"Communism doesn't work"

[Bombay]

I'm not sure If I even should defend the so called "communism" of Soviet Union or eastern Europe.
Capitalists always say "communism doesn't work". Theres an easy respond to that, I know. Because it hasn't really existed.
But how do you defend the state socialism of eastern european countries? Chomsky has said that eastern and western Europe hasn't been
at the same level economically for 400 or 500 years so it's not a fair comparison. Is this really true? He also said it's more fair to compare
for exaple Bulgaria an Brazil. In that case it makes sense.

But what about comparing East and west Germany? I believe it was equal in every way before socialism of East Germany. But as we all know West Germany had better standards of living. Does that prove market economics work better?

I consider myself an anarchist so I'm not a big "fan" of USSR and so on, but I always like prove the capitalist wrong whenever I can.
And If there is other ways to respond to capitalists whenever they claim "communism doesn't work" let me know.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I'm not sure If I even should defend the so called "communism" of Soviet Union or eastern Europe.
Capitalists always say "communism doesn't work". Theres an easy respond to that, I know. Because it hasn't really existed.


"Socialism/communism" doesn't work is a simple statement that doesn't mean anything. The only reason "capitalism" works is because it does what it it supposed to do - creates and shifts capital.


But how do you defend the state socialism of eastern european countries? Chomsky has said that eastern and western Europe hasn't been
at the same level economically for 400 or 500 years so it's not a fair comparison. Is this really true? He also said it's more fair to compare
for exaple Bulgaria an Brazil. In that case it makes sense.

Eastern Europe has indeed been left in the wake behind the industrial revolution and subsequent mutations of initial industrial capitalism, but there were great improvements in many regards still clinging on well into the era of state-capitalism of the 1970's. Though some of the countries have unfortunately regressed quite a bit since the close of the 1980's, many would not be where they are today without the contributions of the era. Bulgaria's planned economy in particular also lacked some of the severe shortages that plagued for example Poland.


But what about comparing East and west Germany? I believe it was equal in every way before socialism of East Germany. But as we all know West Germany had better standards of living. Does that prove market economics work better?

Does market economics work better? West Germany were given large amounts of support in various ways from the U.S. and so on, which significantly bolstered the economy. This in turn allowed a subsidized extensive welfare state - similar to what is still a matter of fact in Israel today - which was necessary to promote the triumph over socialism in East Germany. Despite this of course, East Germany, with limited support from the Soviet Union, were the most economically successful - in terms of living standards and consumption goods - of all of the eastern bloc.

[Bombay]

Thank you! I'm satisfied with your answer:)

[bie]

Concerning economic development in 1929-1938, as % of industral output comparing to 1929 (100%):
1) France - 112%
2) Germany - 125%
3) USA - 72%
4) UK - 112%
5) USSR - 477%
(source: Chomsky)

Who is telling that the centrally planned economy doesn't work? :)

[Catillina]

Concerning economic development in 1929-1938, as % of industral output comparing to 1929 (100%):
1) France - 112%
2) Germany - 125%
3) USA - 72%
4) UK - 112%
5) USSR - 477%
(source: Chomsky)

Who is telling that the centrally planned economy doesn't work? :)

Could you give me the link please? Is it an article, or what exactly? I would be interested to read the artice if so

[JazzRemington]

Concerning economic development in 1929-1938, as % of industral output comparing to 1929 (100%):
1) France - 112%
2) Germany - 125%
3) USA - 72%
4) UK - 112%
5) USSR - 477%
(source: Chomsky)

Who is telling that the centrally planned economy doesn't work? :)

To be fair, I think the reason why the industrial output of the USSR was so high was because it was developing industrially. Plus, I wonder what types of industries were counted and how much they contributed to the percentage.


I'm not sure If I even should defend the so called "communism" of Soviet Union or eastern Europe.
Capitalists always say "communism doesn't work". Theres an easy respond to that, I know. Because it hasn't really existed.

Well, when people say "communism doesn't work" that's usually an opinion, and not so much an argument. A valid counter argument would be just to say that it does work. They didn't offer any evidence as to why it doesn't work, so why would you have to offer any evidence that it does?

[Bombay]

Well, when people say "communism doesn't work" that's usually an opinion, and not so much an argument. A valid counter argument would be just to say that it does work. They didn't offer any evidence as to why it doesn't work, so why would you have to offer any evidence that it does?

I agree with you 100%. But after you say it does work "they" will compare USSR with USA and eastern Europe with western Europe. But now I think that problem is solved.

[bailey_187]

But what about comparing East and west Germany? I believe it was equal in every way before socialism of East Germany. But as we all know West Germany had better standards of living. Does that prove market economics work better?


East Germany had less people, less land and poorer resources.

Some recent West German government estimates put the amount the USSR extratced in reperations and other payments to be a figure over 100 billion marks (Merkel, W. And S. Wahl. Das gesluenderte Deutschland. IWG: Bonn 1991). Had this been invested in the East German Economy, with East Germany's average 18% rate of return on investments(Naumann, G. and E. Truempler. Von Ulbricht zu Honecker. Dietz: Berlin 1990) ,it would have compounded to give East Germans a per-capita income 15 times the level of West Germans (A. Murphy - The Triumph of Evil. European Academic Publishing (2000).
So the East German system, although unable to create living standards on par with West Germany's, did more with less.

Also, in the 1970s (according to Jonathen Steele's Socialism with a German Face) East Germany had a per capita income higher than Britains.

