Criticisms of Communism...?

Question

~ Why has communism never been attained by any country?

~Why do you think nations experiementing with communist governments have to be so repressive (no migration, censorship) to have their ideology accepted?

~ Can communism exist without authoritarianism, or is it a flaw built into the theory?

~What are the three greatest strengths of communist ideology?

Answer 1

Communism is an economic system that has been 'attained', as you put it, by several different countries.

Currently Cuba, Vietnam, N.Korea, China, and Laos function with and maintain communist economies.

Answer 2

Communism has never been attained and maintained by any country for an extended period of time as they have made the same mistake that Capitalist countries are also making...THAT MORALITY CAN NOT BE LEGISLATED BY FORCE!

Nations experimenting with communist governments have to be so repressive to have their ideology accepted for exactly the same reasons that nations experimenting with unbridled capitalism have to be so repressive and allow no migration and enforce high censorship to have their ideology accepted. For either extreme thinking to be successful, half the truth must be suppressed as there is another side to each and every political coin.

Communism and capitalism alike can not exist without authoritarianism and it is a very obvious flaw in both theories...see number one concerning the forceful legislation of morality.

Three strengths of communism are all people are educated, provided with health care and there is no homelessness.

Three strengths of capitalism is that science and art are free to develope and enlarge, people are allowed to keep their earnings and rewards from hard work and private enterprise is responsible for the success of business and results in better roads, services and products.

The weakness of each are the strengths of the other. Capitalism has a homelessness problem, health care problem and an educational problem.

Communism has a low motivation to work by its lack of reward for the worker, government has control of roads, services and products and are seriously below standards and inventions in science and art are limited by government controls.

Doesn't it seem like a good thing to have a little of each and not too much of any extreme?

Answer 3

I think communism came way before it should have. Communism appeared at a time when human beings were at the peak of the competition for the world's resources. Communism advocates equal wealth distrubution among all the people of the world and that is an impossible task to achieve in todays world. Recent Communist governments corrupted the principals of Communism by creating oligarchies and became drunk with power and also became breeding grounds for some of histories most despotic dictators. I think Communism as we know it is basically dead, but do not be fooled when the world gets ready for true Communistic ideologies say in the future when the our earth will have not any borders that divide countries, and world population has stabilized, and the natural state of the earth has been altered because of poor environmental policies by nations today, then a new form of Communism will emerge and people will embrace it and live by it's principals for a very long time.

Three basic principals that I personally think sound romantic but I know will never work are:

I. The abolishment of private property.

II. The comparison of the proletarians to worse than slave like status in society.

III. Universal free education and medical coverage for all.

Answer 4

Communism, with it's middle state being Socialism, tends to push two overriding beliefs:

1. Profit is bad, so the best way to be fair is to make everyone make the same amount of "money". Generally, this has led to everyone being poor. The next time you hear a politician saying they want to "Punish the rich" realize that they are pushing the same belief, and it leads poverty for all.

2. The Government is the all powerful ruler of the little people. While communists/socialists say they want everyone to be equal, they feel that only they (the Bureaucrats) have the knowledge to make Communism work. So the few people who might be considered rich in a communism are these people-- the others starve. Just look at Fidel Castro, he is one of the few rich people in cuba. HIs people starve and try to flee to the US for our system (freedom/capitalism).

Authoritarianism is needed to keep a communism from being fleeting. You will see most as oppressive, and the largest killer of people the world has ever known IS communism. Stalin killed millions more than HItler could even ever dream of. They build walls to keep the people in for this reason.

Ronald Reagan, the man credited for pushing Communism over the edge, once said that Communism only exists in heaven, where they don't need it, or in Hell, where they already have it.

As for the strengths of communism, there are none, since it cannot be maintained for any period of time without subjugating the the people into a form of slavery to the state, and this is not the normal state of mankind.

Answer 5

Communism has and always will fail to recognize two human traits.

Humans are Greedy and Ambitious. When you try to stir that into a pot with this "from all according to their abilities and to all according to their needs" you are bound to have problems.

There is simply no incentive to do anything better than anyone else. All will be rewarded equally regardless of whether they lay around and play video games or develop a cure for cancer.

This isn't a real answer to the question you asked, but I think it is the information you are really seeking.

Answer 6

- it is against human nature to give up possession of any type and live only for the common good. Everyone wants to get some benefit from their work.
-No nation has ever truly experimented with communism - only leadership has imposed their ideas on the population, creating an elite that lives well, and the rest who live as communists
- communism is supposed to due away with any form of government other than what is necessary to regulate the common affairs of state. See answer above, - the theory is imposed to maintain the power of the few over the rest.
- you got me on the last one, unless of course you are confusing social or socialist ideals with communism. One is not the other, though much of western political thought tends to equate the two. Socialism is nearly biblical - I am my brother's keeper and am responsible for his welfare; by working for myself, I am working for the common good; equality under the law rather than by the amount of money or possessions we have accumulated.

Answer 7

Communism works in small communities only, where compliance and virtue of individuals is known by all. But cooperative, rather than competitive systems cannot be scaled.


