Join the new world

[img]http://media.z2.zoopy.com/media/cache/2010/03/12/56321/168030/thumb-640x.jpg?1268405002[/img]
Welcome readers, To theThe Hermes! Enjoy!

The Communist Interviews
I have decided to interview a few respected communists to find out about Communism in eRepublik, this will be a series of articles posted weekly.
Please Note: The Hermes or Tpex does not agree or disagree with with the content of said interveiw

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu315/tpex/t6hfw7lv.jpg" alt="obrazek" title="tittle" width="600" />

Today we have Maksim Chuikov A well known and respected communist from Russia.
(Click here to read this in Hungarian)


Tpex: can we start?

Maksim_Chuikov: Yeah, sure.

Tpex: so what makes you want to institute communism in eCountries?

Maksim_Chuikov: There are several reasons, not just ideological but mechanical reasons as well. I've always been a follower of a planned economy. With planned economy I'm of course talking about the perks it generates, eg. equality, solidarity and efficiency.
The argument that "communism" doesn't work in eRepublik has been brought up on numerous occasions in political debates on the eR forums, in articles and third-party forums. But the game script is against it.

Tpex: okay. So do you feel the common player is abused in a free market?

Maksim_Chuikov: I would say every worker who hasn't got the right to decide where the fruits of his labour go to are being abused in eRepublik.
The ultimate goal for any communist is to make an equal economical system. However, if a fellow comrade willingly donates the fruits of his labour to the collective movement then it's fine by me.

Tpex: But in return the fruits of his labour are money?

Maksim_Chuikov: The fruits of labour can be money or gold, yes.
But it can also be, as we're seeing in communes, like products which affect your wellness, like food, gifts and houses but it can also be weapons.

Tpex: ok.... let say we have somebody working in a big free market, due to the natural rise and fall he gets to choose what job he wants, if he is being treated badly he can move to another job, when he needs to buy things there is always a price war, how is that not fair in your view?

Maksim_Chuikov: Today a member of our movement (by the name of Radsoc) has created a script in which you can calculate your exploitation level.
A worker is being oppressed in almost all free market companies today, which we can prove now.
Even if a worker would receive a wage of what his work is worth then there'd still be a class society.

Tpex: interesting, but why?

Maksim_Chuikov: The general managers hold the simple tools of firing anyone. The general manager also has a monopoly over the economical side of the company, such as buying export licenses or upgrading the company.

Tpex: you think all the workers should have a say?
Maksim_Chuikov: We feel that every worker is entitled to participate in the management of a company. Whether they elect the general manager or all have access to the company is a different thing.
I believe there's different answers to that question. It all comes down to how efficient you want an economy to be.
In theory, a completely equal planned economy would mean the election of managers on a micro-scale, these "commissars", as we call them (instead of managers, since it's a bourgeoisie term), would only operate the company. They wouldn't be entitled to fire, sell or upgrade the company (just to name the basics) without workers' authorization.
On a macro-scale every worker would have to participate in an economical planning discussion, if the workers would decide to prioritize the production of high quality food instead of more weapons then the entire economy would be relocated by the (elected) commissars to do so.

Tpex: A mini democracy?

Maksim_Chuikov: Yeah, it'd be total economical democracy,
of course, this is just in theory how a decentralized economy would work.

Tpex: fair enough, But the GM was the one who funded the company in the first place?

Maksim_Chuikov: It doesn't matter to us if the general manager has collected the money himself. After he's created the company he begins exploiting the workers.
After a proletarian decides to open a company then he's bound to follow the rules of the capitalist economy (in order to survive).

Tpex: Fair enough. Do you believe there is a difference between communism and socialism?

Maksim_Chuikov: There is a clear distinction between communism and socialism in eRepublik, just like real-life.
What socialism entails, or what the purpose of socialism in eRepublik is varies between almost all parties, there's not a manifesto on e-socialism in eRepublik yet

Tpex: ok good I just wanted to clear that up. Have there been any successful communist eCountries?

Maksim_Chuikov: There hasn't been a single "e-communist" e-country yet. But there's been a lot of e-Socialist states, the most prominent ones being eSoviet Union and ePortugal, there's also been a lot of activity in eSlovakia, eNorth Korea, eCzech Republic and so forth.

