Why did communism never work?

[Nihilist74]

Seems like most of the countries who try to go with communism are already poor. Russians were starving to death before they became communists and they were starving after the communist party fell. A lot of countries that claim to be communists were not really communists. They were totalitarians. I think European socialism is closer to being a real version of communism than the so called communist countries ever claimed to be. Its against human nature to really be a communist. Humans are greedy, self centered and afraid. That's why it never works. I think the European countries do a better job at coming close to it than anyone else though.

From each his abilities, to each his needs.

[Deleted]

To what extent can we attribute the Soviet Unions demise to bad planning, micromanagement attitudes and having to essentially fight a global conflict with someone dedicated to your annihilation.

The Soviet Union was dealt a very bad hand but when every force on the planet also wants to to collapse and fail, its kind of a struggle to resist that AND carry on with your project.

Thats a complete nonsense.. the Soviet Union turned all its member states into third world crap holes. It was like whats happening in Venezuela now and Eastern Europe is still poor because of it, decades after the collapse.

[khazmodan]

I'm sure it is. I was referring to the mainstream media. Universities can't suppress Marxist discussion for various reasons.

Why would long term government workers ever want to suppress information that rationalizes being a government worker? Consider why you are discussing Marxism and its benefits versus the "necessary evil" that is capitalism, professors are going to teach what benefits them not what benefits independent businesses and economic long term health.

[ControlWarrior]

To what extent can we attribute the Soviet Unions demise to bad planning, micromanagement attitudes and having to essentially fight a global conflict with someone dedicated to your annihilation.

The Soviet Union was dealt a very bad hand but when every force on the planet also wants to to collapse and fail, its kind of a struggle to resist that AND carry on with your project.

You could also say that the United States had an inherient advantage over the USSR because of the way American capitalism was able to mobilize industry during the arms race. Also, the USSR was pretty beat up after WWII. It was more inevitable than people admit.

[Theodarzna]

Thats a complete nonsense.. the Soviet Union turned all its member states into third world crap holes. It was like whats happening in Venezuela now and Eastern Europe is still poor because of it, decades after the collapse.

All of its member states were third world countries or poor countries before the Soviet Union, the Russian Empire wasn't exactly a Radiant Beacon of prosperity.

Eastern Europe was also not exactly stellar before hand, neither was Latin America.

What also seems to be a factor is these States that try to enact the project come from the Third World in the "World System," Which means resource extraction, low pay, serf states.

- - - Updated - - -

You could also say that the United States had an inherient advantage over the USSR because of the way American capitalism was able to mobilize industry during the arms race. Also, the USSR was pretty beat up after WWII. It was more inevitable than people admit.

Absolutely, its relatively amazing the whole thing held together for as long as it did.

[Deleted]

Exponential growth isn't sustainable.

Exponential growth is not needed for capitalism to work.
Small buisnesses like shops are still a thing.
The entire world is not made of America.

[Jotaux]

Communist countries tend to be cut off from the world and trade embargoes are enacted to prevent them from succeeding. They also usually have dictator who is suppose to relinquish power but that never happens. People are also greedy so there is less incentive to work harder or be innovative. Sure there are people who would do things for the good of mankind but you are limiting the pool of people that will do those jobs by removing some of the incentive.

[Deleted]

To what extent can we attribute the Soviet Unions demise to bad planning, micromanagement attitudes and having to essentially fight a global conflict with someone dedicated to your annihilation.

The Soviet Union was dealt a very bad hand but when every force on the planet also wants to to collapse and fail, its kind of a struggle to resist that AND carry on with your project.

It's wise to know when to give up.

[Deleted]

All of its member states were third world countries or poor countries before the Soviet Union, the Russian Empire wasn't exactly a Radiant Beacon of prosperity.

Eastern Europe was also not exactly stellar before hand, neither was Latin America.

What also seems to be a factor is these States that try to enact the project come from the Third World in the "World System," Which means resource extraction, low pay, serf states.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...PP)_per_capita

Again, not true... if you look at this. GDP in Eastern Europe was around the same level as Portugal and Spain after WW2 and in 2003 it was almost 3 times less than those countries.

[khazmodan]

It's very sensible. Very rational. But also incredibly naive and very exploitable.

That said, true communism hasn't existed. If it did, it would span the world today, because that's what communism is. What has existed, are a lot of systems that followed communist ideas, without implementing the most fundamental things that'd make functional communism.

I really recommend reading up on the source material, it's origin. Then check on how history actually unfolded, and you'll see why it didn't work.

It didn't work because communism does not deal with the reality of human nature which is that at best we are a balance of selfish desires and desires to help others. Communism assumes that humans are willing to give up all ambition and property so we can live in some redistribution/welfare state that only rewards the lazy and the ones capable of manipulating the political system for a dwindling supply of food and resources. Communism will NEVER WORK, but maybe it will make this country miserable enough that even the parasites leave...

[Theodarzna]

Exponential growth is not needed for capitalism to work.
Small buisnesses like shops are still a thing.
The entire world is not made of America.

