romano
19 answers
35 thumbs up

Why did communism fail?

Did communism fail in Russia and Eastern Europe because it was socialist or because it was totalitarian? Is there any concrete data about this or is it only a matter of personal opinion?


Answer this question
  • # Posted 2 years ago
  • 5871 views
Share Send to a friend Watch Report
 

Best Answer

 
eGrant
2 answers
14 thumbs up

First of all, let me tell you that this is a great question. I think the answer to this question is a matter of personal perspective, but much more, it is a matter of facts, historical facts.


The USSR (and the Warsaw Pact) was the leading socialistic body in the eastern block for about 69 years, being an “efficient” rival to the United States and NATO. Much of the Soviet people were proud communists who had full belief in the system (some of the Russian citizens still are). If so, why did the communistic system failed in the Soviet Union?
Some of the reasons for the downfall of the USSR (and the Warsaw Pact) were mentioned here by earlier repliers, but there were reasons which were not mentioned. I believe these were the main reasons for the downfall of the Soviet Union:

1. During the years 1964-1982, Leonid Brezhnev was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. During his time as a ruler, he became responsible for the economic troubles of the USSR, basically because he (and his “government”) ignored many economic fundamental problems. After his death, the leaders who came to power had to struggle with the so called “economic legacy of Brezhnev”.

2. In 1985, a completely new type of leader came to power: Mikhail Gorbachev. During his years as the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and later as the President of the Soviet Union, he did his best to pull the USSR out of the “communistic middle ages state” into a state a super power should look like at the end of the 20th century. He tried to perform reforms (such as the well known “Glasnost” and “Perestroika” reforms) which were suppose to make the Soviet economy grow again (after the economic crisis of Brezhnev) and the political system to be more democratic. Gorbachev did not agree with the soviet one-party system, and in 1990 he was elected by the newly elected Congress of People's Deputies as the first (and only) President of the Soviet Union. It is important to know this, in order to understand the power of a change in a system, that had been burned in the minds of the soviet people by Lenin and Stalin, long before Gorbachev was even born.

3. After such enormous changes in a country who knew only totalitarian regimes, much unexpected has occurred. People of the socialistic states within the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself, saw it as a weakness in the system and began rioting against the USSR. The rulers before Gorbachev had a way of dealing with such “internal affairs” - sending in the tanks. But Gorbachev did no such thing, at least not until it was far to late. The people of the different states of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR knew only too well the sting of the iron fist of the so called “old type communists”, and they were afraid Gorbachev will soon fall from power and be replaced by some Stalin-like figure (as was attempted by some Red-Army communistic militants). They knew they had to act quickly in order to avoid some very unwanted consequences including Red-Army tanks and numerous deaths; And so the riots went on. After the coup attempt of 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed completely. The states that formed the Union of Soviet Socialistic Republics (USSR) were suddenly free from the direct rule of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev, as the president of the Soviet Union was no longer relevant, as he no longer had a country to run.

I think it is very important to see the things through the eyes of history in order to understand why and how things happened. The communistic system in the Soviet Union was build upon the dead bodies of the nations people. Gorbachev once said, “I thought I could improve the system, but I came to realize that systems such as this, which was built by the force of Lenin and Stalin, a system that survived only thanks to the strength of the Red-Army and the fear from it, will not be able to survive as a democracy - because of that same fear” (it is not an exact quote!).

The people of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact knew only pain and fear of what was suppose to bring them the exact opposite. They did not debate over the economic systems, over the affects of communism against the capitalism and the free market. They wanted out of a terror regime, and “communism” was just a name for it. The communism failed before and continues to fail today, because no one (accept maybe for Gorbachev) ever tried to make it a system FOR THE PEOPLE, as it is suppose to be.

Hope I gave you something to think about, and maybe even an answer to your question.
Posted 2 years ago ( permalink )
In reply to romano's question
Rated as
Best Answer
0
14
  Report Abuse  

Helpful?

line
line
line


 

All Answers

Order by
 
gkamin
55 answers
190 thumbs up

Well, this is a tough one to answer. Of course the answer you'll get will have a major element of personal opinion. That's how it is when you let people analize situations and events in social science - there's no clear answer, and it all depends on your point of view. You will fit the data you get to your own beliefs.

In social science you have lots of contradicting conclusions even on the same data, and of course you can find exactly the data you need to prove your point, if you look for it hard enough. That's why I would'nt take for granted any decisive or absolute answer to your question.

You can also be sure that the answer to your question is complex and has a little bit of both explanations, mixed with others too.

However, it is my belief that the economic system contributed significantly to the bankrupcy of the soviet state, due to its failing to understand human nature, and what drives people doing what they do. But again , that's coming from a free market supporter, that takes all the historical and economic facts. and uses them according to his outlook.
Posted 2 years ago ( permalink )
In reply to romano's question
gkamin was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

Rated as
#2 out of 9
0
9
  Report Abuse  

Helpful?

line
line
line



 

Hi

All genuine attempts to answer this question will contain a mixture of fact and opinion. I personally think that there are more than handful of factors that led to the downfall of  Communism there:

1 The sheer size of Russia and the diversity made it difficult to govern.

2 Too many people were uprooted from their native lands and forced to move to other regions, which caused enormous loss of productivity and led to discontent.

3 The economic policies certainly played a very big role in the State going bankrupt.

4 Refusal to acknowledge changing realities. China avoided this pitfall (economic reforms were kickstarted as early as 1978) and the result is there for all to see.

I hope you found my take useful.

Posted 2 years ago ( permalink )
In reply to romano's question
Rated as
#8 out of 9
3
2
  Report Abuse  

Helpful?

line
line
line



 
Tijmen
1 answer
4 thumbs up

I think there is a strong correlation between personal freedom and economic freedom. Communism is an economic model which can only be enforced by totalitarism, because a lot of 'economic' things, have social and personal aspects as well. The best example of this is free expression. I heard about a theater group in Havana (they came here to the Netherlands) who weren't allowed to start a street theater, because this is 'entrepreneurish'.

To answer your question: regimes fail because they are totalitarian. Communism is always totalitarian, so they always fail.
Posted 2 years ago ( permalink )
In reply to romano's question
Rated as
#3 out of 9
2
6
  Report Abuse  

Helpful?

line
line
line



 
Charbax
9 answers
6 thumbs up

I believe communism cannot work as long as capitalists control most of the world ressources. And as long as it is too easy for governments to be corrupted (lack of communications technology).

Though I believe things might change with the use of Web 2.0, there will be somekind of Direct Democracy and money in paper and coins will soon disapear in favour of somekind of IT communism.
Posted 2 years ago ( permalink )
In reply to romano's question
Rated as
#9 out of 9
8
4
  Report Abuse  

Helpful?

line
line
line