Talk:Communist party

message: I object to the statement that most communists parties would have broken relations with the Communist Party of China. In fact CPC has reentered the World Communist Movement, and established firmer relations with many of the main communist parties. Those denouncing the CPC as traitors, generally belong to the maoist movement.--Soman 15:36, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  CPC and the World Communist Movement 

message: "However, as of 2004, this nominally communist government has not distinguished itself in any significant way from the capitalist government which preceded it."
I think this is wrong. I remember reading in a copy of Challenge that the Communists slashed the military budget and poured the equivalent money into health and education. 144.32.128.112 09:11, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moldova 

message: I'm inclined to merge the list in this section into List of Communists, and remove it from this page. This article is about communist parties, so shouldn't have a random list of individuals, some of whom were never even part of any communist party (Karl Marx was long dead by the founding of the first one!). What might be useful, and I can't provide this, is a list of all places and times where communist parties have governed a state; the intro says 21 nations have at one time been governed by a communist party. Thoughts? CDC (talk) 17:26, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now done this merge, and deleted the list from this article. The list here was mostly duplicated from List of Communists. CDC (talk) 19:24, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Famous Communists" section 

message: Is this article really trying to say that Castro aligned with the Soviet Uoin becease he was snubed by Eisenhower? Come of it.
After Fidel Castro's nationalistic revolt in Cuba, he was snubbed by President Eisenhower, who went out to play golf on the day he was scheduled to meet with Castro, and assigned Vice President Richard Nixon to meet with Castro instead. Castro was extremely annoyed at the slight, and entered into negotiations with the Soviet Union. Castro aligned with the Soviets and declared himself a communist shortly afterward.from Communist party#Cuba
--JK the unwise 11:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cuba 

message: I propose that this article be limited to giving a definition of what a communist party is (democratic centralism, etc.), leaving all issues of the historical developments of communist parties and examples of communist governance in other relevant articles, like Communism, communist state, List of Communist Parties, etc. --Soman 15:42, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Streamlining with other 'Communism' articles

message: There is a big problem is overlapping material at articles like Communism, History of Communism and this one. IMHO, virtually all material on the history of the communist movement should be brought over to History of Communism, and this article should deal uniquely with the concept of a communist party (leninist organization, organizational structure, explain concepts of PB and CC, working methods, mass organizations, international relations, role of press in communist parties etc.). --Soman 09:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article 

message: Of course, Lenin and his What is to be Done? (which is what is implied when referencing the Menshevik/Bolshevik split), has nothing to do with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union after 1924 (his death year) and especially with the CPs of the various client states and offshoots of the Stalinist USSR. A careful reading of the aforementioned book will reveal the fact that Lenin advocated a more professional and dedicated mass party in 1903, dedicated to raising awareness of socialism and what he outlines elsewhere as an awful way of the world under capitalism through journalism (Iskra) and preparing workers and students to intervene in events and worker's experiences at ground level, rather than the Mensheviks, who advocated sticking to trade-unionism politically, becoming mere secretaries for the "spontaneous" and petty-bourgeois Trade Union bureaucracies in practice, and allying with whatever Barak Obama types came up from among the Russian Bourgeoisie (especially Kadets, constitutional democrats) theoretically, essentially the program of Tony Blairs who aren't already in power. These ideas were put into practice in 1917, when the Bolshevik party involved a great segment of the Russian working class and the peasantry, and they were elected as a majority into all of the country's Soviets by direct vote by October. After 1917 The Bolsheviks had to lead the country through Civil War, Famine and the crippling growth of the state bureaucracy led by Joseph Stalin. By the time the country was stabilized in 1928, Lenin had been dead for over 4 years and Stalin had staged a full coup-de-tat. By 1940 almost every october Bolshevik was dead, even the rank and file, outside a select few who had won Stalin's favor, like Kalinin and Molotov. This all happened in the Great Terror of 1936-1940. Instead of Being a Mass party as Lenin had intended and as it was in practice in 1917 the "Communist Party" of Stalin was simply a tool of counter-revolution, a name put on the brutal caste of capitulating bureaucrats who took over the soviet union and led it to its final dissolution in return for being today's millionares and billionares in Russia and they rule today, though gutting any of the legacy of the Revolution which they and the western press have claimed for Stalinism even beyond its grave. They will do so forever, because Trotsky and Lenin and the Russian masses shut down the stock market, kicked out the parasitic rich and aristocrats, guaranteed rights and equality even in the face of the western violence (Civil War etc.) and the failure of the Western European revolutions from 1917-1921. The legacy still threatens even after the coup-de-tat and 80 years of repressions, betrayals and worldwide distortions and condemnations. Stalinism has nothing to with Socialism, and everything with Capitalism. It can be said once, it can be said a thousand times. Similarly, the idealized Stalinist "Communist Party" has nothing to do with the ambitions of the Bolsheviks or their leaders, Lenin and Trostky.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samboring (talk • contribs) 03:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Of Course... 

