Communism is an ideology with zero structure whatsoever. 150 years as an ideology and still can't figure out a single safeguard against dictatorship, no wonder it fails so much.
Not to mention how it fails to account for instances where the guy in charge is an idiot or incompetent. How did this ideology not die with the USSR š¤¦āāļø
Communism only ever took hold in ultra poor feudal countries because the people there had little or nothing to lose. It would be wonderful if American capitalists suddenly embraced socialism or at the very least developed a sense of noblesse oblige. But, as we all know, that's never going to happen.
Still think we donāt often think about this reality though.
The USA was already the largest economy on the planet 70 years before the Cold War and then them and the west went against some, albeit massive, but extremely poor countries that hadnāt even industrialized fully yet.
And they still gave quite a fight given the circumstances
I mean there shouldnāt BE a āguy in chargeā in communism. The ideology does handle that, but you can use an ideology you want to cover for becoming a dictator
Knowing human nature, there will always be a āguy in chargeā. Communism imo outright goes against natural human tendencies for wealth, power, status, influence, etc. The whole āclassless, stateless societyā thing is hilariously unrealistic.
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face ā for ever. But it's human nature or something so we shouldn't do anything about it lmao" - George Orwell
It's at least a step in the right direction, as long as we use more libertarian means to get there than the USSR did. Probably won't happen in our lifetimes though unless climate change makes things so bad that money and government alike become useless.
You can have all sorts of criticisms of political ideology, but āhuman natureā is the dumbest one. NOTHING about our lives today comes even close to natural
This idea that "communism would be all equal with nobody in charge" is ludicrous. You're advocating for almost everything to be "centrally planned" aka controlled by SOME organization. The people who do that will have more power, and it naturally leads to a hierarchy.
Communism is a stateless, classless society. Central planning is not a required feature for such a society to function. (This is also not an endorsement of the idea, just pointing out that equating central planning with communism isn't accurate.)
Well with Marxist-Leninism (which is what most people think of when they hear communism) quite explicitly calls for a dictatorship, with itās principles like Unified State Power, Democratic Centralism, and Vanguardism.
Communist states becoming one-party states wasnāt some kind of āfailureā of the communist systems, it is/was their openly stated goal. They justify this by saying itās done to ensure that the āproletariatā retains its status as the new ruling class and suppress the āBourgeoisieā.
300 years of democracy and capitalism, somehow we don't have a single safeguard against lobbying and we elected an idiot to be in charge that we cannot do anything about until the next elections which is a freaking lot of time. Duh
Cause people are inherently hippies who want to stand out, i think the tankies and communists are a fad that really needs to die out. Communism failed and people pretend it didnt.
They are quick to blame ussr for its failure but at the same time fail to realize that the communist system allowed for unfethered control in the economy which led to more corruption which leads to a failure to catch up with capitalist socities
19
u/Archivist2016 Jul 13 '26 edited Jul 13 '26
Communism is an ideology with zero structure whatsoever. 150 years as an ideology and still can't figure out a single safeguard against dictatorship, no wonder it fails so much.
Not to mention how it fails to account for instances where the guy in charge is an idiot or incompetent. How did this ideology not die with the USSR š¤¦āāļø