@LN B-RYS,
What would you like to know about Communism?
The idea that all members of the group should live together on the basis of, "from each according to his means, and to each according to his needs" has been around for a very long time. A number of early Christian communities tried to promote the idea but it failed to take root, even though many of the early Christians were slaves and had little or nothing to begin with. There are some who have speculated that the earliest human societies were communistic, but that is a decidedly minority of scholars. A close examination of "primitive" societies seems to more nearly support the idea that societies tend to naturally gravitate toward status and class, often based on property/wealth, or ability to coerce, or some religious division, OR all of the above.
During the Period lasting from about 400 CE to 1400 CE, European society was largely feudal, and ordered largely by the theology of the Church. Everyone in society had their roles assigned by God at birth, and judged worthy of heaven or hell based on how devoutly they lived their lives. This was not really a money economy, but one based upon barter and local agricultural production. People didn't move around much geographically, or socially. Land stewardship was really more the style than land ownership, though for all practical purposes the Church and the Manor "owned" all of the land and wealth. This was a very stable period in European history that pretty much came to an end with the arrival of the Black Death in Italy of the 15th century, CE.
The Plague devastated Europe with some areas losing as much as half of their populations. Averaged out it appears the mortality over all was somewhere around 30%. People die, but wealth and property does not so easily dissolve. The European economy was shaken to the core, and the old feudal society lost its stability and hold over how society operated. Suddenly there was a labor shortage and as the fields went untended, landlords had to compete for the available labor and wages were an important inducement. Laborers became aware of their importance, and money came to replace the old notions about destiny as a motive for going to work. Money is more portable and doesn't rot if not consumed quickly, and there was more of it to be spread over a shrinking population. Everyone, who survived the Plague, became wealthier than they had been under the Old Order. Short life expectancy also tended to undermine the old morality, and many preferred to "eat, drink, and be merry" with their new wealth, than to make contributions to the Church in hopes of heavenly reward. There was at the same time a transition from an almost totally rural/agricultural society to a more urban and mercantile social order. Individualism and willingness to explore new and innovative ideas helped fuel the Renaissance and invention. The invention of movable type increased literacy, spread new ideas and raised questions that had a profound effect on European cultural development. Gun powder revolutionized how wars were fought, and helped shift the balance of power from a largely unorganized feudal aristocracy to the reigning monarch, and that in turn helped build the modern notions about nation states. Scientific invention changed the ways that people looked at the world, and by the middle of the 17th century Europe was on the cusp of a technological wave that became the Industrial Revolution by the end of the 18th century, CE. The risk of death remained worrisome clear up into the late 17th century and since the 15th century, Europe was in turmoil. I would be remiss if I didn't specifically mention here the role of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation that was almost as catastrophic to European civilization as the Plague that had preceded it.
The Industrial Revolution, nationalism and the idea of "Total War" might be said to have all come together at the end of the 18th century. In the New World, Britain lost most of it's North American colonies. The Enlightenment provided an important part of the new American Experiment in self-government. The French Revolution followed, but like most violent revolutions, quickly fell into chaos. The Terror first gobbled up all of the "aristocrats" (the term became almost meaningless as it was extended so much that it came to apply to everyone who had any degree of property or wealth), and then began to devour it's own. Out of the chaos came a public demand for security and order, and the man to bring that about was a Corsican artillery officer named Napoleon Bonaparte. At first, Napoleon was regarded all across Europe as the savior of the Revolution, and the harbinger of a new age where social justice and peace would extend across all of Europe, and beyond. That idealistic dream died rather quickly when Napoleon had himself made Emperor, and installed a new and more potentially more powerful political aristocracy in conquered lands. When Britain resisted, what in effect was a World War began that lasted until 1815 with the final defeat of Napoleon after the Battle of Waterloo.
To fight the Napoleonic Wars, both Britain and France had to mobilize their entire nations and economies. Railroads, steam engines, and improved armaments were essential to the war effort, and the shift of populations from the countryside and agriculture into towns where wage labor predominated increased. The owners of the means of production were totally unrestrained capitalists whose philosophy was purely selfish; make the most money in the shortest time while paying the least overhead possible. There were no unions, and, if anything, governments "tilted" toward those who already had great power, influence and property. A very small number of people owned much of the wealth, and at the bottom conditions were almost unbelievably sordid and mean. After 1815, Britain was poised to extend its empire across the globe and conditions in Industrial Britain did not improve. You might want to read a bit of Charles Dickens whose novels helped awaken the public conscience, though there is evidence that conditions in many slum areas might have been even worse than Dickens describes.
Into that milieu, a wealthy industrialist joined forces with an impoverished German intellectual to improve society. Fredrick Engles was only one of many who were beginning to question the values of the Industrial Revolution and were beginning to develop a social conscience. Karl Marx was a very disagreeable man who more-or-less made a living as a journalist and intellectual. Marx had a deep and abiding interest in history, and believed that the scientific method could be applied to social issues. One of the central concepts was the idea of "Dialectical Materialism" (Thesis, Antithesis, and Synthesis). Marx saw history as continual struggle between three classes; the owners of production (on top-Thesis), the workers (on bottom, Antithesis), and the Bourgeoisie (exploiters of both, Synthesis). The workers continually struggle to become middle class, and then to replace the owners, the aristocracy. This struggle, according to Marx, never ended through all of recorded history. He, Marx, found ample evidence to support his thesis in the Industrial Revolution and the highly stratified British social system in the late 19th century. Marx and Engles published their "Communist Manifesto", which was an international call for workers to rise up and throw off the chains of wage slavery. This they believed would lead to a new era where the eternal class struggle would be replaced by a socially aware Workers Dictatorship around the world. This was only one of several such movements that cropped up in the last quarter of the 19th century designed to improve conditions for working people by reigning in the excesses of the Industrial Revolution.
Marx predicted that the old system was on the point of collapse, and that industrial workers would not, could not and should not continue to slave away their potential. He foresaw violent revolutions in every industrialized nation, starting with Britain and followed by France, Germany and the United States. He was, of course wrong. Communist plotters made little headway but not for lack of trying. What changed was the advent of modern warfare that ground up the populations of Europe during the Great War. Like the Plague, a whole demographic was wiped out and society was shaken again to its core. Russia, the least industrialized of all the "European" nations was also the most feudal being ruled by an absolute monarch. Russia lost badly to the Germans on the Eastern Front, and Czar's throne was as shaky ans a chair in Karl Marx's flat. Lenin, with the help of the British government was smuggled into Russia to keep the pot boiling and Russia from re-entering the war. Before Lenin was able to fully build his power-base, the Russian Revolution occurred and an new Democratically elected government was installed. Lenin's Bolsheviks undermined the new government, and staged a coupe to seize power. The Russian Revolution pretty much followed the model of the French Revolution with copious amounts of blood spelled as the Bolsheviks put into practice the theories of Karl Max. Too late, the British realized that they had unleashed a monster and allied themselves with the White Russians (the Czar's Party). The British and Americans staged an ineffective and ill-planned effort to unseat the Bolsheviks but were defeated at Archangel. Lenin didn't live long, and after his assassination was replaced by Stalin who was even more ruthless than his mentor.
That should give you something to chew on for a little while. If you have questions, just ask, but please try to be a bit more specific in your queries.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace