Talk:Communist state

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 07:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Communist state → Marxist-Leninist stateMarxist-Leninist state – Term is more accurate for what the article describes. _⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 06:25, 23 December 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Vestrian24Bio 04:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

It has come to my attention recently that this page has been the link used in the government section of multiple Warsaw Pact-aligned states in the Cold War, such as the Bulgarian People's Republic (which is where I first found this), and also modern day nations like Laos and Cuba.

It also seems that this page has already garnered some tension regarding terminology. This tension has naturally bled into the infoboxes of these states.

Therefore I think it is best that we get a broad consensus with people from all over the Politics and History topics. It seems to me that it's the same few individuals participating in these, and the fact it is spread amongst multiple pages has diffused the input of editors.

Thank you. _⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 06:20, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for starting a proper process.

1. The term "communist state" is scholarly. It gets 60 400 hits on Google scholar. In contrast, Marxist-Leninist state garners 2 020 hits. Scholars use the term communist state.
2. Communism is a much more accessible term for our readers than Marxism–Leninism. We can prove this by looking at our page view statistics. In the period 02.12.2025 to 22.12.2025, communism had 55,648 page views and Marxism–Leninism had 32,520. Communism is both what scholars use, and the most accessible term for our readers
3. Is this clarification? Not really. All communist states that have existed have been ruled by Marxist–Leninist parties. Is Marxism–Leninism a good term? Not really, since many Marxist–Leninist parties have advocated another form of state governance than the classical state structure established by the Soviets. Does anyone remember eurocommunism? The South African Communist Party supports a multi-party system. Marxism–Leninism is an ideology, not a monolithic idea on how the state should look after the revolution.
4. Readers need to be sent to the article that actually discusses the topic at hand. This article is about the state system as it existed in communist states. No other articles here on Wikipedia is specifically about that. It's strange to advocate that this term should not be used, but another more general term should be used. That also breaches WP:ACCESILIBITY.
5. As such, it should be clear to anyone reading this that both scholars (Wikipedia:Verifiability), general readers (WP:ACCESSIBILITY), and maintain absolute clarity, the term communist state should remain. Generally, I will say that this Marxist–Leninist state thing is mostly a Wikipedia thing, and the general argument against its use is that the term communist state is an oxymoron (since Marx claimed communism would be stateless). But this is WP:Original Research. Wikipedians can't decide to not use a scholarly term because of their interpretation of Marx: Marx wrote about communism and NOT communist states. The term is not an oxymoron if scholars use it.
6. I Oppose.

TheUzbek (talk) 08:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose Per WP:COMMONNAME. In other words option 2, though I would caution against using strawpolls as discussions are WP:NOTAVOTE. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:42, 23 December 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Mellk (talk) 12:25, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
• Comment I decided to remove the infobox option things because it would be better suited for an RfC elsewhere, and I think that should be tackled seperately. Also at the advice of @Zxcvbnm: _⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 19:27, 24 December 2025 (UTC)
• Support The sources used in this article refer specifically to the structure of Marxist Leninist states, and I have seen complaints from other editors that the term "Communist state" is oxymoronic, as the ideal goal of any movement striving for Communism necessitates the abolition of States. @TheUzbek: gave me a description that I think is a useful definition, but seems to be exclusively based around the state structure of Marxist-Leninist governments. I think this is a necessary specification. Also, it begins to fall into WP:NPOV, as the title of "Communist state" with sourcing largely reflecting Marxist-Leninist systems, and thus accidentally pushing that POV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeaponizingArchitecture (talk • contribs) 19:30, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

  By proposing the move you're already counted as supporting. See WP:RMCOMMENT ("Nomination already implies ..."). ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 04:20, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Support - "Communist state" is an oxymoron. Communism is when the state withers away due to the end of class conflict. Saying Communist and state in the same word doesn't make sense. TheUzbek's comment saying that the general argument against its use is that the term communist state is an oxymoron (since Marx claimed communism would be stateless) but then saying that this is WP:Original Research. doesn't make sense. You already said the thing. The theory is that communism is one that is stateless. How is that WP:OR? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:41, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Communist state is a scholarly term used by scholars such as Robert Service, Archie Brown. Is Wikipedia about what scholars say or what Marx said? We have an article on communism as Marx defined it; its called communist society. TheUzbek (talk) 13:31, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

