Communism vs. United Order

Introduction

Communism and the United Order are often compared due to their shared emphasis on collective welfare and the elimination of poverty. However, these systems differ fundamentally in principles, implementation, and outcomes. Understanding these differences is crucial for those interested in aligning economic practices with spiritual and moral values.

Key Aspects/Points

1. Foundation and Motivation

   • Communism: Rooted in Marxist ideology, communism is a political and economic system advocating for the abolition of private property and the redistribution of wealth by the state. Its primary motivation is class struggle and economic equality.

   • United Order: Originating from divine revelation, the United Order is a religious and covenant-based system designed to promote consecration and stewardship. It emphasizes voluntary participation and personal accountability under the direction of God.

2. Ownership of Property

   • Communism: Private property is abolished, and all means of production are owned collectively by the state.

   • United Order: Private property remains intact, but participants voluntarily consecrate surplus resources to benefit the community, with stewardship responsibilities assigned to individuals.

3. Agency and Freedom

   • Communism: Often implemented through coercion, communism restricts individual freedoms to enforce equality.

   • United Order: Participation is entirely voluntary, respecting individual agency and moral accountability.

4. Role of Religion and Morality

   • Communism: Typically atheistic, communism seeks to replace religious influence with state ideology.

   • United Order: Deeply rooted in religious principles, the United Order seeks to elevate individuals spiritually while addressing temporal needs.

5. Outcomes

   • Communism: Historical implementations have often led to economic inefficiencies, loss of freedoms, and widespread poverty.

   • United Order: While not widely practised, the system aims for unity, self-reliance, and spiritual growth within a community.

Refuting Common Misunderstandings

• • • “Both systems are the same.”
      While both aim to reduce inequality, communism relies on state control and compulsion, whereas the United Order is based on voluntary consecration and stewardship.

    • “The United Order is impractical.”
      The United Order is not meant to be a secular economic model but a divinely inspired system requiring faith, commitment, and spiritual maturity.

    • “Communism is inherently moral because it seeks equality.”
      True morality respects agency and accountability, which are typically suppressed in communist regimes. The United Order achieves equality through love and sacrifice, not force.

The Spiritual Benefits

• Encourages selflessness and charity.

• Strengthens community bonds through mutual support.

• Promotes spiritual growth by aligning temporal practices with divine will.

• Teaches principles of stewardship and accountability before God.

Practical Steps

1. Study the Principles: Learn about the United Order and its scriptural basis in Doctrine and Covenants.

2. Practice Stewardship: Manage personal resources responsibly and seek ways to help others.

3. Develop Charity: Cultivate a spirit of love and generosity in daily life.

4. Strengthen Faith: Deepen your relationship with God to prepare for covenant-based living.

5. Build Community: Foster unity and cooperation in your local congregation or neighbourhood.

Considerations:

Communism and the United Order may appear similar on the surface, but they diverge significantly in philosophy, implementation, and outcomes. The United Order, grounded in divine principles, offers a system that respects agency, promotes spiritual growth, and fosters lasting equality through voluntary consecration.

Explore the teachings of the United Order in scripture and modern revelation. Reflect on how its principles can inspire greater charity and stewardship in your own life. Consider discussing these ideas with others to deepen understanding and strengthen your community.

Recently it was brought to my attention that there is a movement that is called “Anarcho-Communism” that has some of our younger generation swooning, much as they did for the “Socialism” argument that many on the Left in America have been touting. This is another brand of evil that is masquerading as a viable form of “governance” that might rival the United order. While I can see the reason that they are falling for this — I mean, would it not be nice to have “communism” without the evils of “government” or “elitists” in power??

I have done some research on this and have created the following article to address this.

Anarcho-Communism vs Communism vs United Order

Introduction

Anarcho-Communism, Communism, and the United Order are three distinct systems aimed at addressing inequality and promoting collective welfare. While they share common goals of economic equality and communal cooperation, their underlying philosophies, methods of implementation, and societal structures vary greatly. This comparison explores these systems to clarify their unique attributes and address common misconceptions.

Key Aspects

1. Anarcho-Communism

   • Philosophy: Advocates for a stateless, classless society with voluntary cooperation and communal ownership of resources.

   • Key Principle: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

   • Implementation: Rejects all hierarchical structures, including the state and organized religion, emphasizing direct democracy and mutual aid.

   • Notable Figures: Peter Kropotkin, Mikhail Bakunin.

2. Communism (Marxist)

   • Philosophy: Envisions a classless society achieved through the abolition of private property and the establishment of a state-controlled economy during a transitional socialist phase.

   • Key Principle: Collective ownership of the means of production, with resources distributed based on need.

   • Implementation: Initially relies on a centralized state to oversee the transition to communism, eventually dissolving the state in the ideal phase.

   • Notable Figures: Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels.

3. The United Order

   • Philosophy: A religiously motivated system implemented by members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to promote unity and eliminate poverty.

