marxists in America today. Also, I don't see why, on paper at least, creating a party and attempting to raise some of the funds through a commune would not work.
You seem to think a commune is nothing but sitting around, smoking weed and engaging in "free love". Look at stuff like Kibbutzim and other successful communes

Observe the cowardly post-modern ironist subjectivity, the default of late stage capitalism. He knows very well that he is full of shit, he knows very well that his plan and his goal is not in connection, but please stop bullying him. It's not like anyone is any better than him!

He just wants to play IRL minecraft on his inherited land with friends and shit, so stop criticizing him on a communist board, aimed at bringing about communism, jeez!

Attached: utopian.png (468x600, 264.94K)

Look my advice to you man is to find a local party that would be willing to help back and organise it
The idea that you solely will be able to build some Agriculutral commune by yourself by just recruiting friends that want to help out is sorta silly

But don't let these defeatists ITT keep your dreams dreams you dig?

Attached: 4.jpg (1280x720, 66.14K)

Attached: construction-worker-laughing-at-something.jpg (266x228, 26.3K)

Marxists have often used the creation of workers cooperatives and agricultural Communes as a propaganda tool for the further creation of socialism
Just because the diggers / levellers wrote about the idea in a utopian manner centuries ago does not mean they have a monopoly on using the idea to elicit social change

That's not OP (me), but I'm not going to trash an idea just based on autists here. Of course the entire idea is pretty half-baked right now since it only just came into my head a few days ago.

I know your just shitposting but 40 acres of lumber would probably pay pretty well

Also the idea that Communes are Utopian and can't exist IRL is pretty much disproven by the fact North Syria runs effectivly its whole economy off them

Are you intentionally this dense, mate? There's no "social change" coming out of communes, because they are by definition secluded little communities that strive for semi-autarky (and always fail at that medicine, technology, etc.).

This whole idea of "being the change you want to see in the world" and "showing an example of a good life" is pure capitalist ideology on steroids.

You either are prepared to change the whole of society or you already accepted defeat.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

We'll North Syria for instance has done a pretty good job at linking together the various cooperatives and agricultural Communes into a cohesive economy instead of isolated enterprises striving for Autarky
It's also made some progress with the lack of medical training held by members by giving individuals basic training in first aid / ombat medicine etc
Elaborate

1. initial capital required to pay for tools, trucks
2. initial capital required to pay workers who actually cut it down
3. initial capital required to pay for transportation
4. initial capital required to pay for legal advice for understanding your state's deforestation laws and regulations, current and future businesses pertaining to the "commune"
5. finding a buyer for your lumber, and realizing that you will never get as good a price as your big competitors

Attached: 1435548116778.gif (243x162, 1.74M)

lol remember the Detroit Commune?

No one showed up to the first meeting so it was abandoned

fun times

The argument is that communes will not bring about communism, not just because they inevitably rely on the larger society economically they wish to transcend, but because history shows that their lifespans don't go further than half a century at maximum, a decade on average.

Oh, I remember. I was arguing in that thread along similar lines, so I was called a Debbie Downer, close minded, authoritarian statist piglet, whatever. Guess they showed us good.

That's a completely different socio-historic context, you utter retard. You are talking about an already militarized region on the defensive, organized together by a bunch of parties. What's the average distance between two US communes? 400 miles? What uniting party, historical pressure will make them cohesive?

Attached: 2.png (500x356 1.32 MB, 104.76K)

You have any contact info? Can you give me a acre so I don't have to worry about squatting?

Finally me and this nigga agree on something

800 - 588 - 2300
You can call me Empire.

Amazing
I bet you think training guerillas in the Cuban countryside is utopian too

kill your self

Attached: 2453.jpeg (275x183, 11.35K)

Did you also get a mule? Anarchists probably wont like it because you will need to enforce rules. You can't simply accept anyone because who knows how many hippies can take the invitation to invade your land and destroy the environment.
Charge a token amount of rent in labor maybe?
You could do a sort of trailer-park/RVpark-ish kind of thing, those double-wides can get pretty lavish FYI.

Northen syria had international backing in weapons, military training and recentl, american bombings

You can grow enormous amounts of produce if you invest in a hydroponic system and use natural sunlight. Some people have claimed to be able to make very good money doing this but you'd need to have the necessary experience and the know-how to market your goods.

THAT'S 100% WHAT'S WRONG WITH IT IF YOU ARE A FUCKING COMMUNIST, YOU IDIOT
read marx.

"We acknowledge the co-operative movement as one of the transforming forces of the present society based upon class antagonism. Its great merit is to practically show, that the present pauperising, and despotic system of the subordination of labour to capital can be superseded by the republican and beneficent system of the association of free and equal producers.
"Restricted, however, to the dwarfish forms into which individual wages slaves can elaborate it by their private efforts, the co-operative system will never transform capitalist society. to convert social production into one large and harmonious system of free and co-operative labour, general social changes are wanted, changes of the general conditions of society, never to be realised save by the transfer of the organised forces of society, viz., the state power, from capitalists and landlords to the producers themselves.
"We recommend to the working men to embark in co-operative production rather than in co-operative stores. The latter touch but the surface of the present economical system, the former attacks its groundwork."
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1866/08/instructions.htm#05

lmao.

I would try and make a log cabins if you let me live there.

Can I come?

Absolutely and undilutedly correct. Idealists in this thread getting mainlined facts and they are still trying to cope.

