It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why did Communism fail in Soviet Russia?

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
The soviet union failed because of the low price of oil in the mid to late 80s. They made a large portion of their economy from exporting oil. They could not afford all their spending. No money, no power.

the one percent run communist countries too and the peon don't have much chance of climbing the ladder.
You better read up real carefully before deciding to favor communism.


Uh did you read Marx? It was supposed to take a long time and happen naturally as wealth consolidated in capitalism to a fractional number. It was supposedly going to come out of a country like the US with the massive infrastructure and a manufacturing base. The workers would simply revolt and would also be made up of the military and political system leaving the wealthy with less control over the power structure.
He was saying it was a natural progression of capitilism.

Obviously he was wrong but communism was not supposed to come out of rural, poor, agricultural states.

Communism has never happened according to the philosopher that created it.




posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier


Communism is great until you put people into the formula. That's where it always fails.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:20 AM
link   
"They pretend to pay us. We pretend to work."



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Marx got some things right. But we could equally talk about Engels as well. Both were rather good situated and it's funny, that those guys from the winning class did what they did.
Which might tell us a lot, with regards to their lack of foresight or creativity and consistency, if we dare to listen. There is definitely a conspiracy angle to this, but I'll leave it with that.

Thousand years you say?


The social revolution can be best understood in the context of the relatively long history in Spain of workers' organisation and social struggle. The CNT, which was the major driving force of the collectivisations, had been in existence since 1910 and had 1.5 million members by 1936. The anarchist syndicalist movement had existed in Spain since 1870 and, from its birth to the (partial) realisation of its ultimate ideal during the social revolution, had a history of constant engagement in intense social struggle - "Partial and general strikes, sabotage, public demonstrations, meetings, struggle against strikebreakers.., imprisonment, transportation, trials, uprisings, lock-outs, some attentats"[2]

libcom.org...

We would already be there if it wasn't for the fascists. Spain is not the worst example either, we all saw the rise of Podemos and the end of that old two party system days ago.

History tends to repeat itself. Maybe it's already happening.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: luthier


Communism is great until you put people into the formula. That's where it always fails.


That may be true. But it has never happened.

Like I said Marx didn't realize the power of technological subversion and political propaganda.

My point is it communism has never been tried. The closest thing would be the Scandinavians.
edit on 23-12-2015 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Communism never existed in Soviet Russia. You had leaders (Stalin for example) doing things and calling it "Communism' (closer to totalitarianism).

So Communism never 'failed' in Soviet Russia because it was never a thing there.
edit on 23-12-2015 by Tsubaki because: lol



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier



He was saying it was a natural progression of capitilism.

Obviously he was wrong but communism was not supposed to come out of rural, poor, agricultural states.

Communism has never happened according to the philosopher that created it.


Not so fast. Take a look into todays Andalusia, I've linked a good article in my first post.

Communism isn't about Marx and Engels only, it's also about some indigene cultures or anarchist syndicates for that matter.
You don't do anyone a favor here. You could equally talk about the Old Testament only when addressing Christianity, but we both know there is a bit more to that after all.

You really think there didn't happen anything remarkable with regards to communism after Engels walked their thoughts to the printers? Trotzky did a hell of a job developing a clumsy idea further, didn't he? And trotzkism is communism by definition as well, innit?
edit on 23-12-2015 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: optimisitcplanet




Everyone would be paid the same no matter what work they do





harder jobs to do .... would be paid more.


What...in the heck...are you saying?



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Conflicting ideas:



"Everyone would be paid the same no matter what work they do."
"And also it is put in place that harder jobs to do such as building houses, etc would be paid more."


Is it equal, or isn't it?

Also:



"Essentially a fully communism system with bits of Capitilist ideology ( ie paying more for harder jobs). "


More pay for 'harder work' is not capitalism. More pay for preferred output is capitalism.

In your system, two auto mechanics get paid the same no matter how much better one mechanic is than the other. Why then would the better mechanic work better or harder than the other?

Who decides what 'hard work' is? Does an auto mechanic get more than a teacher or research scientist?



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I'dd say communism failed because it was implemented under a dictatorship.

I only know the basics of most socio-economics systems, but in theory communism looks pretty good. In the sense that it's fair. However, when arguing with people I find that most people automically associate communism with dictorships, poverty, famine, ...


The essence of communism is that everything is organised by the state. There's no (or limited) private ownership and free market only exists in limited form. In that regard, as long as the state works for and by the people, everything should be fine and dandy.
edit on 23-12-2015 by Vechthaan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Communism will always fail because humans don't like being told that they will be a drone in the collective ruled by masters that they will never become.
Do as I say.
That's against the grain of human nature.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Communism will always fail because humans don't like being told that they will be a drone in the collective ruled by masters that they will never become.
Do as I say.
That's against the grain of human nature.



Dude you don't understand what the philosophers wrote. Communism is much closer to anarchy. There is supposed to be no rulers telling them anything.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: luthier



He was saying it was a natural progression of capitilism.

Obviously he was wrong but communism was not supposed to come out of rural, poor, agricultural states.

Communism has never happened according to the philosopher that created it.


Not so fast. Take a look into todays Andalusia, I've linked a good article in my first post.

Communism isn't about Marx and Engels only, it's also about some indigene cultures or anarchist syndicates for that matter.
You don't do anyone a favor here. You could equally talk about the Old Testament only when addressing Christianity, but we both know there is a bit more to that after all.

You really think there didn't happen anything remarkable with regards to communism after Engels walked their thoughts to the printers? Trotzky did a hell of a job developing a clumsy idea further, didn't he? And trotzkism is communism by definition as well, innit?


No I don't think Trotsky did a hell of a job moving a clumsey idea further.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:41 AM
link   
It has probably been stated, but there is no incentive to work hard. The real incentive is getting paid the same for minimal output. Fail to meet quotas and the administration suffers, so you create work conditions where the workers and their management are leery of eachother. It is easy to see why communism can only deteriorate over time.
edit on 23-12-2015 by onthedownlow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: optimisitcplanet
Honestly to me the ideologies of communism suits my taste.


Communism failed, and will continue to fail, because like in all autocratic/dictatorial forms of government personal, social and civil liberties are repressed. The idyll that some people want to achieve - equality for all, and all that - just does not work because human beings are individuals and not robots.

The Soviet Union's failure was due to myriad reasons, not least the unwillingness and pressure from those nations that had been occupied and oppressed for decades under a communist dictatorship.

I thankfully live in a country with faults admittedly, but where I am free to do pretty much anything I like, including living in a community as described by the OP.

Edit to add that the two largest countries that were purportedly "communist" - the Soviet Union and China - were also countries that suffered horrendous death counts from famine, oppression, genocide, doctrinal stupidity and just plain old brutality.

OP, this is likely the best answer you are going to get here.

You are inquiring about a highly complex subject. Luckily for you, scholars have been writing on the subject since before the USSR collapsed.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: onthedownlow
It has probably been stated, but there is no incentive to work hard. The real incentive is getting payed the same for minimal output. Fail to meet quotas and the administration suffers, so you create work conditions where the workers and their management are leery of eachother. It is easy to see why communism can only deteriorate over time.


What? Not only is that another misconception of what communism is (which again has never been implemented) it shows a lack of understanding as to what is happening with capitalism.

As the emerging markets gain economic power their will be only automation to keep the CPI low and deal with the massive inflation problem that will arise as the emerging markets gain strength.

Once our workplace is automated everywhere how will there be jobs? The job market will be so small capitilism will cease to exist. Something will have to be done with the billions of people with useless labour skills that no longer exists in the job market.

Sooner or later it will have to be addressed to compete with prices we need to automate which of course is already taking jobs.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier


Communism failed because it was supposed to happen naturally out of the most modern advanced capitalist state. Not a rural peasant culture.

If you are speaking of why Communism failed in Russia, this is plausible and has sometimes been cited by Marxist historians. Marxist ideology holds that the development of an urban bourgeoisie and an industrial working class are prerequisites for a people's revolution. Russia had little of either, so the Russian Revolution was largely a peasant revolution. This changed its character so that it wasn't 'really' Communist.

But this is just Marxist theory. I don't know if it was ever proven true. Remember, Communism did not fail in China, which was also a mainly peasant society.

I also disagree with the reason you give for the survival of capitalism. Capitalism survives because it is popular, and because it works well in combination with the rule of law and any political system that supports property rights. It doesn't need propaganda to sell it to people -- apart, that is, from advertising for all the goodies it produces.


edit on 23/12/15 by Astyanax because: of phone dumbness.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: nonspecific
You would be shot on the first day of the revolution.


That's a good point. For communism to get started and kept going an awful lot of people have to die.

The blood on the hands of these people, not to mention all their henchmen and torch carriers.

Stalin
Mao
Pol Pot
Ceausescu
Kim Jong-Il
... and all the rest.

Communism works over the dead bodies of those who says it would not work.



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier

The assumption would be that inflation will balance out automation. I guess from your viewpoint, you feel that communism will just intensify the vaccum, but that, at least in my opinion, is impossible. Inflation will change the need for manufacturing, and become the inevitable balance.

ETA: are you suggesting that communism doesn't suffer from deterioration of work place moral and efficiency? Of course there us a myriad of reasons, but they all begin in the workplace

edit on 23-12-2015 by onthedownlow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99




personally will not let a few decide what and where I'm best.


lol you

well in the capitalistic culture who decided someone is good at cleaning the crap out of your toilet .. they do it because that's what they are best at ?? describe person fit for that job lol
(god I will regret saying this out loud on Ats I hate to be gross)

General to the op

communism failed because it was time to do better and one day capitalism will fall too because it was time to do better

crush the old system and rebuild again and again and again each time we gain new piece of information

economy in general since woop woop and till the end of time will be one entity.. based on what ideology who knows.. the only thing that we do know is that the standard of living is increasing on average that's all we need to be concerned about and focused on







 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join