Not a single one of the ideologies listed on that page has successfully established socialism except for the derivatives of Marxism-Leninism, such as Juche. The closest is Zapatismo, but Zapatismo does not consider itself communist, nor socialist, nor anarchist, and instead is a primarily indigenous ideology related to the Chiapas region.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
I mean, both religious and primative communism both exist today, just not at a state level.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
“Religious communism” is not a thing, and early communalism exists in micro-pockets. Neither is the same as what is understood as communism, the theoretical mode of production that predates Marxism.
BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
The problem we’re arguing about here is “understood as communism”
I understand both of those to be Communism, because they are in fact types of Communism. That’s why they’re referred to as “Religious Communism” and “Primative Communism.”
You are trying to Pidgeon hole Communism as just Marxism, when the word frequently has far broader implications in common use.
Even the dictionaries have definitions that extend beyond Marxism. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism www.dictionary.com/browse/communism en.wiktionary.org/wiki/communism
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 day ago
I already said the concept of communism predates Marx. I am not redefining communism to Marxism. OP is asking about socialism and communism as they actually exist and are understood, and further “primitive communism” as described by Marx is misleading and instead is better described as “communalism.”