From a historical point of view, communism isn’t a doctrine belonging to modern society. In fact, Karl Marx described the concept of primitive communism when he discussed hunter-gatherer societies. The idea of a society founded on social egalitarianism can be traced back to Ancient Greece and later to the Christian Church, which further reinforced the concept of shared property.
Modern communism, as we’ve come to know it, was born in 19th century Russia, when Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels further refined the meaning of the word and wrote the ideological body of communism in a pamphlet entitled The Communist Manifesto.
The story, which would shape modern history, began in 1917 when Lenin and the Bolshevik Party rose to power after seizing the window of opportunity created by the October Revolution.
From that moment, Russia ceased to be a monarchy and became a country that mirrored the ideology of Marx, Engels, and Lenin. Although communism is not limited to Europe, the grasp and the struggle for dominance felt stronger than ever on this continent, as the Soviet bloc strived to gain the upper-hand in the fight against Democracy.
In 1991, the Soviet Union disbanded, and the country constituted itself as a semi-presidential republic, where the president is considered the head of state. Currently, the Russian Federation is a democratic state represented by multiple parties.
Here are the ten plausible reasons that led to the disbandment of the Soviet Union and, subsequently, to the downfall of the communist doctrine in Europe.
By default, a communist country, such as the Soviet Union, valued utilitarianism above everything else. This meant that every action performed within the state had to have a palpable ending. Artistical endeavors such as poetry, sculpture, and painting, were not considered a good means of making a living.
Moreover, even the artistical drive was measured and controlled by a censorship committee, whose job was to determine if the work of an artist can actually serve the country or not. The arts usually entail a free way of thinking, something that did not go well with the Party.
The only creations published after passing the censorship committee were those that hailed the accomplishments of the Communist Party or those that encouraged others to believe in ideological utopias such as the class struggle or the supremacy of communism over capitalism.
Artists and thinkers alike who did not conform to the Party’s view were often persecuted and even faced charges of high treason.
Collectivization is another way of saying that private farming was not allowed. The force collectivization law was a doctrine enforced through Soviet Russia between 1928 and 1940, which coincided with Stalin’s rise to power.
With the industry taking off, the country needed food to support the ever-increasing mass of factory workers. At the beginning of 1930, more than 90 percent of the farms were conscripted in the collectivization program, which meant that all the items produced on a farm will be equally distributed among the population.
In other words, collectivization was another way of denying the right to private property, a doctrine which was adopted in the hope of optimizing the food production industry.
Naturally, the doctrine has been refuted by many farm owners who criticized the party views. Unfortunately, Stalin and the communist regime eliminated all those who opposed forced collectivization.
Similar actions were taken by other communist leaders, who wanted to demonstrate the Party was the bearer of truth.
In communism, individualism makes room for the collective. Ideals like freedom of speech were considered dangerous to the Communist party. The forced collectivization act and the lack of artistic freedom are just two examples of how communism chose to circumvent some of the fundamental human rights.
Of course, all civil rights were negated in the hope of establishing a society that functioned like a Swiss clock, without any deviation and to create a man that worked without questioning his role or place.
One of the main reasons why communist ideology ceased to exist is because it was not able to adapt to outside conditions. Certain forms of communism, like the one practiced in China, managed to survive this long because it was able to react to outside stimuli such as the global economy and social changes.
On the other hand, the Soviet Union faced the idea of dissolution from the moment it decided to close its eyes to what happens beyond its borders.
Innovation is one of the most important aspects that offers cohesion to society. Without change, society will fall prey to archaic practices. As a closed society, the Soviet Union focused more on production than actual innovation, an action that led to its early demise.
The economy dictates that the price of a product is formed when the offer meets demand. Also, there are other financial mechanisms used to determine prices and to regulate competitiveness on the global market.
On the other hand, the communist doctrine thought that the only way of distributing wealth was to form a so-called command economy, an organism that would determine how the resources should be spent.
Naturally, this type of economy will substantially increase the disparity between those who were in charge and the layman.
There are countless aspects which pointed out that this flawed system impeded the Soviet Union to manage its resources.
From the rise of the Khmer Rouge group in Cambodia to Stalin’s rise to power, the history of communism is riddled with tales of atrocities committed against those who did not embrace the communist doctrine.
Famine, mass executions, overwork, are tools of the trade which shaped the communism blood-thirsty demeanor.
In the end, the society envisioned by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and others is just a utopia, making communism the grandest and most dramatic social experiment ever performed by humankind. From the lack of rights to obsessive control, communism was like a time bomb ready to explode at any moment.
The communist society founded on equality states that regarding remuneration, a factory worker earns as much as a neurosurgeon. Furthermore, people performing tougher jobs life working in the ER or handling a nuclear reactor did not receive incentives for their work, because that would anger the ordinary worker.
