Menshevism

[Paula Marx]

Fractions of communism are bolshevism and menshevism, so...
...any mensheviks here?

[Joshua Purcell]

These two 'factions of communism' were actually two groups within Russia before its revolution in the early 1900s. There were differences between the two factions, so I guess there could be people who say they agree more with the Mensheviks given hindsight, but you probably won't find many of them anywhere you look since these two groups don't represent how factions will always play out in all revolutionary organizations from that point forward. I can't really say these two are factions of communism because of this... more like factions that ended up being formed due to situations within that specific Russian revolutionary party during the early 20th century.

[Christopher Hill]

In hindsight I do suppose most who identify as Trotskyists would support the Mensheviks (Trotsky was originally a Menshevik after the Split) on the issue of party membership if that is even an issue,(A Party member is anyone who works under the parties guidance)but the Bolsheviks on most other matters (The Menshevisks being on many issues more right-wing and reformist)

[Paula Marx]

I'm not in any party or something because I think communism is an ideology, not the politics. Communists are against politics, which is only the conflict of classes. Also, I think bolshevism is (was?) too violent. I support menshevism because I think we shouldn't look up after those Soviet "communists" who killed millions of people and didn't follow the real idea. With Lenin and Stalin bolshevism became its opposition.
I don't know will we ever reach our goal and make the Utopia out of this capitalist world, but our will  is important.
Hope you understand what I mean ^^

[Pie]

In hindsight I do suppose most who identify as Trotskyists would support the Mensheviks (Trotsky was originally a Menshevik after the Split) on the issue of party membership if that is even an issue,(A Party member is anyone who works under the parties guidance)but the Bolsheviks on most other matters (The Menshevisks being on many issues more right-wing and reformist)

I believe Trotsky was only a Menshevik for one year-he split with them after they wanted to ally with the liberals. Anyways, I think Trotsky once said that remaining with the Mensheviks was probably the greatest mistake of his life. As for Trotskyists supporting Mensheviks, I think that's rather ridiculous, as you note the Mensheviks ended being reformist and supporting the capitalist government even over the Bolshevik gov't. However, I suppose you're not entirely wrong; there are a fair amount of "Trotskyists" or "admirers" of Trotsky that are really liberals; they would support the Mensheviks and they believe Trotsky was some great liberal hero.

I'm not in any party or something because I think communism is an ideology, not the politics. Communists are against politics, which is only the conflict of classes. Also, I think bolshevism is (was?) too violent. I support menshevism because I think we shouldn't look up after those Soviet "communists" who killed millions of people and didn't follow the real idea. With Lenin and Stalin bolshevism became its opposition.
I don't know will we ever reach our goal and make the Utopia out of this capitalist world, but our will  is important.
Hope you understand what I mean ^^

First of all, I don't see why communists are "against" politics (how is that even possible?), as you say politics is the conflict of classes, so why should we be "against" politics? Also, it is rather hypocritical to claim that Bolshevism is too violent then support the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks were defending the revolutionary gov't in Russia, was it brutal and violent? Yes, but less so than if the whites had managed to win. As for the Mensheviks being less violent, how can you say this about them when they supported a World War 1, a war over territory and resources that killed some 15,000,000 people? This is like all the capitalist hypocrites, they whine and sob about how mean and cruel the Bolsheviks were because a few million people did die in the Russian Civil War while it was a war the Bolsheviks didn't even start(!), and even then altogether far fewer people died in this war than in World War 1, which was a war the capitalists started and uniformly support(ed). As for Lenin and Stalin being enemies of communism, with Stalin I rather agree, but Lenin was no enemy. Lastly, we aren't utopians, we don't to make some utopia after capitalism (and utopias are impossible anyways), and using such vocabulary is destructive.

[Joshua Purcell]

First of all, I don't see why communists are "against" politics (how is that even possible?), as you say politics is the conflict of classes, so why should we be "against" politics? Also, it is rather hypocritical to claim that Bolshevism is too violent then support the Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks were defending the revolutionary gov't in Russia, was it brutal and violent? Yes, but less so than if the whites had managed to win. As for the Mensheviks being less violent, how can you say this about them when they supported a World War 1, a war over territory and resources that killed some 15,000,000 people? This is like all the capitalist hypocrites, they whine and sob about how mean and cruel the Bolsheviks were because a few million people did die in the Russian Civil War while it was a war the Bolsheviks didn't even start(!), and even then altogether far fewer people died in this war than in World War 1, which was a war the capitalists started and uniformly support(ed). As for Lenin and Stalin being enemies of communism, with Stalin I rather agree, but Lenin was no enemy. Lastly, we aren't utopians, we don't to make some utopia after capitalism (and utopias are impossible anyways), and using such vocabulary is destructive.

Great answer to the post. One of the most tired arguments I occasionally have to answer as the socialism/Marxism/communism is Utopian... it's usually the very first thing a person who has no idea what they are trying to argue against brings up. It is true that there some socialist projects that had Utopian goals in the past, but the exact same could be said about ideas around our current capitalist society as it was being formed (and still in its infancy) in the Netherlands around 1600s. And just because there were some Utopian projects doesn't mean that all ideas behind socialism are by definition Utopian.

Not to say that Paula Marx was being argumentative by bringing up the word Utopian... it's just important to know that Utopian goals are not inherent in any socialist idea any more than they are in ideas from the right.

[Paula Marx]

I know that and I still want the revolution, but is it possible? Will our biggest ideal, Utopia, ever happen or is it just an idea? Socialism has three stages: the proletariat dictatorhip, "democratic" socialism and destruction of politics. Personally I don't think we'll ever reach the third one, no matter how hard we try.
Also, Bolsheviks were very violent when they came to the power. I never saw in Manifest or Capital Marx or Engels writing about that. Communism stands for personal freedom and originally (the ideology) is very liberal. I understand how and why they violently took the power, but should they kill other people when they were already there? They killed millions of workers ( I thought they fought for them) and other communists. I don't mean to sound hardly, but I think only Mensheviks understand the real target of communism.