ADAMSON UNIVERSITY College of Education and Liberal Arts Social Science Department

Final Examination: Real Communism

In partial fulfillment of the requirements in Geopolitics

Submitted by: SALITA, Roma Angelica J. AB Pol. Sci./2nd yr. 1300-1400H/MWF

Submitted to: Prof. Don Emmanuel Nolasco

March 2012

I.

INTRODUCTION
The task that was given to us is to conceptualize a theory of what will be the next

political theory that will be dominant after Green politics, which can be a new idea or a comeback or retainment of a previous one. From the first time I heard about this task, I already had two theories that I wanted to use, one is the idea of going back to scratch and start all over again, while the other is technopolitics where everything will be based on technology. If I were to use the first theory, I will call it the Flintstones Politics, this is the prehistoric era politics where the idea of surviving is based only on the basic needs of the people and that there is no such term as property because natural resources are free for everyone to enjoy. I always believe that technology makes the world more complicated, and that it will come a time that we need to give up all those technology and go back to the simple life so we can continue living. The machines that we have define our class in the society for it shows that we have more many to acquire such things. This will work by confiscating every machine and destroy them. No machines, no need for so much money, eventually, money will have no use for people only need is basic commodities like food and shelter which can be acquired freely from nature. On the other hand technopolitics will focus on technology, rather than eliminating it. The idea of this is, because we have a lot of this stuffs, then we should start expanding the use of it. Technology can make tasks easier and saves time and energy. Technology also shows how advanced a society is every society will strive to prove themselves.

The problem in my two theories is that they are extremes; they are at the opposite ends of the evolution of political theories, so it is hard to decide. Other than that, the Flintstones Politics idea is somehow too late to execute because we cant be dependent on nature anymore due to a lot of errs that we have done to it already, just the same for technopolitics where there is no such thing as equality anymore, and the battle will be Last Nation Standing, and might cause the end of the world. Now, Ive decided to use an idea which is something in the middle, communism.

There are many misconceptions regarding the ideology of communism. In my own experience during the midterm debate, I was against communism because of its effect on the countries that adapted it, like China and North Korea, how the adaptation of the ideology of communism killed people and alienated a country. But it felt like I was poured with freezing water when the professor explained to us that communism is just a floating idea because it was not been applied as it is, that no country was able to give life to the ideology of communism. I felt like a fool in defending my side of solid rock with the other side which is but air.

There are three (3) statements that I want to tackle with the use of this paper. First, we dont need to formulate another new theory that can improve the world of politics. Second, communism is the best contender against the application of capitalism. Lastly, erase the misconceptions about communism.

For the first statement, I will discuss why previously formulated theories just give confusion to people, especially for students who are studying them, and how formulating a new one will mean more choices so more chaos. For the second, based on my observations and researches, I will show how the United States is playing with us with their theory of capitalism, and how can communism destroy them if the ideology of the latter will be finally executed properly. And for the third, through further analyzation, I will cite the cause of failure of some countries that tried to adapt the theory of communism.

II.

DISCUSSION
There are atleast 10 well-known political theories, two (2) in every era of

Geopolitics. During the Imperialist Geopolitics, there is imperialism and colonialism. These two (2) is different in a way that imperialism is domination in general, not only about territory which is colonialisms focus. Imperialism also included economic, military and cultural influence. In connection with Cold War Geopolitics, it is said that the USSR and the United States were against imperialism which is why they brought up the

ideology of communism and capitalism. But critics argued that in the case of the USSR, they actually practiced colonialism and imperialism tactics by doing the old-Russian way of expansion and control, while in the case of the United States, after the defeat of the USSR against them, they become the only superpower which showed their global domination.

For Post-Cold War Geopolitics, the dominant theories are liberalism, Marxism and feminism. Liberalism may have different kinds but the main focuses are on believing in equality and individual liberty and supporting private property and individual rights, which, if youve noticed, is actually a combination of communism and capitalism ideology. Next is Marxism which is theorized by Karl Marx, is a critic of capitalism while is the brother of communism. Their difference is that Marxism is basically a system of analysis, and a way to view the world while communism, on the other hand, is basically a political movement, a form of government, a condition of society, in short, Marxism is the idea while communism is the application of the idea. Then came feminism which the basis is liberalism. The theory of feminism is about the application of the theory of liberalism to women. The last theory that was tackled in class, which I dont think is really the last, is Green Politics, which is under the Environmental Geopolitics. The twist in Green Politics is that it is the combination of almost all the other theories like anarchism, feminism, socialism, etc., but with the addition of caring for ecology. It can be called as a perfect theory because it concerns all, but the problem with Green Politics is that because of so much combination of theories, its followers are also divided depending on what theory plus caring for ecology that they want to follow. There are no specific or common ideas other than being ecology preservers.

