Talk:List of current communist states

This article was nominated for deletion on 2008-02-21. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Communist state#Current communist states]] The anchor (#Current communist states) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

untitled

I've proposed some significant changes to this article, which I believe needs a complete overhaul in order to bring it to an acceptable standard. Principally, it requires a clear definition as to what you are specifically listing. There originally seemed to be about 3 statements as to what a "Communist state" was taken to be, and the list was not consistent with any of them. It must be a clear definition and refer to something concrete with as little room for interpretation/argument/debate as possible, otherwise it's not useful. If there's too much possibility for disagreement then the definition needs to be changed, or the list needs to be scrapped altogether. Remember, other well-defined lists and additional discussion can also be included in the article too. 76.10.148.6 (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To this end, I think that the main list should be composed of something along the lines of "self-proclaimed Communist states that are widely perceived as such". I've used the term "Communist-labelled" states to disambiguate things a bit. 76.10.148.6 (talk) 05:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite surprised people would agree with you. PRC and Vietnam are indeed "Communist". It doesn't matter how or why some meanies came and seized power from the emperors and killed their own rich, East Asian history. The name of the government parties, even on the cities' articles, say, "CPC" and "Vietnamese Communist Party Secretary". It is a well-known fact, Communism also disables you in the way that you can't express yourself. Everyone has to wear solid color shirts and cut their hair one way, and all the freedom expanse of the internet we have come to take for granted just wouldn't happen there, as they enjoy spying on their people.

If you really think communism has anything at all to do with shirt colors and hair styles, then you obviously shouldn't have anything to do with this article. I assure you, if judging by those standards, China is certainly not a communist state. Internet censorship is a result of something else altogether, unrelated to their socio-economic systems. And before you get too nationalistic, we have something called the PATRIOT Act here, which is exactly spying.

In any case, I agree a more specific definition of Communism is needed for the sake of this usefulness of this article. As it stands, all we know is that the ruling parties described themselves as such. As far as actual content goes, it doesn't say much. User:Gotank 13:07, 07 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm very much inclined to agree. What, after all, is an NPOV definition of a "communist state"? Communism is not, necessarily, the same as an iron-fisted dictatorship or authoritarian government or whatever (though the Soviet Union was a famous example, communism originally intended to make society better, not kill millions), and this article should reflect that. It should also reflect the opinion that there are no current communist states or that no communist states have ever existed. Only then can this article be called NPOV.199.126.134.144 (talk) 04:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So what are we to do then, re-name this as "List of current phony communist states"? Even though they are run by parties claiming to be communist, it is as it is. A truly communist state in it's purest form will never come about anyways. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 22:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A "truly communist state" would be a contradiction in terms. A communist society would be stateless. Aridd (talk) 16:24, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And that's why articles like this epitomize POV and shouldn't exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.214.138 (talk) 04:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under the header States Undergoing Significant Market Reforms: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.29.31.147 (talk) 14:51, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lao PDR does not officially refer to Marxism-Leninism anymore —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.29.31.147 (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North Korea

I see that North Korea has been removed from the list twice, on the startling grounds that it is "no longer communist". I'm sure there is some kind of technical justification for that - probably that Juche has nominally superceded Marxism-Leninism - but that's pushing a point of pedantry to absurdity. If North Korea is not an example of a communist state in the commonly understood sense, then what is? Certainly not the PRC. At the very least it's bizarre that North Korea warrants no mention at all in the article, but Cyprus apparently does! Sofia9 (talk) 05:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has been mentioned from several sources that it has dropped all references to communism on here and here also, along with some other news sites. More current info can be also found under the Constitution of North Korea. As for Cyprus, it's still governed by the communist party it has, as well as the ruling President who belongs to that party. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 22:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still think that's a weak argument. If we were only relying on self-definitions, strictly speaking no country defines itself as a 'communist state', but in practice North Korea comes closer to the definition than most others. But the broader issue is that there's a total lack of consistency here - see [1].

As for Cyprus, yes I fully understand why it warrants a passing mention, I just think it's utterly ludicrous that Cyprus is there and North Korea isn't! Strictly speaking AKEL in Cyprus are just one party in a three-way coalition, so it's an over-simplification to say the country has a communist government in any case. Sofia9 (talk) 04:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If bothered to look at the sources, N. Korea now is seen as a "Military-First' state & unless you or anyone else got a stronger source(s) saying otherwise, then by all means show it here. As for that other article, it has now also been corrected, yet others have to be also updated. I just don't understand why some still say they are communist while it's own government has rejected it (even though residual elements are still seen there). The facts speak for itself, it WAS communist, but not presently. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 12:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I'll try to overlook the gratuitously rude comment you made at the start, because I can assure you that I read your 'sources' thoroughly before I made my previous comment, and indeed read several other articles on the same topic, and it was on that basis that I reached my firm conclusion that North Korea should continue to be on this list. The key point is that the new constitution still defines North Korea as 'socialist', which is precisely the self-definition that all countries defined externally by the west as communist states have used down the decades, along with prescribing a leading role in the state for the ruling party. It effectively brings it into line with Laos which as I understand it long ago removed all references to Marxism-Leninism and communism from its constitution, and yet mysteriously remains on the list in spite of your strictures. I think what's happened here is that a couple of editors have got terribly excited upon reading about this constitutional change, and on a point of pedantry (the curse of Wikipedia) have decided that NK must go from the list. But once the initial hoo-ha dies away that decision is going to look a bit silly - especially in the light of the current status of some of the other countries that remain on the list. I won't personally reverse your edit either here or on the other article unless others come to my support, but in my view it is utterly inevitable they will both be reverted at some point in the future. Because, indeed, the facts do speak for themselves. Sofia9 (talk) 23:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, North Korea is a Communist country. Juche is a Communist ideology. It's not Marxist-Leninist, but there are many different types of Communism. According to the KFA (Korean Friends Association), North Korea did not drop all references to Communism in it's constitution, and indeed still considers itself Communist. It's clear to me that Juche is a form of Communism, just as Maoism, Marxism-Leninism etc. are. --Sunoco (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

idea about removing "current".

I think that we should have removed "current" and completed it with another section: Former communist-lead states. I think we also shall include those that ruled together with others or was elected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.16.168.251 (talk) 16:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Communist states

Agree. Lycurgus (talk) 02:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. КĐ^♥ 18:26, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the way to effectively remove articles. You must provide some arguments why this should be merged/removed. My very best wishes (talk) 17:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 76.105.115.131, 10 March 2011

North Korea should be added.

The line "even though its principles are not followed." should be removed. The principles of Communism are being followed in each of these states. People will not live by the principles of communism without the force of a totalitarian regime. One has followed the other in every attempt to bring the Communist idea to reality. Allowing the current generation of Communist idealists to re-label the failures of Communism as not true Communism is intellectually disingenuous and misleading.

Mrhymer (talk) 16:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Basically done. I reorganized the "self described" countries by the date they "became" communist (formerly, they were neither organized by date nor by alphabetical order, so I don't think there was a reason to the order they were in). I added North Korea and used the date that the USSR was officially assigned to govern what is now North Korea, since that seemed the best date for the "official" beginning of a communist government in North Korea. As for the "even though its principles are not followed", that sounds like a weasel statement which is there merely so we don't get into big arguments about which countries are "really" communism. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]