If Communism is so great why did it fail every time?

[Comrade Mitja]

Just an question,why do you fight for an idea that was proven that it cant work.



Just asking,no troll replays

[TheGodlessUtopian]

What Communism?... seriously.

[Eagle_Syr]

But it was never proven that socialism (since only socialism has ever been realized) cannot work.

Indeed, history demonstrates the efficacy of socialism. If you consider the state of Russia in 1917, and later under the USSR, the rapid industrialization, increased food production, improved education, and improved living conditions of the Russian people indicate a successful implementation, to some extent, of socialism.

And while it is true that there were shortages and rations, you must also take into consideration the extreme destruction and loss of life the USSR suffered in war-fare (WW2), and the continued harassment by the United States during the Cold War. Consumer goods would have been better had it not been for these things.

The USSR achieved many great scientific, medical, educational, and industrial feats. After all, the USSR was the first to put a man in space; first to send a satellite into space, et cetera


The same can be said of Cuba pre and post-Batista

[Leonid Brozhnev]

Who proved this when? I must have missed the memo.

[TheRedAnarchist23]

People have diferent views towards the faliure of socialism some (the anarchists) claim it was because of the existance of a state, others (left communists) claim it was because the revolution did not go international, there are of course more views, but I will let others explain.

So, you decide why socialism failed.

[DasFapital]

it wasn't communism that failed but rather personality cults and state capitalism.

[Comrade Mitja]

But it was never proven that socialism (since only socialism has ever been realized) cannot work.

Indeed, history demonstrates the efficacy of socialism. If you consider the state of Russia in 1917, and later under the USSR, the rapid industrialization, increased food production, improved education, and improved living conditions of the Russian people indicate a successful implementation, to some extent, of socialism.

And while it is true that there were shortages and rations, you must also take into consideration the extreme destruction and loss of life the USSR suffered in war-fare (WW2), and the continued harassment by the United States during the Cold War. Consumer goods would have been better had it not been for these things.

The USSR achieved many great scientific, medical, educational, and industrial feats. After all, the USSR was the first to put a man in space; first to send a satellite into space, et cetera


The same can be said of Cuba pre and post-Batista

look at russia and UK,who has more develop technologies?
Also you forgot to mention how many inocent people died cuz of so called communist
Those communist leaders always put to power people who followed their program,those who had their own mind never got the chance to lead ussr
Look who came to power freaking stalin,worst kind of human there is imaginable
so why did the ussr collapsed? if it was so great,also yugoslavia,and other "communist" countries

etc etc

[TrotskistMarx]

From my own personal opinion of why many leaders of socialist labor parties, apply a state-capitalism to large corporations. And neoliberal-capitalism to the medium and smaller corporations of the respective countries where socialism has failed, has many many many causes. One of the major causes are the scientific causes of it. That socialism in 1, 2, 3 or 4 countries, while other countries have neoliberal-capitalism or state-capitalist systems or mixed neoliberalism and state capitalist system at the same, while using military force or political force to terrorize those new socialist experiments (example Cuba, Korea Venezuela etc. which are terrorized by big capitalist nations)

The other causes are that all humans right-wingers, centrists-wingers and left-wingers are too egocentric, too narcissist, too selfish. That inability of humans to evolve toward more altruist, less narcissist, less egocentrical people, is what leads many many many leaders of socialist parties and even members of socialist parties to behave in an unfriendly, unloving manner. And when they get to government power to steal money and to apply capitalist economic models backed by IMF, World Bank and corporations so that the leaders of the socialist marxist parties can see more personal wealth for themselves, their families and their friends.

The book The Prince by Machiavelli talks about the selfish nature of humans. And we have clear-cut examples of how socialist workers parties, when they win elections, they become right-wingers neoliberals, pro-IMF. (Because in IMF neoliberalism is where socialist marxist presidents can become rich, they quit their marxist ideology, and give in to the temptations, pleasures and joys of wealth, luxuries and the high levels of comfortable lifestyle that they get with lots of money, compared with their former older lifestyle of lack of money.

So you see politics, societies are not exact science, humans are not predictable, many marxists get corrupt in power like Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Lula Dasilva of Brazil, Michelle Bachelet of Chile, and even Tony Blair's party was supposed to a workers party (The Labor Party of UK)


.

Just an question,why do you fight for an idea that was proven that it cant work.



