Commonist Manifesto

Be sure to read Fascism Under the Red Banner, also by Ilyich, is the prelude to the Commonist Manifesto

The Commonist Manifesto was published on December 16, 2007 in response to Demokratikos' Allied Socialist Nations and its Bolshevist ideology. The Commonist Manifesto is the basis for Commonism

Leftism in the Alliance Environment
To have a fair Leftist democratic system, authoritarian power is not needed, wanted, and it goes against what Leftism tries to achieve. A united coalition government ruled by the proletariat, which means that everyone rules the everyone. Not a political hegemony rules everyone else. To achieve this a representative legislature must be eliminated. The representative legislature is easy to use (senate, congress, council, parliament, house, etc.) and to associate to power, as anywhere from three to nine people are in charge of deciding the laws and acts of the alliance. This can create a political hegemony and unfair representation of the people and their opinions, and Leftism aims to bring the power of the people to the people. It is shown with the Allied Socialist Nations, that a representative legislature is strictly under the control of the Premier and his domination of alliance politics.

To replace the representation, an assembly of all peoples must be established to decide upon all of which the alliance will enact upon (legislation). This assembly of people must carry the dominant force in the alliance, being above even those whom hold titles of authority, and the head of state. The powers of the assembly shall be virtually unlimited, and with every act decided upon by a fair democratic vote, the power would be in good hands as it is everyone taken into account rather than a few in charge as head of state or as ministers.

With abolishing the representation and initiating an assembly of people, the alliance aims to combat fascism, nationalism, Bolshevism, Stalinism, and Maoism (and also many other whom hold similar ideologies). The power to the people has been accomplished, and the ideals and fundamentals of communism can now be enacted.

The authoritarian power of the ministers and heads of state shall be severely limited in a proper Leftist alliance. The power of the people will belong to the Assembly, not to the selected few with a special title within the alliance established. Those elected to offices of power are entrusted to manage certain day-to-day duties of the group, such as for example: A defense minister will be entrusted to maintain the alliance's defense forces, or while a recruitment minister will be entrusted to organize recruitment drives and bringing in new members. Those elected to head of state offices are entrusted to represent the alliance, and its people. Acting as the head political figure, the head of state makes the alliance's announcements, and keeps the alliance organized and in order, keeps it from falling apart. Each authoritarian position has no more power than the Assembly.

It is the aim of Leftism, specifically Left Communism, it to do away with the majority of power held to the small number of individuals trusted in running the alliance and deciding for everyone else. To further this quest, many powers must be limited and must be thrown away, this includes: Any veto powers that a head of state or [head of] government may posses, any policy that requires the approval of a head of state or authoritarian figure before a bill is passed, special powers granted to few individuals, the unfair taxation of nations to give money to a central figure, and the involuntary military service. Lets break all of this down.

No veto powers. A veto is basically a "fuck your idea" to the person who originally thought of it. If the people feel that such an act being legislated should be passed for the good of the alliance and of everyone else, then why should on figure head say that they cannot do that? That the people cannot have what they want? Veto power is also dominance over the legislature, and the alliance's policies, only passing what you like and vetoing what you don't. So, to achieve power to the people, all veto abilities should be abolished.

No figure head approval. Why must you require an approval from a figure head on a bill that the people already approve? I do not understand why you must, together with the veto powers, one could control the policies of an alliance through these usually overlooked "harmless" powers. If a head of state does not like a bill, he can simply refuse to approve it and therefore it is never passed. Likewise, he may sign the bill which he feels is appropriate.

Unfair taxation. With the alliances I have been in the past, I was forced to pay "debts" that I had left behind in a group. This had all come together as the alliance demanding every last cent back they had given to me previously in foreign aid, to why I ask you? I served that alliance for what I could, I gave it power in the role of my membership and added stats to their totals, why must I have to pay back for the money simply because I feel like moving on? This would be similar to having to pay back all your bonuses from a job because you decided to quit. Also, recruitment bribes upon a nation is unfair as well, someone has to pay them. Usually it is the person sending the recruitment message, but at other times it is someone else forced to pay. How is this fair? How is this just? Why must someone else pay for an act you initiated?

Involuntary Military Service What I've understood the least is the militarization of some alliances. There is more to the game and more advancement rather than war, efficiency, and forcing upon your members to fight for some "just" political cause you and a few others believe in. As such, military service to the alliance should not be forced upon. Sure, if you refuse to fight you'll most likely get ridiculed for it, but shouldn't it be their right not to fight for a cause they see as unjust? Or are the barred from thinking in such a way? And why limit a free mind?

Also, speaking about the militarization, this also incorporates the need for an "efficient" system and to be quick and fast during wartime and battle. The need for efficiency usually leads to fascism, the limiting of people's representation and power, and the establishment of a meritocratic rule with a political hegemony at the top. Why be efficient in the first place to throw out democracy if you don't expect to be in any wars that would require "quick action"? To solve this, be neutral in all conflicts. If you feel you do not need to fight, then don't. If you feel that it would endanger your people, then don't endanger them in combat. Since you have gotten rid of war, there is no need for efficiency, therefore democracy and power to the people can be reinstated.