Okay Veeky Forums, how come most proponents of gommunism are burg.(can't spell properly sorry) themselves...

None of them ever successful. Doesn't mean much if they don't last very long.

This absolutely. Look at litvinov/Finkelstein.

Even in Russia most of the revolutionaries were working class though. Lenin, Trotsky, and dzherinsky were exceptions, not the rule.

Bullshit.

The only people who do think that they don't need hierarchies are idiots. And their demagogues implanting this nonsense into their minds know this.

Name one (1) of the leaders for the revolution (who were according to Trotsky: Trotsky, Lenin, Lunacharsky, Sverdlov, Zinoviev and Kamenev)

Attached: REvo.jpg (200x309, 22K)

Fact: the working class has always been royalist/conservative. People who work for a living are more likely to want to stick with the devil they know, vs rich bourgeois who will do fine either way.

Hmmm...there's somebody (a worker, I might add) that Trotsky left out. I wonder why.

Revolutionary movements are not caused by the envy of the poor towards the rich, but the envy of the middle class towards the nobility.

Marxist theory does not know the construct of "middle class", and furthermore, most prominent Marxist theorists do not come from backgrounds that could be described as middle class, but out of something more commonly described as the precariat.

If you go back, and actually look at the men behind the actual communist partied - say, KDP in Germany, PCI in Italy or SKDL in Finland, you'll find the story muddier than that if you only take Marx (whose fortunes are often overrated in modern discussion)/Engels/Lenin as being representative.

Palmiro Togliatti was an actual middle class family (his father was a government clerk), which fell into poverty after his father died at an early age. He graduated from university thanks to a public scholarship, but never held any job resembling middle class, working as a common tutor and a writer in a minor left wing newspaper after which he made his transition to full time political employment.

Mauno Pekkala, the first (and only) democratically elected communist head of state in Western world, worked his pre-politics career as a forest keeper and a minor clerk in forest service.

Ernst Thälmann, the head of German Communist Party during Weimar era, worked in his parents coal, vegetable and wagon shop until the age of 10, after which he started to work on the docks of Hamburg. He left his home at at the age of 16 to work as a fireman on a freight ship until eventually serving in the army in WW1 and leading KPD after it.

Maurice Thorez, the head of the French Communist party from 1930 to 1964 started his working career as a coal mine worker at the age of 12, which he pursued until being appointed into a paid post in the party.

Klement Gottwald, the illegimate son of a poor peasant, headed the Czech communist party made his pre-political career as a carpenter before WW1. After the war, he held the post of a sports instructor and an editor in a minor left wing paper.

and so on.

>Bullshit.
Epic argument.
This is just wrong. During the heyday of revolutionary movements (the interbellum years), the European working classes tended to lean left (At least in those countries not under rightist dictatorship, like pretty much all of Eastern Europe).

The socialist UGT and the Anarchist CNT trade unions in Spain had together upwards of 2 million members in the 1930s.

In Germany the working class voted largely for the SPD, not communist, but hardly 'royalist' or 'conservative', either.

In France the Front Populaire rode to power largely on a working class vote.

Italy and pretty much all of Eastern Europe were under rightist dictatorships, so it's hard to tell what the working class did or didn't support there.

That is not a fact that holds any water with the information we have on party voting during cold war.

The educated strata largely voted for progressive and conservative bourgeoise parties, whereas communist party vote tended to be dominated by the most precarious and most affiliated with trade unions, whereas socialist/social democrat vote was more of an wide tent, with voters from low and middle classes participating in union.

Wrong, revolutionary movements are national struggles for freedom from outsider oppression.

>Bullshit
So are ypu saying the communist movement in Spain was not composed of mainly working class people? Could you provide a source on that? Surely you are not spouting bullshit yourself, I assume.

>Why did their fellow revolutionaries consider them to also be """proletariat"" when in reality most of them came from the middle class?
Because they were all bourgeois pretending to be proletariat and calling one of them out would expose the caller as a fraud as well.
It was an unspoken agreement to uphold the fantasy. Like everything else about communism it was based on a lie and self-delusion.

fuck communism. millions dead is enough