message: *support Based on the discussion, its the reasonable way to proceed that makes justice to the sources and NPOV.--Cerejota (talk) 06:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said, I tried to do so, could you elaborate so I could amend?  --Cerejota (talk) 23:11, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking from my perspective, one should simply improve this article, without any merger. It already tells too much about "front organizations". Some of the previously included materials need be restored. Main point to be explained: Communist party is something very much different from Western political parties, like Democratic Party (United States). For example, it is exclusive (like a military order) rather than inclusive by nature. That was an organization of "professional revolutionaries", it demanded strict subordination (the principle of centralism, "the party is always right"), etc. This must be explained. Of course I am more familiar with CPSU... Biophys (talk) 02:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Oppose. Communist fronts operated in many countries as this article demonstrates, not just the United States. The fronts were not part of the national Communist Parties. Rjensen (talk) 19:58, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Oppose for several reasons; some fronts were highly specialized, open to few members, and did not seek mass exposure or mass appeal at all, as the term "mass organization" implies.  nobs (talk) 19:17, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

text: Although in this Supreme Court case communist front organization, a redirect, is used. User:Fred Bauder Talk 01:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This report cites a 1944 Dies Committee report on What is a Communist Front?  nobs (talk) 23:09, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The link provided is not the 1955 report cited in the communist front article, rather  Dec. 1, 1961 to supersede Guide publ. on Jan. 2, 1957.  nobs (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Communist-front organization, a red link, was the term used in US legislation. User:Fred Bauder Talk 01:06, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Although in this Supreme Court case communist front organization, a redirect, is used. User:Fred Bauder Talk 01:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This report cites a 1944 Dies Committee report on What is a Communist Front?  nobs (talk) 23:09, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The link provided is not the 1955 report cited in the communist front article, rather  Dec. 1, 1961 to supersede Guide publ. on Jan. 2, 1957.  nobs (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Communist-front organization

message: Bharatiya Janata Party in India is reported to have overtaken the Communist Party of China as the world's largest. 
http://qz.com/372466/heres-how-the-bjp-surpassed-chinas-communists-to-become-the-largest-political-party-in-the-world/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.68.64 (talk) 07:15, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  CPC: No longer the largest 

message: Communist parties are NOT illegal in Poland. Current communist party in Poland is Polish Communist Party. Moreover, there are a couple of socialist and communist organizations. If you can, please, correct this mistake in the first section.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Communist_Party_(2002)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.69.103.71 (talk) 17:28, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither is it in South Korea (anymore).  I just removed them both from the article. --D昌양 (Talk) 15:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, there are more problematic entries as being illegal. While the old Communist Party of Soviet times was 'banned' by Poroshenko in Ukraine in 2015, the ban was not - and could not be - followed or enforced (see this article. Further to this, the 'ban' only applied to that specific incarnation of the "Communist" party. Trotskyist and other 'communist' parties led by worker's unions, et al., are not banned or outlawed. This article states clearly that it deals with multiple incarnations of communism and communist political and economic thought. Sweeping statements based on decommunization in some Eastern European nation-states are WP:SYNTH conflating the communism of the Stalinist (and post-Stalinist) era being actively rejected by the state is not the same thing as making every communist party illegal, ergo I am removing Ukraine from what is a hobby-horse list. Note that the 'banning' of that communist party was in tandem with the banning and rejection of the Nazi party. It would be appreciated if editors paid attention to citations rather than misinforming readers. Iryna Harpy (talk) 07:06, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish Communist Party 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Communist party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100511033229/http://www.cfr.org/publication/14482/communist_party_of_china.html to http://www.cfr.org/publication/14482/communist_party_of_china.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I thing the reference section is a mess now, some of its material should be moved to another section; "Notes" section maybe.Ghazaalch (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Ref section