Congestion is the biggest issue with low oil prices:
IT RISKS THE LOSS OF FOREIGN SCIENTISTS WHO LARGELY POWER U.S. RESEARCH EFFORTS AS THEIR HOME COUNTRIES ALL HAVE EXCELLENT TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE. The only viable solution is a highway-overpass-compatible PRT system called Hallitubes.

Answer 8

communism doesn't have any strengths as far as i know.

and please, communism has been tried over and over and over. it ALWAYS FAILS. maybe it would work if you changed human nature, but barring that, it ain't gonna work ever. so i don't see how you can say it has never been achieved. USSR was communist, to their undoing. so is Cuba. North Korea. (whose leaders have plenty of dough, and they're the ONLY ONES who do.) that's just recently.

Answer 9

~ Why has communism never been attained by any country?
* No Communist country existed so far.
In Marxist theory, the state is the repressive tool of the capitalist system, and when the people share all the wealth, the state is needed to be abolished.
The so called "Communist states" (former USSR, Vietnam,and others) are in fact the exact opposite of the Communist society.
Capitalism is stronger than ever in these countries, because this is state-capitalism, the power of the state, of the repressive machine (as Marx described the state).
In these countries, a few group of opportunists take advantage of the Communist ideology, and control the people, at their own interest.
This small group of people (the biggest capitalists) are called The "Nomenklatura" acting in the name of the working class.
Milovan Djilas (a true Yogoslavian Communist jailed by Tito) wrote of the nomenklatura as the new class in his book New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System.
"...And that it was widely seen (and resented) by ordinary citizens as a bureaucratic élite that enjoyed special privileges and had simply supplanted the earlier wealthy capitalist élites."-Wikipedia
As I sad, this is wild capitalism, and NOT COMMUNISM, because Communism has no classes (like now : lower,middle, upper).
When these anti-Communist regimes claiming to be Communist become brutal and opressive, it is Stalinism.
These states claim to be "Marxist-Leninist" states.This is a fake term created by Stalin to make a justification for his murders.
"Stalinism is the political and economic system named after Joseph Stalin, who implemented it in the Soviet Union. It includes an extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around an absolute dictator, extensive use of the secret police to maintain social submission."-Wikipedia.
Stalinism is clear anti-Communism, and I don't want to waste time the real Communist heroes detained by Stalinist regimes including my grandfather.For example, when a few French communists immigrated to the USSR hoping to find a real workers paradise (when Stalin was the dictator), they were killed, because they could saw that this is capitalism, and not Communism. The exploitation of men by men.
So in these countries the Nomenklatura is the rulling class , and in Communist theory they are no classes.
Cuba - state-capitalism.
China - pure capitalism.
Vietnam - state-capitalism.
North Korea - Stalinism and Juche (extreme right nationalist ideology created by Kim Jong-Il.).

The term "Communist state" is a product of corporate media, discrediting the word "Communist".
This term is TOTALLY INCORRECT, because Communism is a society without any state and without any class.

~Why do you think nations experimenting with communist governments have to be so repressive (no migration, censorship) to have their ideology accepted?

Because the Nomenklatura (rulling class) is fearing of the people which know that what they do is neither socialism, or Communism.
Their ideology is Stalinism.
And I have to add that Stalin was national-socialist (nazi) in fact.
In a December 1, 1952 Politburo session, Stalin announced: "Every Jewish nationalist is a potential agent of the American intelligence. Jewish nationalists think that their nation was saved by the USA."
More on Stalin's antisemitism:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin%27s_antisemitism

~ Can communism exist without authoritarianism, or is it a flaw built into the theory?

"Democracy, is the road to socialism." - Karl Marx.

"Freedom only for the members of the government, only for the members of the Party — though they are quite numerous — is no freedom at all. FREEDOM IS ALWAYS THE FREEDOM OF DISSENTERS. The essence of political freedom depends not on the fanatics of "justice", but rather on all the invigorating, beneficial, and detergent effects of dissenters. If "freedom" becomes "privilege", the workings of political freedom are broken."
-Rosa Luxemburg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Luxemburg

Yes.Communism is not authoritarian in theory, but Stalinism is
(or Marxism-Leninism).
Marx wanted a transition (socialism is the transition to the Communist society) to Communism that would be "the dictatorship of the proletariat", but Communism it can be only democratic.
Dictatorship of the proletariat refers to workers power (workers Democracy), not to single-party dictatorship.
When Marx lived, the multi-party democracy was a real dictatorship, because only male rich people could vote (and where only a few republics that time).
It is very important to mention that Communism is hardly anti-monarchic (Communists are always against a king or a quenn).

In 1918 in Hungary, when Communists were in power for only 1 year (after the Austro-Hungarian empire collapsed), workers were elected DEMOCRATIC WAY to the council (kind of parliament).
That was the "Council Republic" and it was defeated after Romanian army entered Budapest. This was true democracy.More democracy than in USA , because in USA that time womens could note vote.In the Council Republic, ALL THE ADULT POPULATION COULD VOTE, INCLUDING WOMEN!!! An extremly rare thing that time.I would also like to say that Communists always wanted to liberate womens.

