Although it seems unlikely that communism could ever create a truly successful and uncorrupted state because of the incentive issue, capitalists write off communism too quickly. In America especially people are quick to say the system stands no chance in the future. A lot of this might be due to the American paranoia over government control (this is ingrained in the nation's founding) and from 20th century politics in which the USSR was America's antagonist.
The Russian and Chinese transitions to communism were corrupt and unsuccessful for several reasons. The totalitarian/authoritative governmental structures, the globalist/ isolationist foreign policies, and the pre-revolutionary conditions in these countries destined them for failure.
Pre- revolutionary Russia and China were not ready for the transitions Marx and Engels describe. The authors of The Communism Manifesto write "Though not in substance, yet in form, the struggle of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie is at first a national struggle... The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products." Both nationalism and severe industrial conditions are required for the Marx&Engels revolution. Russia and China had neither of these. Firstly, these countries were, and still are, multi ethnic states. Populations believed in different religions and spoke over hundreds of different languages. Widespread nationalism was not a part of the common Russian or Chinese mindset at this time. Secondly, neither of these countries had industrialized enough to necessitate a revolution. This is important for two reasons. Firstly, railroads and communication were not fully developed. This made it difficult for citizens to coordinate with one another over such large and geographically variant land masses. Secondly, the vast majority of Russians and Chinese were peasants. Some certainly experienced poor conditions in factories, but class antagonisms extended beyond the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Therefore not enough of the population was motivated to participate in the revolutions that were supposed to start in the factories.
In fact had it not been for the world wars, these revolutions might not have occurred. Russia's civil war during WWI gave rise to the Bolsheviks, and China shortly converted to communism after being invaded by the Japanese during WWII. Communist leaders in China and Russia saw their nations devastated and recognized that, as is true for any nation suffering from famine and distress, revolution was now more easily instigated because the people wanted change. But this is not how Marx & Engels describe the process of a communist revolution. They explain that the transformation would occur after a long period of intense industrialization and in countries where nationalism existed in the consciousness of the people. These conditions would force the proletariat to fight and unite itself, versus what ended up occurring in Russia and China. These revolutions were led by politically minded leaders that could sense general dissatisfaction in their respective countries.
 |
| Stalin (left) and Mao |
In the post revolutionary periods, Russia and China fail in two other significant ways. Firstly the governmental structures used fear tactics to maintain power. They needed to employ these because they could not have fixed the lasting problems from war overnight. Both governments still recognized that these were tumultuous times and did not want another revolution. They had to repress the very same people they thought they were liberating. This created many problems. Firstly, no one person could have solved the amount of issues that existed in post war Russia and China. Collaboration is necessary for optimal results. But those under the regimes of Mao, Stalin, and Lenin were often times afraid to speak out against the decisions of their dictators. For instance if Chinese agricultural experts had not been afraid of Mao, the Great Chinese Famine might not have occurred. In fact there might have been experts that did speak up, but so many "dissenters" in both Russia and China were sent to toil and die in camps, the likes of which still exist in North Korea. Secondly, the people began to secretly resent their governments for repressing their rights to speech and other freedoms. Secret publications, either self published or published over seas by the foreign press (even here in Ann Arbor!) would circulate in Russia and China arguing against revolution, turning even the proletariat against the regimes. Because these governments scared the people of Russia and China, not everyone felt like cooperating with the system and therefore internal conflict prevented the improvement of communism.
These types of governments also scared the United States and Europe. America especially did not like these dictators because they violated what the nation considers inalienable rights. In addition, the global aspects of communism scared many Americans. Had it not been an important part of communist theory to convert the world to the communist system, Westerners might not have felt the need to defend themselves from Russia. Russia's desire to control Eastern Europe and other territories terrified the United States, as did China's claim over neighboring regions. Then later, when these nations developed isolationist policies the west became paranoid over what occurred behind closed doors. Knowing that the general aim of communism was to unite the world, America and Europe did not appreciate the inaccessibility to Russia and China. Had these countries been neither imperialist nor isolationist, the world might have opposed them with less vigor, and revolutions in other countries might have naturally occurred.
What else is standing in the way of successful communism? Incentive. However this problem might be solved by a more moderate approach to the system. There could be, for instance, three flat incomes. One for workers, one for professionals, and one for those with proven disabilities who are unable to work. Of course, this could still perpetrate class resentment.
What do you think, is "good" communism possible? Could a few tweaks make it successful? Feel free to incorporate American class antagonisms (think 99%).
Images cited:
America vs. Russia. Digital image. Blogspot.com. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgd-Rxc2GI1qc-DR_Fe4P_m20RrNE2vfE3i-Tj-Ye-fjZqCDG1L0_Q0XGELSbH3fvZhYinXHGWs7rW6oYEqFiW7_HMZvolGaqP_gSbPtvurvKcznAe6aH3LK6EgbvNThy-IpqqYcQ5fBjSE/s1600/America+vs+Russia+02sm.JPG>.
Field- Workers. Digital image. Grinningplanet.com. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.grinningplanet.com/2004/04-13/field-workers.jpg>.
Industrial workers. Digital image. Im.glogster.com. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://im.glogster.com/media/4/35/88/45/35884522.gif>.
Stalin and Mao. Digital image. Blogspot.com. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiA0X-ADYt6kbOvI_2E05Z5JPPdQMFE6zH61VtR9X_KgU9eqBi_KonrntFTmtvq_VAWSCI8bBch5FBc0qEn8bGXhW4IwiPssGyD-0e6x_xkCt32OkMYvw68HQWpCBlVO0o-h2PdeTop97U/s1600/stalin+mao.jpg>.
I must say, Alisanne, that I was really excited by the pun in the title. Well done. Also, thank you for bringing up what I think is a vital point when discussing Marxist theory - the Soviet Union and China weren't what Marx had in mind when he advocated proletariat revolution, and never got to his idea of what communism should be. I'm not a fan of the idea of revolution in just about any form - they tend to be long and harrowing processes with a great deal of bloodshed - but living in this time in the United States, I definitely feel that there is a significant amount of class tension. I'm not sure, however, that there will ever be a move away from capitalism in this country. John Steinbeck wrote that "socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires," and I tend to agree with him. But I do think that America is due for another round of reform (like we saw in the early twentieth century) to make life easier on the proletariat and precariat.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I feel some definite comradery (pun completely intended) in that us REEES 395 students both decided to write about the Soviet Union.
ReplyDeleteNow for the more substantive aspect. I don't think that Marxism is truly possible because for obvious reasons, it's not going to happen instantaneously and it's not going to happen all over the world. This may seem like a basic comment, but what your post brought to mind is the stories I've heard about goods being smuggled into the Soviet Union from capitalist nations, and this gave the oppressed people an idea of what was in other countries. You can see this with China today and how involved it is with the market economy. So in addition to the lack of incentive, you also have a disincentive. It seems that in the ways communism has been implemented, it has been too weak to handle these sorts of external forces and the only way to solve this would be for the communist area to be completely isolated. However, in an increasingly globalized world, this would be impossible to achieve.