eCommunists and Marx - Sociology & eRepublik

Day 2,393, 05:40 Published in United Kingdom United Kingdom by Mr Woldy


eCommunists and Marx

The following article is part two in a series aiming to explore how real life sociological/philosophical/political theories of social order are applicable, if at all, to eRepublik and the micro-societies that it consists of.

In real life, Marxism is a politico-philosophical theory on society which treats as its focal point the relationship between bourgeoisie, usually wealthy business owners who are active in politics, and the proletariat, their workers who face reduced suffrage. It emerged during the 19th Century in Western Europe as industrialisation took place, and was devised cheifly by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. It has been adopted as the guiding light to communist governments, both in the real world and on eRepublik. eRep has Communist parties all over the world, which are bound together by international organisations aimed to advise and set the standard for eCommunist parties. The following article aims to explore how Marxism can be applied in eRepublik, and as a PCP member offers some of my own thoughts on the direction of eCommunist Parties.



The main obstacle to marxism in eRepublik is identifying a bourgeois and a proletariat. The two are treated as binary opposites, and are defined in terms of their status relative to one another. In my opinion a huge issue for eCommunists therefore lies in identifying the bourgeois. If we accept the materialist view that underpins marxism, a bourgeoisie could be considered as those with higher than average wealth - but assets on eRepublik are invisible. There is no social group of business owners, no middle or upper ‘class’ that can be identified in terms of wealth and no body of players who publicly associate with each other based on similar wealth, and that is all because there is no non-speculative means of assessing individuals wealth in eRepublik. How much someone is worth in terms of assets or monetary wealth can only be known to other players if the individual discloses the information, and as such class structures cannot form, and as such any so called ‘material’ bourgeoisie can only exist in discursive rhetoric, which falls victim to the evidential and logical gaps identified in my previous article.

If a bourgeois can’t be identified, then identifying a material proletariat either in terms of relative wealth or as binary opposite to the bourgeois can also only be speculative. However, that doesn’t mean eCommunist parties can’t push to alleviate the economic situation of those with less spending power than others, and I feel it is safe to assume that there will always be economic disparity between ‘successful’ business operators, and less successful players with a lower income and less companies. We find ourselves in a position where at least in material terms, addressing the imbalance between bourgeois and proletariat is incredibly difficult, though if we assume that there is a group of people significantly richer than others (and how appropriate it is to do so is down to individual opinion) then we can focus policies and initiatives on alleviating the economic pressure of those who are not wealthy. This can be done through game mechanics, either through establishing communes (a long tradition amongst eCommunist parties) or through increasing the spending power of all members of a community using basic tax and minimum wage tools (though this improves spending power of everyone rather than just low-wealth players).



In my opinion, until the admins improve on the economic module eCommunist parties will be confined to operating economic policies such as those outlined before. What I would like to see in the future is more scope and control over taxes, more control over who can be taxed, perhaps based on their production would do much to allow governments to address economic disparity. Further to that, admins bringing back national rather than global monetary markets would be of huge benefit to politicians aiming to tackle disparity, as it provides scope for government stockpiling goods in order to regulate prices - something which has been lost since the introduction of cc rather than national currencies because international stockpiles big enough to alter the global markets have not yet been attempted. Global markets have levelled prices around the eWorld and globalised capitalist competition, so influencing prices is a gargantuan task. A final change which I believe would be a huge boost to eCommunist policy making and appeal would be an admin formed ‘rich list’ (based on currency or assets?) on the rankings page, displaying the relative wealth of players in your nation. This would provide substantial evidence in the identifying of a bourgeois and proletariat and would create a new point of discussion for parties and policymakers worldwide.