Am I not correct in saying that these formulated theories caused confusion because these theories are combination of two or more theories which was formulated before one another? And even their followers are not united, so they made branches

which make it more complicated. So what more if we make some new theories, then each people might have their own theory. Lets now proceed to my second statement that communism is the best contender against the domination of capitalism. The Cold War that emerged between the USSR and the United States is because of the difference of ideologies of the theory that they believed, the former being a communist while the latter being a capitalist. Due to the defeat of the USSR, the United States became a unipolar; they emerged as the sole superpower. The United States as a powerful country, with the use of capitalism as their system, other countries became dependent on them. These other countries want to be in alliance with the United States so to share the glory and to prevent from getting bullied as well.

As how Karl Marx described capitalists as a system in which a small group of people who control large amounts of money, or capital, make the most important economic decisions, is he right or wrong if applied to the United States? Ofcourse, he is right. It is really the United States who controls the world because of the power that they acquired as a capitalist. And with this, the United States was able to manipulate situations, like in the Middle East, countries from there that doesnt want to get allied with the United States was cornered and got bullied.

Fighting the United States will be best done by attacking it again with the same thing that have caused its popularity, communism. The main issue between capitalism and communism is who the owner of resources is. In capitalism, most of the resources are owned by private individuals, then they have workers, and the wages of these workers will depend on their performance and the impression of the owner to them. Isnt this unfair? Workers are slaves that need to follow no matter what their lord says, or else, they will get beaten. But in communism where all resources are owned by the state, people are given their equal share of work so they will also get equal wages, and decisions are made democratically by the people.

Next issue is individual freedom. Capitalism justifies the inherent nature of a person as selfish, being compared to communism that wants us to be saint-like and think about others first before our own selves. Capitalism may be right that we are inherently selfish, but most capitalists are born rich, they grew up having all that they need and want, they see competition with their co-rich people as a game, so it is justifiable to be selfish for they know that they have same capabilities. Most of these privileged people dont really know about being poor so they dont realize the hard life that they caused. I cannot say that it is their fault, they were raised that way. If the system used is communism, then there is no class distinction, everyone sweat, everyone get equal share, they know the basic condition of how to live, and live it simple.

Last issue, but is the most relevant, is the distribution of power, for it can result to geopolitical conflicts. Capitalism concentrates on material things, on wealth, so capitalists who obviously are wealthy are in control. This is the strategy of the United States, they have wealth then they are in control. They use their wealth to manipulate things to favor in them. But if it is in communism, situations are handled democratically and in a balance way that it wont favor just a few.

As for my third statement, I want to clarify first that there is no country that really had or have a communist system because these countries that we marked as communists because of having communist parties are countries who just tried or trying to apply the ideology of communism in their party platform. States like the USSR and China are cannot be considered as communists because they didnt fully had the ideology of communism worked. This caused the misconceptions that the theory of communism is a bad choice, when it is not the theory which is the problem but the adaptors.

The USSR failed in promoting communism because it was combined with the greed for power of Stalin. Properties were not confiscated for proper distribution but to trap the people and not to go against him, and more, he put them into forced labor. The

people rebelled against communism because they thought that how Stalin use it is how communism really works. In the case of China, Maos process of applying communism in his project The Great Leap Forward is actually good. He believed in the people of China on doing things, and set his eyes on improving their industry and agriculture. But things went wrong because of the officials of Mao. Its like, when you give a person power, that person tends to abuse the power given to him. People with capitalist minds, meaning corrupted, implementing a communism system didnt brought good to the project of Mao Zedong, so his attempt of communism failed. Chinas process is somewhat the same as the USSRs process, placed the people into forced labor. The analysis here is that one country to another attempted to execute the theory of communism in a way similar to how the previous country did it, which is a failure, so all attempts failed.

III.

CONCLUSION
Misconceptions about communism are due to lack of further studies. Most of the

people are like that, when something has a bad marked on it, people never bother to put some interest on it anymore, and I can say that Im guilty of this. Another reason is that we are easily influenced by the powerful. Every press-released statements of the United States are believed by the people, and we dont even go to the trouble of confirming it, we just nod.

To execute communism and make it work will not be easy. As what Frederick Engels' stated in "Principles of Communism", the plan for ultimate financial and social equality is built on the principle that the system should spread around the world until all countries are on board. It means that for communism to prosper, all states should follow it, that other systems should be abolished, and the system of communism is the only system to be followed.

Yes, it will take a long time before it will be fully utilized. It needs both patience and unity from the people and the government, as well as hard work. Its not a process that can be done overnight, so to be sure about a good effect, it should be done gradually, and it is not forbidden if some alterations are to be done because not all states have the same resources, needs, and things alike.

The only flaw that I see in this proposal is that many state leaders already have a capitalists corrupted mind. I feared that the outcome would be the same as what happened in China. But anyway, whatever change will happen, whatever will be the next political theory, lets just wait if it is really this year that the end of the world will happen. End of the world may not be a natural occurrence, but it might happen because of, maybe, another world war.

For this paper, I am not intentionally attacking the United States. It is not also about pulling one down to build another up, as wrecking the capitalist United States reputation to produce communist states. The thing here is Im only giving my idea based on my fact researches with a pinch of my opinion. I dont hate the United States, but I want to witness their fall, and will they still be smart enough to find a fallback? When you are on top, theres no other way but going down.