Without incentives, people performing tougher jobs will not be motivated enough to work better or to innovate.
Like any despotical regime, communism was founded on tyranny, which entails the use of terror and fear as tools to control the crowd. History has proven on many occasions that every society based on oppression has rebelled against the regime.
What is your opinion on this? Why did communism fail, according to you? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below!
Images via WikiMedia.org
View Comments
A workman and a neurosurgeon getting same salary?These kind of examples are still seen in daily life.The unskilled moron getting a fat salary.Then ask the factory worker to become a neurosurgeon or an astronaut or a nuclear engineer and get their salary.It would be a lot better to tell the workman to stay at home and give him the salary.Their ideology has been very violent towards their critics.Stalin,Khmer Rouge are just as bad as Hitler but only Hitler is considered to be the bad man in this world.China treats its labor force like slaves and pays them paltry salary and thats why their goods are so cheap and substandard and full of toxic chemicals that can damage your brain.But the Bolshevik revolution as such must have been an appropriate response against the Czars and other Feudal kings who were just as bad as Stalin or Khmer Rouge.
But Glasnost and Perestroika must have changed the old communist ideology which Gorbachev introduced.Is it true?Today's corporate communists are no better than capitalists.Only their flag is red now but for all other practical purpose they want to be like capitalist and live like them.
Nowadays you can see farmers who are multi millionaires.
communism is good thing, it is just human are sin, we dont deserve it.
this is complete negation of nature... if communism is good and functional, it would respect natural laws. it doesnt, what is extremely stupid.
Is it not possible to redefine or modify communism to make it perform better than capitalism. I think THE CURRENT COMMUNIST STATES SHOULD TEACH ADVANCED COMMUNISM that marries all the benefits of socialism and the best of capitalism
That's called... a town. Or a family. In a family, you are expected to do favors for your siblings to get along, but it would be widely regarded as dysfunctional if you did nothing but share everything you earned. Likewise, in a town, you pay state and local expenses as well as socializing with other people, but also earn a living.
The whole question is a logical fallacy. You can't point to a limited number of diverse occurences of a complex system and say that the whole group and every future one is simply a success or a failure.
On top of that, as a world, we haven't made a communism that actually looks like communism.
There are plenty of capitalist countries that are dismal in economic, environmental and human rights.
There is also no capitalist country that is self sufficeintly successful without costs paid externally. The US "successes" particularly economic and environmental ones are off the backs of other peoples and countries around the world. The US's economic and environmental outlook would be dramatically different if it weren't able to exploit labor from China, India, or resources from the middle east. All at grave and ugly costs to the providing lands and people. Our success locally is at the very least, at the expense of lifestyles that can't be considered "successful" globally.
Also capitalism by nature of ever increasing consumption in a world with finite resources will not continue indefinitely. We are looking at catastrophic environmental and economic problems in the very near future. The US is already experiencing shrinking middle class, increasing poor, waning infrastructure and diminishing lifespans. All attributable to the ever increasing inequitable wealth distribution. As the wealth conglomerates to ever increasing billionaires and rich corporations it is not making it back to the society that generates it. Capitalism in its current form is failing by many marks.
If you want to give the question why did communism fail any credence; the overwhelming reason that shouldn't be ignored is the direct and fervent efforts of the west particularly the US to thwart every attempt of people who work against capitalism. What would happen if instead of the US arming aggressive coups and economic sanctions against every notable socialist or communist assembly they just stood back and let it happened? What would happen if the US not only just stood back but actually participated in helping communist assemblies?
"It would work if it had help" is a terrible argument. One of the tenants of Marxism is a supposed moral superiority over and blatant disregard for capitalism and capitalist help. It shows weakness to the system and you cannot have that. Ideologies must be swallowed thoroughly to be effective. There is no room for practicality in Marxism.
I didn't say it needed help. It needs to not be intentionally thwarted at every turn. For the record, I'm not in favor of communism or socialism as we've seen with USSR, China or DPRK. When people object to those examples I agree. I adamantly oppose authoritarianism. Whether from the left or the right. However everything people who fear communism attribute to them is alive and well with today's capitalism. Capitalism is quite non democratic. The US is anything but a democracy. It's a full blown oligarchy that is intent on delivering profit to those in control at the expense of the masses, the environment and other nations. All the poverty and darkness of capitalism is mostly kept offshore but it is responsible for disgusting cruelty and poverty around the world. To say capitalism is successful is only possible when you point to a limited target and ignore a whole lot of war, poverty and environmental destruction. Just because it's not in your back yard doesn't mean it isn't there. When you take scale and time into account, for only having 5% of the world's population the US is one of the most violent and destructive nations that has ever existed.