The answer lies in the "Communist Manifesto," the pamphlet written by Karl Marx and his partner, Friedrich Engels in Germany which introduces Communism as an ideology.
Marx and Engels were appalled by the terrible conditions of working class (or blue collar) people in their day, especially industrial workers in England and Northern Ireland - 14 hour work days, starvation wages, little children working in coal mines, lung diseases (silicosis) among sandblasters and textile workers, Irish women knitting lace until they went blind etc. . They wanted to change and improve the situation which in itself was okay.
However, they also talk about "class struggle" and "class enemies" in their pamphlet too and this is what unfortunately, laid the foundations for the later massacres by the Communists in Russia, China, Cuba and Cambodia.
Marx and Engels believed that there were class enemies - fat cats and big time capitalist businessmen - who were against the workers. They called them the "Bourgeoisie." They believed that the Bourgeoisie would always mercilessly exploit and oppress the workers and never compromise with them on anything regarding their rights. The only way the workers would ever free themselves from this oppression and secure their rights would be through armed revolution and the complete elimination of the Bourgeoisie.
There were no such Capitalist or Bourgeois classes in backward, pre-industrial countries like Russia, China, Vietnam or Cambodia. Nevertheless, since Marx and Engels mentioned them in their book, which the Communists hold sacred - kind of like their Bible - Communist leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot all believed that they had to exist and had to be eliminated in order to achieve a Communist (or Socialist as they called it ) revolution in their countries.
2007-05-09 20:54:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brennus 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
For different reasons. Lenin - because he thought violence and murders were justified as long as the ultimate goal is universal justice and equality. Stalin - because he lacked moral principles.
2007-05-09 17:51:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Thomas B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