Just asking,no troll replays

[Ostrinski]

Poor political programs on the behalf of organizations that did not see the necessity of arranging an education program based on empowering the working class to operate independently and efficiently with regard to the sustainability of the socialist economy, as well as the fact that the capitalists throw rockets at us whenever there is a social foundation for worker´s movements.

[Thirsty Crow]

Just an question,why do you fight for an idea that was proven that it cant work.

The point is that communism is only possible on a world basis. Actual transcending of commodity production and the state can only be accomplished when (most) of the world working class establishes its political domination. That was, and still is, a basic tenet of communist political theory and practice.
So, the conclusion would be that an idea, a project, a possibility, is not proven false when its stated preconditions were lacking.

[Peoples' War]

This is what American's call a "softball".

First off, you aren't taking into consideration, the biggest thing, material conditions. As well, you are clearly not versed in Marxist theory.

If you did/were, you'd realize that the material conditions surrounding these places: China, Russia, etc. were NOT ripe for socialism proper.

Let's look at the example of Russia. After the Bolsheviks established a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, they were faced with the following hardships:

- Civil war
- Famine
- Invasion
- WWI
- Failure of the German Revolution, resulting in isolation.

[wsg1991]

the thing is once they have to adapt to their material conditions , they would call them revisionists

[revolt]

you are all very bad at dealing with the fact that people have an idea about what communism is that's not correct. question for everyone acting as if it is so obvious that communism has never been a social system in place: do you expect everyone to have researched the same politics as you have?

what is "every time"? all previous socialist (not authentically socialist, but thats something else) countries didn't exist in vacuums. there has only ever been two socialist blocs (Chinese allied countries and soviet allied countries). so "every time" is just two socialist blocs. it doesn't make sense to point to both the failure of the Soviet Union as well as the failure of East Germany as two entirely separate attempts. in reality they were both part of the same socialist project. that would be like saying that every Korean war failed because multiple countries were involved in the military effort.

the soviet bloc failed because of economic stagnation, domestic turmoil, etc. can you elaborate on how you think that this disproves the idea of socialism, what you mean by socialism, etc.? that way we can get more specific into answering your question.

[Questionable]

it wasn't communism that failed but rather personality cults and state capitalism.

If you're going to take this route, at least explain to the OP what you're talking about. This is the same as saying "Capitalism isn't failing, it's state-sponsored corporatism that is!"

Anyway, the fall of the USSR wasn't quite the liberating experience that Western historians make it out to be. All but one or two of the ex-Eastern Bloc countries have fallen on hard times ever since the fall. Many of Soviet Russia's neighbors fell to racial wars and bad economics after the collapse, and Russia itself isn't doing so well either. Yeltsin's policies in particular lead to widespread corruption, inflation, homelessness, and the massive concentration of wealth. Furthermore, there's dozens of statistics that show many ex-Soviet citizens miss the "old days." Whether you believe this is because life was actually better or because they're just nostalgic is up for debate, but the numbers are there.

The fall of the USSR may have been a victory for the West, but it was a failure for its citizens

[Deicide]

Yeltsin's policies in particular lead to widespread corruption

What? You think corruption was not wide spread in the USSR and its client states?

[Questionable]

What? You think these things didn't exist in the USSR and its client states?

Yes, the USSR was pretty much dead for the workers by then anyway, aside from a few social programs. I'm only trying to combat the idea that capitalism was a knight-in-shining-armor for the oppressed peoples of Eastern Europe. Regardless of which political philosophy "won," the workers lost.

[Permanent Revolutionary]

Something that has never existed can not have failed.

However, there are many reasons why the transition to "true" communism has failed.
1) Foreign intervention (Russian civil war, US embargo of Cuba, Korean War)
2) Failure to spread the revolution internationally
3) Personality cults
4) Degeneration of the worker's states
5) Internal feuds between socialists
6) Totalitarianism

[seventeethdecember2016]

Since we don't have the material capabilities to achieve a classless stateless state yet. Socialism, which is the transition to Capitalism and Communism and is supposed to 'sow the seeds for a Communist society,' has to achieve it through slow and grueling progress. Perhaps with advanced technology such a system will be achieved.

[Regicollis]

Oh my God! - Communism has been tried!

I guess I wasn't at school the day they told us about that.

[Lanky Wanker]

Someone fetch my friggin' gun... I wanna shoot myself hearing this question for the 508540398943875849035th time.