That is etymological fallacy in part, this term is used by western academics during and after the cold war not at all linked to what marx said User:Easternsahara 02:13, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Soviet Union, WikiProject Countries, WikiProject Anthropology, WikiProject Socialism, WikiProject Chinese history, WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Russia, WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce, and WikiProject China have been notified of this discussion. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:42, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

• Are there specific sources on the terminology? It would be good if the RM had at least one or two. The article is about a specific form of government, what do sources tend to call this? Is that name potentially ambiguous? I doubt the casual reader is going to read much difference into Marxist-Leninist state vs Communist state. CMD (talk) 13:29, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. "Communist state" seems to be the common name for this topic. Per the criteria, the current title is also more widely understood by readers (recognizable and natural) and more concise. At this point the argument over precision doesn't really matter, since so many other points lean in the opposite direction, but if someone has extraordinary evidence for the claim that the proposed title would be more precise, I would be happy to look at it. Toadspike [Talk] 19:57, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree, but there is an argument to be made for moving this article to "Communist state system" or just "Communist system". There are a bunch of scholarly articles out there: "What is a communist system?", "The new class: an analysis of the communist system", "Systems theory and the communist system", "What is communism?", "The Comparative Study of Communist Political Systems", "The Communist System", "Communist and Post-Communist Systems", "The nature of the communist system: Notes on state, party, and society", "The transformation of communist systems". All of them call it "Communist state", "Communist system", or "Communist state system" interchangeably. However, by having a system instead of a state, we stop having to rehash the argument about "Communist state" being an oxymoron. TheUzbek (talk) 08:59, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I would support this 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:29, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I would also be okay with a lede that goes something like "A Communist State is a common term to refer to a state under a government that adopts Marxism Leninism", something like that. _⛿ WeaponizingArchitecture | yell at me 21:42, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

But a communist state/system can be adopted, theoretically, by non-communists. That is why, for example, the Kuomintang adopted democratic centralism. A system is not an ideology... TheUzbek (talk) 22:12, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose: "Communist state" is the common name for the subject this article covers, as comments above demonstrate, even if it's not the 'correct' technical term in Marxist parlance. regards, TryKid ^{[dubious – discuss]} 01:48, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. Whatever the goal of these states was, they are commonly understood to be states, and the common name for these is communist state. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Looking at solely Google Scholar, "communist state" is far more common than "Marxist-Leninist state." - Amigao (talk) 06:09, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose, Wikipedia article titles should be accessible too, and communist state is much more used. The Account 2 (talk) 08:15, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

  I don't know if this is of any importance but even Baidu Baike uses the term "communist state" (yes I know about Baidu Baike's quality but they tend to be more sensitive on ideological issues). While not used very often, it's not a forbidden word in Chinese state media either. The Account 2 (talk) 08:46, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

• Authoritarian socialist state would be a bit more accurate, although much less commonly used name. I suspect political scientists probably use the term 'communist state' when they're feeling sloppy. I suppose the only thing that might support this change in Wikipedia:Article titles would be that it is more precise.  Tewdar  19:32, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

  "Authoritarian socialist state" would fail to differentiate between a communist state and, for example, African socialist Tanzania or Arab socialist Ba'athist Syria. It would also be highly biased against these states, and at the same biased against totalitarianism and other schools of thought. TheUzbek (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per theUzbek, he has covered all arguments against the proposal. User:Easternsahara 02:11, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. "Communist state" is an established term. Its oxymoronic nature is part of its beauty. Srnec (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Chinese history, WikiProject Anthropology/Oral tradition taskforce, WikiProject Russia, WikiProject Politics, WikiProject Countries, WikiProject China, WikiProject Anthropology, WikiProject Socialism, and WikiProject Soviet Union have been notified of this discussion. Vestrian24Bio 04:04, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

these were already notified, do you mean that it was relisted in these venues? User:Easternsahara 04:06, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

No no, they were just notified again; in case there are other users who may have missed the first one. Vestrian24Bio 04:08, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Vestrian24Bio I responded at WPZH assuming this was an accident, but I'm only now seeing that you sent duplicate notifications on purpose. Please never do this again. It is a waste of everyone's time. Toadspike [Talk] 16:32, 31 December 2025 (UTC)