Tpex: ok how close do you think eRussia has come to communism?

Maksim_Chuikov: I wouldn't say any e-country has yet been close to e-communism.
In order to reach e-communism the economy has to be completely nationalized by the workers. There's two ways for the movement to reform an e-country into a Socialist e-country:
The old orthodox way of winning 51% of the Congress;
It's not a secret that this is impossible to achieve in most of the e-countries, especially when the movement is so "bound" to their own e-countries.

Tpex: “Bound”?

Maksim_Chuikov: By bound, I'm talking about international solidarity being low. If we'd all centralize in the biggest or two biggest e-countries then there's a good chance we could get 51% even there.
If you start counting the amount of members in all of the far-left parties in New World then you'll be surprised how many there actually are.
Then there's the new, the second alternative which is something most of the veteran revolutionaries have turned their attention towards, there's a way to nationalize the economy without state power, this is called the "economical revolution".
To summarize the idea, if we create "super-communes" in big e-countries then we can crash the market, open our own companies and repeat the process until we'd control most of the market, this has only been attempted once in practice and it took place in eRussia about two months back.
I'm still heading the program, but we've come to a stall. We realized that the lack of income would become a major obstacle in the future so we put the program on-hold for a while.

Tpex: but this only controls the market?

Maksim_Chuikov: Indeed, comrade. But the state can't control prices and wages, companies can.
But the state can of course create its own, completely nationalized economy if it were to increase wages to 99%, this way it'd kill most of the companies and present itself an opportunity to open its own companies.

Tpex: fair enough, now for the "Orthodox method" what changes do you institute to bring about communism?

Maksim_Chuikov: I'm strongly against the orthodox method.

Tpex: Why is that?

Maksim_Chuikov: I've played this game for almost 1½ year and there's not been a single e-country, except eSoviet Union which has had 51% of the Congress for more then one month, you can't create an e-Socialist economy in just one month. Even if you were to succeed, there's a big risk you might get 49% next elections which would mean all you've accomplished the term before might be lost.

Tpex: so you are against the method because it is risky?

Maksim_Chuikov: I'm against the method of seeking for political power because it doesn't work, (Which we have evidence of.) But it would work if we'd all centralize into one or two e-countries.
Each party think "their progress" is worth more then the rest of the movements. Most of the big far-leftist parties think their e-country is the place where to centralize.

Tpex: so you would rather control the market and force the government into submission?

Maksim_Chuikov: I would, because that's a lot easier.
The international far-leftist movement is corrupted by e-nationalism.

Tpex: interesting thing I have noticed, so do communists have no sense of ePatriotism?

Maksim_Chuikov: The most active members in the Internationale have no sense of ePatriotism.

Maksim_Chuikov: But 50-60 comrades doesn't mean anything.

Tpex: okay. So do you have no interest in small countries such as eSouth Africa?

Maksim_Chuikov: I'm not a person telling people what to do, I support every movement.
I'm against all small movements, even against big movements.

Tpex: you last two statements clash?

Maksim_Chuikov: Yeah, allow me to elaborate, what I'd wish to see is a unification of far-leftists, big movements, PCP, PK, CPSU and so forth are recruiting as much people as they can. However, 10 or 20 new comrades in any of these movements won't benefit them the slightest, small movements, like the eCzech Republic or eDenmark movements would need them more. However, a Socialist state in eDenmark or eCzech Republic wouldn't benefit the international movement like it would if we'd centralize in eSpain, eFrance, eUK or eRussia, we would have access to a lot of more raw materials, more companies and so forth.

Tpex: ok so it’s go big or go home?

Maksim_Chuikov: Precisely.

Tpex: Finally, do you think communism in eRepublik is still fun?

Maksim_Chuikov: I can't imagine doing anything else. It's tricky and more importantly time consuming, but I would have an ethical dilemma if I were to become a capitalist.

Tpex: Thank you very much for your time Maksim Chuokov

Maksim_Chuikov: Anytime, comrade tpex.



Feel Free to post any suggestions or thoughts below.

Please



http://somokon.com/erep/hitcounter.png">