   • Key Principle: Voluntary consecration of resources under divine guidance, with stewardship over individual properties.

   • Implementation: Operates within a structured religious framework, emphasizing personal accountability and spiritual growth.

   • Notable Figures: Joseph Smith, Brigham Young.

Refuting Common Misunderstandings

• Misconception 1: All three systems reject private property in the same way.

  • Refutation:

    • Anarcho-Communism and communism abolish private property entirely, but the United Order allows individuals to retain stewardship of their property while consecrating surplus resources for communal use.

• Misconception 2: The United Order is a form of communism.

  • Refutation:

    • The United Order is based on religious principles and voluntary participation, contrasting with communism’s secular and often state-enforced methods.

• Misconception 3: Anarcho-Communism and communism are identical.

  • Refutation:

    • Anarcho-Communism rejects all forms of state power, while communism relies on a transitional state to achieve its goals.

The Spiritual and Practical Benefits

1. Anarcho-Communism:

   • Fosters mutual aid, solidarity, and voluntary cooperation.

   • Promotes autonomy and decentralization.

2. Communism:

   • Seeks to eliminate economic inequality through centralized planning.

   • Envisions a society where resources are distributed equitably.

3. The United Order:

   • Enhances spiritual growth through consecration and stewardship.

   • Builds unity and reduces poverty within a faith-based community.

Practical Steps

1. For Understanding Anarcho-Communism:

   • Study anarchist literature, such as Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread.

   • Explore historical examples like the Spanish Civil War collectives.

2. For Understanding Communism:

   • Read foundational texts like Marx’s The Communist Manifesto.

   • Analyze historical implementations, such as the Soviet Union or China.

3. For Understanding the United Order:

   • Study scriptures and teachings related to consecration and stewardship in Doctrine and Covenants.

   • Reflect on personal applications of sharing resources and fostering unity.

Conclusion

Anarcho-Communism, communism, and the United Order each offer unique approaches to addressing inequality and fostering community. While Anarcho-Communism and communism share secular and materialist foundations, the United Order is rooted in religious principles. Understanding these systems provides insight into the diverse ways humanity has sought to create equitable societies.

Thoughts on the evils of both forms of Communism

The "true evil" presented to the world in both communism and Anarcho-Communism, as perceived by critics, often revolves around a few core issues. These critiques focus on the philosophical underpinnings, practical implementations, and unintended consequences of these systems. Here are some commonly cited concerns:

1. Rejection of Individual Freedom

• 1. 1. Communism: In practice, Marxist Communism often requires a centralized authority to enforce economic and social equality. This can lead to authoritarian regimes that suppress personal freedoms, stifle dissent, and control individual choices.

     2. Anarcho-Communism: While Anarcho-Communism rejects centralized authority, critics argue that its focus on communal decision-making can pressure individuals to conform to collective norms, potentially eroding personal autonomy.

2. Denial of Natural Human Incentives

• Both systems assume that people will work altruistically for the collective good without personal incentives. Critics argue that this idealism overlooks human nature, which often includes self-interest and a desire for personal reward.

• The suppression of personal ambition in favour of enforced equality can lead to inefficiency, lack of innovation, and economic stagnation.

3. Disregard for Private Property

• The abolition of private property is central to both systems. Critics view this as a denial of a fundamental human right, undermining individual agency and the ability to build personal wealth or legacy.

• Without property rights, people may feel less invested in their labour and its outcomes, leading to apathy and lack of motivation.

4. Historical Track Record of Violence and Oppression

• Communism: Historically, communist regimes (e.g., the Soviet Union, Maoist China) have often resulted in mass oppression, economic collapse, and widespread human rights abuses. Critics argue that the concentration of power in a "transitional" state leads to corruption and tyranny.

• Anarcho-Communism: While it has not been widely implemented on a large scale, anarcho-communist experiments have faced challenges of instability, conflict, and external suppression, highlighting the difficulty of sustaining such a system.

5. Utopian Idealism and Practical Failures

• Both Communism and Anarcho-Communism are accused of promoting utopian visions that fail to account for the complexities of human society.

• Critics argue that these systems are inherently unworkable on a large scale, leading to chaos, inefficiency, or the eventual rise of authoritarianism to impose order.

6. Moral Relativism and the Subversion of Ethical Foundations

• By rejecting traditional institutions like religion, family structures, and cultural norms, critics claim these systems undermine the moral and ethical foundations of society.

• The absence of a higher moral authority can lead to justifications for extreme measures, such as violence or suppression, in the name of achieving equality.

Conclusion

The "true evil" critics see in Communism and Anarcho-Communism lies in their potential to suppress individual freedoms, distort human nature, and lead to widespread suffering under the guise of equality and justice. These systems often prioritize ideology over practical realities, resulting in outcomes that betray their noble intentions. While their goals of equality and communal welfare are admirable, the methods and consequences of their implementation have raised significant concerns throughout history.