It however does require expansion and growth to exist, leading me to worry about the future. Now that the Soviets are dead, and the world is now global, were will the new markets be? The moonites don't seem to have any interest in the newest iPhone.

[Easo]

These countries don't exist because capitalist countries made major efforts to destroy their systems.

And no, of course you've to be not just uninformed but an actual idiot to believe capitalist countries have full employment and low cost of living for the poor, because that can be checked in ten seconds of googling. Most don't have universal healthcare-even if they did, this is generally considered a socialist policy.

Ahhh, the bad, evil West. Great USSR fell just because of them, right? I do wonder though, how such a good system couldn't withstand the capitalist influence... xD
What's with you and full employment?Guess what, it is official policy for Australia and US. Capitalist countries... Austria is one of the countries, where it is actually working. Japan too.
And low cost of living? Is that a standard now? How do you even define it?
P.S.
Socialism =/= communism. Universal healthcare is not communism only.

All of its member states were third world countries or poor countries before the Soviet Union, the Russian Empire wasn't exactly a Radiant Beacon of prosperity.

Not exactly. Baltics, for example, were doing quite well. Though then again they were in one of the most developed parts of Russian Empire before independence - the closer to West, the better roads, more industry, etc.

[Theodarzna]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...PP)_per_capita

Again, not true... if you look at this. GDP in Eastern Europe was around the same level as Portugal and Spain after WW2 and in 2003 it was almost 3 times less than those countries.

..... I am guessing WW2 and the subsequent loot and plunder had zero to do with it.

I was not exactly arguing these places were paradise. My main point initially was the Communism had the problem of being a project with no clear guidebook, leaving Communist states to sort of fly by the seat of their pants when it came to organising a socialist state. None of them really knew much of what to do so it became guessing and often just whatever ideas the current strongman thought were good.

I guess that could be another bullet point on my initial post.

[Deleted]

Stop arguing for the sake of arguing for fuck sake, whats your problem?

You dont need incentive to do good, or to innovate, many people who have innovated and improved us as a species havent been rich. And people that help other people every single day, every second, dont tend to gain from it.

Thats blatantly false. Everything you use and see around you is there because someone thought they could profit from it.

People who help others (a very small minority, mind you) only do it because they can and it makes them feel good about themselves. If it was mandatory to help others, most people wouldnt.. or would try to get out of it.

[khazmodan]

The communist party of China is still around and that works pretty well for China. So to speak.

Though China has had a far less of true communist economy for some time. Probably since I was a kid- and I am fairly old.

i guess you havent seen the hundreds of stories on chinese products with toxins in them or the hundreds of thousands of baby girls that were killed to make sure the family name goes on or the pollution that is killing 350 to 400 thousand people every year. Yea that communism is doing great over there...

[Aquinan]

There are no wages in Communism. Not even money.

No but they get "paid" in some way, food, shelter, etc.

[Deleted]

..... I am guessing WW2 and the subsequent loot and plunder had zero to do with it.

I was not exactly arguing these places were paradise. My main point initially was the Communism had the problem of being a project with no clear guidebook, leaving Communist states to sort of fly by the seat of their pants when it came to organising a socialist state. None of them really knew much of what to do so it became guessing and often just whatever ideas the current strongman thought were good.

I guess that could be another bullet point on my initial post.

Well the real problem with communism and the Soviet Union was that the proletariat rose up and killed the elites. The thinkers, entrepreneurs, business owners, nobles etc. and robbed them blind. After that, there was no one left to produce value so naturally they ran out and starved. This is where the stereotype soviet vodka chugging incompetent stupid worker stereotype comes from.

Then, after WW2, they annexed a bunch of other countries and robbed them too. However in the long run, it was completely unsustainable and was bound to collapse sooner or later as the few successful people the society produced just fleed to the west.

[Theodarzna]

Not exactly. Baltics, for example, were doing quite well. Though then again they were in one of the most developed parts of Russian Empire before independence - the closer to West, the better roads, more industry, etc.

Russia was probably a better example, thought the Russian economy suffered brutally under WW1 and a lot of very bad luck prior to 1917. Plus the Tsarist regime was increasingly horrendous at the very end. Russia was a powder keg waiting to go. Though had a previous Tzar not been assassinated the country might have taken a different route altogether and we might have avoided the whole Cold War and the horrible tragedies that came out of the real world attempts at Communism.

If I had a time machine I actually wouldn't go back and kill Hitler, I'd have stopped the bomb that killed Alexander II and avoid the entirety of 1917 and the horrors that followed.

[Fencers]

Yea that communism is doing great over there...

It is. The OP doesn't exactly specify the criteria for communism 'working'. But depending on defining criteria, China works. The communist government is in power, it's economy is relatively strong, infrastructure exists, investment is strong and the nation is a global power.

If the criteria is to be entirely subject to the personal morals of Bob or Joe- whatever. That topic is unworthy of discussion.

[IIamaKing]

Because people are shitty, greedy and self interested.