Comment on unsure why we are surprised lol
force@lemmy.world 2 months ago“Communist Party” and “Communism” are not equivalent concepts
Comment on unsure why we are surprised lol
force@lemmy.world 2 months ago“Communist Party” and “Communism” are not equivalent concepts
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Who makes that distinction? Plus, the idea of destroying the state, Capitalism, class divides, and money definitely is legally opposed.
force@lemmy.world 2 months ago
… literally anyone who thinks about it? The US Communist Party is one party, there are plenty of other parties that identify as communist.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Laws are interpreted and wielded by those in power. The Democrats are already called Communists, what happens if a genuine Socialist party takes some amount of power?
force@lemmy.world 2 months ago
That’s literally an argument against anything that exists at all. That’s kind of how laws work, linguistics is complicated so everyone’s interpretation is different. But as it stands, communist parties are not banned. What you speak of is a big “what if”, and currently you saying communism as a whole is banned is simply wrong, even as an oversimplification.
It is a big stretch to turn “Parties other than the two largest ones in the country have considerable cultural, legal, and logistical obstacles to being able to participate in high-level American politics, and an unenforced law from 70 years ago banned one specific communist party before most of the provisions being repealed by congress and thr law being overturned in state courts as unconstitutional” into “Communism is banned in the United States”. There is no legal way to criminally prosecute someone on the basis of them being a communist in the modern day.
RustyShackleford@programming.dev 2 months ago
Anyone versed in basic political theory.
An ideology and a political organization are obviously different. Just like republicanism and The Republican Party, democracy and The Democratic Party, socialism and The Socialist Party, etc.
That’s technically sedition, so, yes, illegal.
Nowhere in U.S. jurisprudence is “capitalism” (verbatim) explicitly protected as an economic system. The 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause prevents the state from taking someone’s life, liberty, or property without a proper justification under the laws of the land. The Constitution protects individuals from the government. Freedom to contract is a principle that underpins the basis for a free-market economy.
After the Great Depression, the Court began to treat the freedom to contract as less than absolute, asserting that such freedom may be limited by the State’s interest to protect its citizens. Capitalism is a right guaranteed by the constitution but limited in scope to protect individuals against the dangers of laissez-faire capitalism.
There are no explicit laws in U.S. jurisprudence (that I know of or have turned up on brief internet searches) that enforce “class divides”.
Be it resources, precious metals, or legal tender, money is protected by the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
So we can conclude that the advocacy or practice of communism isn’t legal. Forcing people to practice it or overthrowing the government and dissolving The Bill of Rights in order to for people to practice most certainly is.
In my opinion, that’s a good thing.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Communism isn’t Communalism. Advocating for Communism and attempting to implement Communism at a national level is illegal, as you’ve shown.
RustyShackleford@programming.dev 2 months ago
Yes, that’s true.
… is legal, under the 1st Amendment.
By force, yes. Theoretically, with a broad enough consensus, it could be voted on and enacted.
All pedantry aside, it’s important to differentiate between theory and practice or ideology and an organization.