1st of all there is no such thing as a communist country, as communism describes a state-, money- and classless society.
Then I think you are conflating two very different things: what I think you are alluring to, simply describes a more centralised and ruthless approach at achieving and keeping alive a revolution. (and arguably betraying it, but that does not constitute fascism)
Fascism is a very different thing. Basically it’s the act of “unifying” a group of people or nation against a caricature of a “common enemy”. It seeks the suppression of proletarian class struggle by forcing collaboration and integrating society into one “corpus”. Corporatism is a core tenant of fascism, which is (imo) very well depicted through unions being forced to merge with (or be disbanded into) private companies, because “such distinctions are obsolete when we stand united as one Volk”.
Those class distinctions never disappear, but the whole charade is basically based on that premise.
Ofc this all serves the protection of capital by fooling the working masses and suppressing labour or simply “undesirable” elements of society…
Socialism can involve that (decentralised planning is possible)
In communism - as there is no need for the suppression of reactionary classes anymore - the socialist state ceases to exist in terms of what we know as a “state”
Administration of the economy can and will still exist in the post-“socialist world republic” (ie. communist) world
A Leninist would tell you that the “state” is defined by class suppression, so in a truly classless society the “state” ceases to exist and becomes simply the bureaucracy by which the production of society is organized an allocated.
An Anarchist would tell you that communism doesn’t require a centrally planned economy at all, and that small groups that own and control their own means of production are capable of spontaneously organizing at a mass scale and distributing their production without a central authority.
1st of all there is no such thing as a communist country, as communism describes a state-, money- and classless society.
Then I think you are conflating two very different things: what I think you are alluring to, simply describes a more centralised and ruthless approach at achieving and keeping alive a revolution. (and arguably betraying it, but that does not constitute fascism)
Fascism is a very different thing. Basically it’s the act of “unifying” a group of people or nation against a caricature of a “common enemy”. It seeks the suppression of proletarian class struggle by forcing collaboration and integrating society into one “corpus”. Corporatism is a core tenant of fascism, which is (imo) very well depicted through unions being forced to merge with (or be disbanded into) private companies, because “such distinctions are obsolete when we stand united as one Volk”. Those class distinctions never disappear, but the whole charade is basically based on that premise.
Ofc this all serves the protection of capital by fooling the working masses and suppressing labour or simply “undesirable” elements of society…
Communism involves, almost by definition, a centrally planned economy. That isn’t really possible without a state.
Socialism can involve that (decentralised planning is possible)
In communism - as there is no need for the suppression of reactionary classes anymore - the socialist state ceases to exist in terms of what we know as a “state”
Administration of the economy can and will still exist in the post-“socialist world republic” (ie. communist) world
A Leninist would tell you that the “state” is defined by class suppression, so in a truly classless society the “state” ceases to exist and becomes simply the bureaucracy by which the production of society is organized an allocated.
An Anarchist would tell you that communism doesn’t require a centrally planned economy at all, and that small groups that own and control their own means of production are capable of spontaneously organizing at a mass scale and distributing their production without a central authority.
A Leninist should perhaps open a dictionary instead of trying to redefine words.
An Anarchist has clearly never worked in any group setting I’m familiar with.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
It isn’t exactly a secret, comrade. It’s just that the term “fascist” is still out of style, so they call themselves “conservatives” instead.
Removed by mod