You are coping so goddamn hard.
COPE

sometimes if you use your brain you can draw analogies that prove useful to present circumstances.

Fuck I've been ebinly defeated. Brocialism = Over
COMMUNES = BASED MADE BY BOURG GANG
Go snort some glue nerd

I guess I'll contact you early tomarrow.

congrats OP because despite my communist leanings its basically my dream to pull a walden and live on some land in the middle of nowhere. i grew up poor and rural so believe it or not it doesnt really bother me to not have power or internet or whatever. its what books are for.

The biggest irony is people like you posting with a book icon. Why don't you check MEW vol. 2 and read Zwei Reden in Elberfeld, where young Engels praises Owen's idea of living in big groups because of obvious savings in preparing food, heating costs, and so on and so forth. What's the matter, fella? Bad at German?

That little booklet by old Engels… is again full of praise for Robert Owen, saying his cooperatives delivered the practical proof that traders and factory owners aren't needed. The utopian mistake is to have one big fixed and detailed long-term plan for the world. Joining a commune or starting one doesn't imply that and it's not something that Marx and Engels ever agitated against doing. Just like they never agitated against joining unions, even though joining a union doesn't mean worldwide communism tomorrow. It's not a panacea, and it wasn't claimed to be that, you dumb shit.

neither will spouting your autism on Zig Forums, yet here you are you fucking faggot

Attached: 1445882843332.gif (500x375, 2.16M)

"My answer is that, thanks to the unique combination of circumstances in Russia, the rural commune, which is still established on a national scale, may gradually shake off its primitive characteristics and directly develop as an element of collective production on a national scale. Precisely because it is contemporaneous with capitalist production, the rural commune may appropriate all its positive achievements without undergoing its [terrible] frightful vicissitudes."
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/zasulich/draft-1.htm

Marx wrote the above in 1881. Two years before he died.

"This ridiculous “theory” that Communists should not work in reactionary trade unions reveals with the utmost clarity the frivolous attitude of the “Left” Communists towards the question of influencing the “masses”, and their misuse of clamour about the “masses”. If you want to help the “masses” and win the sympathy and support of the “masses”, you should not fear difficulties, or pinpricks, chicanery, insults and persecution from the “leaders” (who, being opportunists and social-chauvinists, are in most cases directly or indirectly connected with the bourgeoisie and the police), but must absolutely work wherever the masses are to be found. You must be capable of any sacrifice, of overcoming the greatest obstacles, in order to carry on agitation and propaganda systematically, perseveringly, persistently and patiently in those institutions, societies and associations—even the most reactionary—in which proletarian or semi-proletarian masses are to be found. The trade unions and the workers’ co-operatives (the latter sometimes, at least) are the very organisations in which the masses are to be found."
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/ch06.htm

Lenin wrote,
"Without close contacts with the trade unions, and without their energetic support and devoted efforts, not only in economic, but also in military affairs, it would of course have been impossible for us to govern the country and to maintain the dictatorship for two and a half months, let alone two and a half years."
marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/lwc/ch06.htm

The success of the Bolshevik revolution depended upon many things not the least of which was the support of trade unions and working class organizations outside the Communist Party.

People are not going to join a community party if it can't help them negotiate for better wages, health benefits, or achieve a single success right now. Waiting for the global revolution to topple capitalism is not an option for people. You are telling everyone that engaging in daily struggles and attempting to build cooperative and communal structures is pointless since only a revolution will solve capitalism's problems. I agree that a revolution would be needed, but it's also something that will not help alleviate the pressure felt by the working class in the present, nor will planning a revolution even create the conditions for its long-term success.

first of all make sure it does not become a hippie shithole.

I think the smart thing to do nowdays is to avoid the whole self suficient enclosed commune bullshit and go for a more objective and integrated aproach. find the best economical activity for the place and start a cooperative there with a village for the workers. be very open with your neighbors host parties and others activities to showcase a healthier socialist lifestye.
If you isolate yourself from the system people will see your commune as foreign, but if you are still part of the national market and society as a whole people will think the commune is a better lifestyle in the same system and will be more willing to change. communism was never about isolation after all, in fact it's about recognising how dependant on each other we are and finding a way to properly compensate everyone for their work increasing overall QOL.

Attached: bba65a6098be5437fe07853f609134eca2c6badd5958d12e830b48a9dbc5e6d9.jpg (255x222, 11.61K)

It's nice that you've been inspired by the response to start reading what you yourself have suggested.
Marx and Engels did not decide between these two, they did not have to. You are making up a false dilemma of either party building or cooperative movement.
Nein.
You only have pop-culture trash as a reference point here, don't you? There is some overlap between reality and those stereotypes in some places, but there are straight-forward savings when living together and sharing resources. Just like a single-household looks pretty wasteful compared to a family household or living with room mates, these formations look wasteful compared to twenty people living together. How many washing machines does one person need? One. How many washing machines do twenty people need? One. It will also wear down faster than with a single person using it, but not twenty times as fast. From vacuum cleaners to pick-up trucks, with a common pool and a little bit of regular discussion who uses what when, the per-head cost for accessing that stuff goes down drastically.
Most organizations dissolve at some point. Most start-ups go tits up within three years. There are co-ops and communes that are decades old, but of course this is no proof that they don't live long enough, with the armchair critic's measure being conveniently undefined. That critique is vacuous. Most parties aren't stable either, so you could just as well apply that defeatist pseudo argument to Marxist parties.