Communism was easy to be betrayed for the Nomenklatura, because of the Lenin's theory in the book "What is to be done?".
He wanted only 1 big revolutionary party in the transition to Communism (socialism).
This was speculeted by Stalin to develop a dictatorship, and than extending the dictatorship to other East-European countries.
Lenin's theory about the revolutionary party was not completly democratic, but rejected personal dictatorship (Party democracy).
No East-European country respected this, and every party was controlled by the nomenklatura in fact (without fair elections in party).
Lenin also wanted that the country to be controlled by soviets (councils) in socialism, AND NOT THE PARTY.
Rosa Luxemburg had condemned the revolutionary party theory developed by Lenin, saying correctly, that this would produce a dictatorship and not a democracy (even in Leninist sense).

While Lenin lived, the country was controlled by soviets (councils), and not the party.
After Lenin died, Stalin toked the control, invented Marxism-Leninism, made a new constitution transfering the power TO THE PARTY, and took control of the party (this was the end of internal party democracy).
Than in USSR there was Stalinism and not socialism.
Stalin killed millions of people, including many Communists.
The leader of Hungarian council republic (Kun Bela) was killed also by Stalin.
And he killed his rival Trotsky too, paying a professional killer to kill him in Mexico (he was in exile).
Trotsky said in his book "Revolution Betrayed" that USSR is a "degenerated workers state", and publicly blamed Stalin and the USSR, and said that USSR is not socialist.
From a text of the fourth international (Trotsky's international organization):

"The Soviet state of that period was held to be a workers' state because the bourgeoisie had been politically overthrown and the economic basis of that state lay in nationalized property. The Soviet state was degenerated because the working class was politically dispossessed. The ruling stratum of the Soviet Union was held to be a bureaucratic caste, and not a new ruling class, despite their political control. The theory that the Soviet Union was a degenerated workers' state is closely connected to Trotsky's call for a political revolution in the USSR, as well as Trotsky's call for defense of the USSR against capitalist restoration."

"The term "degenerated workers' state" is commonly used to refer only to the Soviet Union. The term deformed workers' state was coined by the Fourth International to describe states other than the Soviet Union which are or were based upon nationalized property, but in which the working class never held direct political power."-Wikipedia.

More about Trotsky : http://en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Trotsky .

Lenin send a letter to the party which said Stalin is a criminal and he can not be putted in charge.The letter was censored by the orders of Stalin.
After this, a lot of non-Socialist "Communist states" appeared, which were all dictatorships, in every sense (Marxist and Leninist too).
Examples are : Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Cuba, and others.

These states never wanted Communism, but they talk always about the "Road to Communism".
China is having a 70% private economy and it is not socialist.

There was also an anti-Stalinist revolution in Hungary led by the Communist Imre Nagy in 1956(a socialist revolution, but Hungarian right don't recognize that).

There was a democraticly elected Marxist leader of Chile, but who was removed by an US led coop.He's name was Salvador Allende.
For more information : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende .


I think that your definition of democracy is the multi-party democracy.
But there are forms of socialism and Communism compatible whit this too.

Whit Communism :
Eurocommunism.
A theory of Western European Communists developed in 1970's to distance their parties from USSR type dictatorships and theories (Stalinism).
These include:
* Non-revolutionary transformation of the society (to a Communist society)
* Multi-party free elections
* feminism
* Gay and lesbian liberation (Marx was anti-gay)
* free press, freedom of speech, AND ALL NON-ECONOMIC INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS.
* and other things existing in a liberal society but not regarding economic things.

Today there are many Eurocommunist parties, which include: The Communist Refoundation Party (Italy), Party of Italian Communists, French Communist Party (PCF), and many others.
But if you see a party describing itself as Marxist-Leninist, you have to know that is a anti-democratic Stalinist party (for example the Communist Party of the Russian Federation).

For more information about Eurocommunism please go to :
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/it/eurocommunism.htm

And about Marxism in general, to www.marxists.org .

For socialism:

-- Democratic socialism:

Very similar to Eurocommunism, but trying to achieve only a socialist society, and not a Communist society.
Many Eurocommunist parties describe itselfs Democratic Socialists, because most people think Communism is a dictatorial theory, an example is Party Of Democratic Socialism from Germany, which is Eurocommunist in fact, but wishes to not irritate the former East-Germany population whit the term "Communist".

For more information about Democratic socialism : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Socialism .


~What are the three greatest strengths of communist ideology?

* freedom from capitalist exploitation
* No classes
* No poverty, the same wealth for everybody.
* Workers power
* No imperialism (exploitation of a nation by another, creating colonies, for example India, where people worked for the British people for no money).
* Women liberation, non-discrimination of women.
* The republic, anti-monarhism
* Anti-clericalism, anti-religion, but respecting the religious freedom.
* Separation of State and Church.
* Many other things for more info go to www.marxists.org.

I hope you understood this.
ekbalazs222.

P.S: (later edit):
To those who say USSR was socialist:
“the earnings of the highest paid Soviet worker were more than 28.3 times the earnings of the lowest paid worker at that time.”
( http://www.marxists.org/archive/shachtma/1950/03/russia.htm
-that was the equal distribution of wealth in the USSR....