There are also numerous polls conducted in the area of Germany that was the East German state in which people say they "prefered" "had good memories of" "viewed favourably" etc, East Germany.

[The Ben G]

I have had people tell me that multiple times. Its crap. It has worked in the past and it sure will work in the future. (have people thought that just because it failed in the east, doesn't have to work on a huge scale?)

[Invincible Summer]

To be a dick about semantics, communism - as a stateless, classless society - never existed so it is impossible to say that it "doesn't work."

What's more, what is the definition of something "working?" Someone who makes the argument that "communism doesn't work" obviously comes from a pro-capitalist or at least pro-social democrat bakground, and obviously they don't (and due to their political views, "can't" ) say that "communism works." It undermines what they believe. So their definition of "working" is different from someone who is pro-communist.

Basically it's wholly subjective and not even an argument.

[ArrowLance]

When speaking of East Germany it is also important to say that many professionals and much of the intellectuals (i've read reports saying up to 70%) left the East due to western propaganda and genuinely better perspectives.

[bailey_187]

When speaking of East Germany it is also important to say that many professionals and much of the intellectuals (i've read reports saying up to 70%) left the East due to western propaganda and genuinely better perspectives.

Indeed.


"In particular, the west German government provided working age east germans who moved to the west germany with significant amounts of money and other benefits in order to emigrate to West Germany. For instance, free loans and other state assitance of up to 160,000 West German marks (about $100,000) were offered to each East german emigrant worker, along with a scarce apartment and reimbursment for any property that they left behind in East Germany" - Austin Murphy - The Triumph of Evil (European Academic Press; 2000) pg124

[Kléber]

All the capitalist "success stories" - West Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan - are on the periphery of the Soviet bloc. You don't see capitalism outperforming socialism in Africa. This is not a coincidence, it's because the US bourgeoisie deliberately pumped its superprofits into US satellites encircling the Soviet bloc during the Cold War.

[CartCollector]

Let's take a time warp back to 1795 or so:

Yeah, well, democracy doesn't work. Look at what happened in Greece and then Rome. It's failed every time it's been tried. Do you want our country to lose power and become a fallen empire too? The crazy radicals in America and France are just going to destroy themselves with a system that puts power into the hands of idiots, instead of a great and noble king.

[Scary Monster]

Tell "them" to take a look at cuba. Its the most prosperous latin country, thanks to the cuban revolution. No starvation, unheard-of homelessness, no child malnutrition. Compare this to other latin, capitalist, US-backed countries. Their people are starving, being killed and tortured by corporations (look at coca cola and colombia), etc. Of course, cuba cant be compared to the US or UK, since they are prospering only because of centuries of economic pillage of the third world.

[Barry Lyndon]

Another great counter-example is the province of Kerala in India, populated by 30 million people. There, the average life expectancy is 10 years higher then in the rest of country(73 as opposed to 63 years), it has 97% literacy as opposed to 61% in the rest of the country, the infant mortality rate is less then a third of what it is elsewhere in India and they have all but abolished the repressive caste system, and women are as well educated as men as well as active in local politics, a rarity on the Indian subcontinent. What's the difference? Kerala has been politically dominated by Communists since the 1960's, who have organized through grassroots women's organizations and labor unions, and are regularly returned to power through elections.
This is a remarkable example because it is within the boundaries of the same country.

[bie]

Could you give me the link please? Is it an article, or what exactly? I would be interested to read the artice if so
I have eventually found the primary source of this information. It is Report on the Work of the Central Committee to the Eighteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.), Delivered March 10, 1939.

from: http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1939/03/10.htm

[Red Saxon]

Concerning economic development in 1929-1938, as % of industral output comparing to 1929 (100%):
1) France - 112%
2) Germany - 125%
3) USA - 72%
4) UK - 112%
5) USSR - 477%
(source: Chomsky)

Who is telling that the centrally planned economy doesn't work? :)The Ukrainians who were killed to make that possible? :confused:

[AK]

To be a dick about semantics, communism - as a stateless, classless society - never existed so it is impossible to say that it "doesn't work."

What's more, what is the definition of something "working?" Someone who makes the argument that "communism doesn't work" obviously comes from a pro-capitalist or at least pro-social democrat bakground, and obviously they don't (and due to their political views, "can't" ) say that "communism works." It undermines what they believe. So their definition of "working" is different from someone who is pro-communist.

Basically it's wholly subjective and not even an argument.
True that. Unfortunately, to the half-wit capitalist you will be debating with, it will sound like you're avoiding any argumement and it's even more proof that "communism doesn't work".

[RadioRaheem84]

Chomsky once made the argument that it was foolish to respond to people saying that communism, socialism cannot work. They usually compare the United States or a European country, mind you nations that had the advantage of developing through centuries of exploitation, colonization and trade, with poor nations or the ones in the Second World (the Soviet Bloc). Well, look at the USSR and where it came from; a pretty poor agrarian society, i.e. the last feudal outpost of Europe under the Czar. In a little under 20-25 years, they went from that to an industrial power house (that nearly single handily defeated the Fascist powers) second only to the US. This is what marveled the entire world. This is what drove the Western elites mad. That here was a country that developed into an industrial powerhouse and had skipped the industrial revolution and did not use colonies or neo-liberal imperialism to foster it's growth. This was seen by many as an amazing alternative to relying on the Western powers. People began to think that nations could use developmental policies to foster internal growth and drop the reliance on foreign control of industry.