This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
Surhone, L. M., Timpledon, M. T., & Marseken, S. F. (2010), Nicos Poulantzas: Political sociology, Marxism, structural Marxism, Leninism, Eurocommunism, social class, instrumentalism, cultural hegemony, Betascript Publishing((citation)): CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
"while smaller and more marginal parties (such as the Communist Party of Great Britain) remained correspondingly more dependent upon the patronage of Moscow"
What utter nonsense! The CPGB was firmly Eurocommunist in the 1970s, constantly distancing itself from the Soviet Union on a raft of issues -- such as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the treatment of dissidents in the USSR.
You can make any change you want to the article. --Juliet.p 08:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
more references
for a long time i have been an avid student of politics. by chance, when reading the history of the indonesian communist party i came across a link to "eurocommunism".....
more references than this mandel person!
This article suggests an anti-Eurommunist POV[edit]
A statement like "It was those Communist parties most strongly entrenched in their respective societies — notably the Italian Communist Party and the French Communist Party — that adopted a Eurocommunist line" is clearly mistaken: the Russian and Chinese CPs also had mass roots. This entry fails to explain what Eurocommunism was in the words of its supporters. --Duncan 13:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose the intention is the compare different West European CPs, not CPs internationally. Lets say compare why PCI adopted eurocommunism whilst the Communist Party of Denmark did not. Still the comparison failed, as several of the smaller European CPs were sympathic towards Eurocommunism. Rather it was parties like PCI that came to play the leading role in Eurocommunism, for reasons obvious. --Soman 13:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed, I think the suggestion is a little deeper -- to suggest a causal link between the social weight of these parties and their political collapse. I think this is weak, and mistake. There's a serious discussion there about how Lenin argued that Bolshevism needed to be adapted to Western Europe, to Gramsci and to Togliatti. This post simple suggests that it's about adapting to the middle class, which is useless. --Duncan 16:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
On reflection, I still think there are serious POV issued with the article. Even the opening claim that Eurocommunism is revisionist is not NPOV. --Duncan (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The relation of PCF with Eurocommunism is more complicated than both of these versions porttray. PCF vacilliated towards Eurocommunism, first welcoming it, then rejecting it and then again approaching it. --Soman 11:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure but it seems to me that my version states the main point: they have always followed the USSR communist party when it existed (and also have always accepted their money - this is today fully documented). Alain10 13:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, there is a difference. Namely, that PCF did participate in formulations of eurocommunist standpoints in the 1970s, but backtracked in the 1980s. --Soman 14:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am not convinced. They accepted for a time the eurocommunist concept for propaganda reason but soon, after it began to mean independance from USSR, they refused it Alain10 17:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are several objections that I'd like to talk about. The reason I'm not editing right away is because I'm not very familiar with eurocommunism specifically and more with Warchau-pact history, so I could be mistaken. Anyway, I'll post the objections in the order the text appears in the article.
Eurocommunism is classified as an attempt to develop a theory. If it was an attempt, why would it be in the encyclopedia as such a thorough article? Should be 'a new movement within european communist parties in the (early) 1970s' or similar.
"possibilist" is not a word. maybe pragmatic?
"But Eurocommunism was in many ways only a staging post." and "others, like the Dutch, toyed with green politics" are not examples of encyclopedia-worthy information, somewhat biased in language and more importantly I think, unclear in what it means.
much use of generalisations, "right-wing critics"; "most revolutionary left-wing movements", etc. without citation.
Buddelmeijer 10:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Claim "What was peculiar was that the Youth was nearly compltely Taistolaist" is totally unsubstiated and no scholar of the era would support this --State of clarity (talk) 22:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The template doesn't really make sense in that Eurocommunism is listed with Marxist-Leninist movements on the "same side", when in reality Eurocommunism is (like Hoxha said) anti-communism. The main historical role of Eurocommunism is to condemn the actions of socialist states and move the focus of Communist Parties away from proletarian class politics into bourgeois distractions such as ecology/feminism/homosexual "rights", etc... ie - the same policies as Anglo-American liberalism. Claíomh Solais (talk) 23:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think that is an NPOV view. Marxism-Leninism is the political tradition associated with the Communist parties after Lenin, not only the Maoist parties. --Duncan (talk) 13:31, 26 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi,
why is that word, at the end of the first para after the lead, in quotation marks?
They make it look like the claim is made ironically, as a joke, or in bad faith.
I suggest removing them, or completing the statement with the full quote from the source.
T 88.89.217.49 (talk) 21:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]