Where does this leave eCommunist parties? Marxism isn’t all about materialism, and throughout history various people have aimed to expand Marxism and apply it to social and political theories which can be detached from the materialist roots of bourgeois/proletariat relations. Ideologies such as Marxism-Leninism use Marxist ideology and have applied it to politics, developing pro-democratic and anti-imperialist doctrines*. Although still framed in terms of bourgeois/proletariat relations (a reflection of power politics of the early 20th Century), such ideologies can be reduced to key principles which are easily adopted by eCommunists. Social welfare, education, democratic inclusivity as well as traditional marxist notions of workers controlling means of production are all policies which can be enacted in eRepublik. In simple terms I would group these into three themes; a) Social - welfare and education are already something which most countries take seriously, though it’s regulation and apolitical nature** should be something that eCommunist parties are always pushing for and ensuring. b) Economic - Communes are the backbone of eCommunist economic initiatives, allowing people direct access to what they produce is an essential means to diminish economic disparity, and in my opinion eCommunist parties, when elected CP, should push to have state ran communes, drawing upon GDP to subsidise the costs of communes for low wealth players. As well as that, parties should take it upon themselves to teach their members and the public principles of supply and demand and the implications of high and low taxes in order to encourage open debates on taxes and minimum wage, which in many places in something rarely discussed and controlled by a handful of people and which should contribute towards a bourgeois/proletariat dialectic. c) Anti-Elitist/Bourgeois initiatives which encourage all parties to engage with their members in a way which does not deny them their voice and does not manipulate members, and which encourage parties to think of members not as mere voters but as contributors who are represented. This is something I think is lacking, and a field in which all eCommunist parties should be leading by example.



When I floated the idea for this article to PCP members, it was suggested I discuss one-party states. I believe it may provide food for thought to briefly discuss Marxism and politics. A key element of Marxist ideology is that it should be progressed through a single ‘super’ party in any given country. In eRepublik, eSaudi Arabia is currently a one party state. Unfortunately, in a country where multiple parties exist, aiming to move everyone into a single party would be impossible to enforce and with the rules on Congress candidates could prove harmful to anyone resisting a PTO. A one party system invests a lot of power in the PP and is open to abuses of trust, but again is something which perhaps the admins could look at as part of changes to the politics module. Personally, I don’t think eCommunists would benefit greatly from single-party states, and as Marxists often take an anti-idealist and anti-reactionary stance in countries where eCommunists do not make up a significant part of the political scene it may move them towards marginality and reinforce any elitist groups that are operating in said country. The idea of the one-party state as being the best means to progress Marxist ideology and equality is dependent on a revolution and upheaval of the current political process and institutions, and entirely displacing it. eRepublik doesn’t currently cater for revolutions, and so our doctrines of equality can only be applied through the existing institutions and processes, though a Trotskyite global approach to progressing these principles has proven helpful even without a revolution.

To conclude, I believe Marx can have a place in eRepublik, and that eCommunist parties can and do frame their approaches around principles which have been developed through real live Marxist philosophers. Parties such as the PCP should therefore be pushing for several things over three broad categories: Economically eCommunists are restrained by game mechanics, and so I feel it should be the place of the Comintern to encourage members to pressure the admins into rethinking and developing the economic module, perhaps it ways outlined above. Not only that, but to continue running and importantly expanding communes and social welfare (private or state ran, though ideally the latter) as well as considering what can be done on an international level to regulate prices and increase players spending power. Socially, eCommunists have to set the example of how to operate parties in a fully inclusive and encouraging manner, lead by open and democratic leaders in a transparent way. They should also encourage debate and pluralism. Pluralism in erepublik should come in encouraging people to use the media module*** and in allowing cross party messaging and recruitment****.


Thanks for Reading.
Mr Woldy.







To apply for the ‘Woldy’s Young Achievers’ Scheme, simply pop your name in this thread on our external forums:
http://tinyurl.com/WoldWelcomes



* See Wiki for more.
** Propaganda should not enter education, lengthy article on it here.
*** I have written on the importance of the media before, (A very long time ago) it remains instrumental in educating citizens and encouraging open and transparent debate. Vote buying can skew opinions and voices and should also be frowned upon.
****Cross party messaging has become a taboo in the eUK and elsewhere. I believe it should be allowed, voters are entitled to know about how other parties operate and should be given the information needed to choose which party to join. Banning cross party recruitment is to treat party members as property, owned by party elites that should not be encouraged to leave any given party. Cross party messaging is a simple extension of education, and key to a proper democracy.


I would like to point out that these are chiefly my own thoughts, and various people may join PCP or other eCommunist parties for reasons entirely their own, members deviating from key principles or enjoying roleplay or whatever floats their boat are as entitled to help the party and its cause regardless of how seriously they may take principles such as these. Discriminating people based on activity, how or why they play, their experience or how seriously they take the game is another form of elitism.

I welcome people who know more about Marx correcting me on everything 😉