Elections in Proletariat Dictorships?

[Balesir]

stalinism took a damn lot of work too.

Yes, but there the reward/incentive is clear - (a share in) the grip on absolute power.

In germany if the speech on the balcony hadnt of put an end to it, Democratic communism would have been easier than dictatorial.

As a vector to get into power, yes. But then, since the ideal of communism does not agree with the fundamental structure of the non-communist state, the communist government either gets blocked by the state structure (and subsequently voted out) or it dismantles that structure. Dismantling a state structure requires powers that go outside the constitution of that state (by definition). Someone has to dictate the form of the new structure; the competition to do that will be intense, and is unlikely to be won by someone keen to do it in a just and equitable way out of the goodness of their own heart. Finding an incentive sufficient to provide someone with the drive needed to form such a new society from scratch - and get all stakeholding parties to acquiesce to it - that is the problem.

 

[Orinsul]

and the liberals didnt bring in an entirely new system of government completely incompatible with what had been there before?
the only difference i can see is that they had a working example to point to and say see itll work out just look over there for your proof.

Direct Democracy which was what most communists before russia stood for, has proven examples [mostly swiss, but also in a small way everywhere], its merely an expansion of local government to every issue, most of the foundations are already there and its pretty easy to set up in any state which already has a modern administrive structure. Probably the game would represent it as only the upper house. But it is possible, and it did happen historically, just never with the support of the people with the guns.

but the point is its not from scratch, the dictatorship is more from scratch than the democratic choice. The only different is in the langauge used and the lack of an overrulling authority.

WHo knows if it would have worked and probably who cares, but given how many people of computer playing age think themselves communists, communism ought to be playable as unless it is until Victoria 3 comes out every week will be a complaint about the impossibiltiy of communism.
and they usually come from rich families too so if word gets around then the game will be profitable and lots more work will be done on it and possibly expansions and so see its a good thing. AND does it really hurt anyone to have democratic communism possible? NO probably wont happen to the AI anyway but it gives them that want it a choice.

 

[telesien]

stalinism took a damn lot of work too. In germany if the speech on the balcony hadnt of put an end to it, Democratic communism would have been easier than dictatorial.
Communists want communism because their communists, what incentive did the liberal revolutions had to do the hard work thei socio-economic changes?, they didnt all end in dictatorship. Why should communist be any different? because they believed in it, who knows why but they did, some of them still do to this day.

Yes and that is why it always ended up the harder way...

 

[Balesir]

and the liberals didnt bring in an entirely new system of government completely incompatible with what had been there before?

The liberals brought in a new system of government; the communists demanded a new system of society. The first requires the remodelling of government institutions and rules (typically against a working model) - the second requires telling people how they are going to live. It requires replacing established market systems with new models of goods redistribution. It requires new management structures in every workplace, and new models of land registration and allocation. After a liberal revolution, the government has to change; after a communist revolution everything must change. Look at the definition of 'communist' in V2: "we want social reform and the current system won't give it to us!" So, it follows, communists require a change of political system (to get the social reforms) and a change of social system (because it's the right thing to have). You can't change everything without doing a lot of 'telling'...

As an aside, I think the definitions Paradox has chosen for these political movements, as well as being excellent for game play, are actually quite thought provoking in their own right. Bravo to them!

 

[Colon]

Communism has nothing undemocratic about it, most communist movements were in favour of DIRECT Democracy

I expected such a line. The basic problem remains: if you allow truly free direct democracy, those voters may very well vote for things that undo communist goals (return private ownership for instance), unless the votes (or the voters) are 'shepherded', which gives undue power to who gets to sheperd. It is a fantasy to believe a democratic communist state never arose just because of individual events or persons. The whole concept is fundamentally flawed.

 

[OHgamer]

I think once again a thread is getting well beyond the scope of what is appropriate for this forum. Discussion should be focusing on game mechanics to depict things like elections, not "angels on the head of a pin" bickering over ideological theory. That's what the history and OT forums are for. Please try to keep the discussion in this forum focused on actual game mechanics as elaborated in the development diaries.

 

[Colon]

I think it's quite relevant to the question of elections in a proletarian dictatorship to wonder whether such a thing is conceivable in real life, but fine.

 

[unmerged(48056)]

Yes... life would indeed be swell if everyone was a cigar smoking Bolshevik intellectual...

Unfortunately, to use Marx's words, we live in the real world in which the masses are only concerned about their opiums (whether its the Church or its modern equivalent the television screen and football).


Sure, you can all theorize Communism as much as you want. But as it stands, Proletarian Dictatorships should represent the instability of Marxian regimes in Eastern and Central Europe.