What Is The Most Successful Communist Country Ever

[dead0man]

Reading a debate on another board about this topic, thought it might be a fun one here if for no other reason than to see people argue their various points of view on Communism (never existed but would be perfect if it was, rarely existed, always horrible, good idea on paper/bad idea in practice, etc).  So, huh, what do we think?  The USSR is an obvious answer, it did some nifty things (after killing tens of millions of it's own people).  The PRC has to be considered (after killing tens of millions of it's own people), but it's successes came after it started giving up it's communists principles.  Cuba did alright for awhile, but it was getting some serious handouts from Moscow.

[Хahar 🤔]

Czechoslovakia?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Yugoslavia seems to have for a while been comparatively (to other points in that region's history) not at all bad.

[tpfkaw]

In terms of implementing the Marxist vision, Democratic Kampuchea, in terms of not then Hong Kong, if it counts.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Okay, I don't care how libertarian you are, anybody who thinks that Democratic Kampuchea represents the 'Marxist vision' is just as much of a hack as people who think that Somalia represents the 'libertarian vision'.

[angus]

The People's Republic of China, without a doubt.

[tpfkaw]

They're the only ones who put in a truly "good-faith" effort to actually implement all the Marxist buzzwords - "abolition of private property," "abolition of all social classes," "equal liability of all to labor" etc.  Since Marxists will typically claim that the USSR and related entities were not truly "Marxist" because of the lack of total implementation of said buzzwords, I can only conclude that the State which put in the greatest effort towards achieving them is the closest thing to "pure" Marxism.  Indeed, Noam Chomsky among others was gushing over the Khmer Rouge in the 70s.  Of course, the Marxist vision is horrific and genocidal, as could have been predicted even before an attempt at its implementation.

If I am merely as much of a hack as "people who think that Somalia represents the 'libertarian vision'." are, I'm glad to know that you think 2/3rds of this site is as or more hackish than I am.

[angus]

Cambodia's fun to talk about, and Pol Pot was a barrel of laughs, but that country's per-capita GDP is around 2000 dollars and mostly the short-lived regime was marked by paranoia.  Did they ever build anything?  Did they ever get good at educating their people?  Did they ever figure out how to feed a population?  The only thing that Khmer Rouge was ever really good at was genocide, having successfully killed off 90% of the ethnic Chinese people living in that country.  I guess you could call that a success story, if you were inclined to think of successful ethnic cleansing as a good measure.

But China is a real success story, and the repression of ethnic minorities by the Han usually involves forced relocation and cultural repression, rather than martyrdom.  A much smarter strategy.  And in a generation, their percapita GDP has gone from, like, a few grains of rice per person per day to something resembling that of Costa Rica.  And they're financing all our endeavors, aren't they?  Everything we do, eat, learn, and build right now is underwritten by the Chinese.  In 20 years or less, they'll have a greater share of the world's aggregate GDP than even the United States.

True, the PRC wasn't faithful to the Communist Manifesto, but what government ever is?  You can't use that as a criterion, or you wouldn't have any candidates.  Also, it had its own brand of communism, even when it was more properly communist.  Anyway, it would have been successful even if Marx had never existed.  China was around long before capital-C Communism, and likely it will be around long after capital-C Communism dies.  At the height of the Roman Empire, circa AD180, under Marcus Aurelius, Rome had a population of 5 million and a land area of 3 million square miles.  So did the Han Empire.  They were about the same size, in area and population at that time, but then Rome fell apart.  It's language because Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, etc., and it's people miscegenated with the pale, northern barbarians to produce the modern races of Italy, France, and Spain.  Not so with the Han.  I submit that China is the most successful nation ever, by any criterion you'd care to name.  It also just happens to be a capital-C Communist country, so it's the perfect answer to this poll question.

It always bothered me that Chairman Mao and the Communists wanted to stamp out confucianism.  It seemed the perfect fit.  If you want to impose collectivist authoritarianism on a country that has a long history of collectivism, and one whose prime philosophical directives come from the obedience-driven philosophy of ancestor worship and respect for authority, then it seems like you'd want to play up Confucianism as much as possible.  I'd have thought that they would want to do as the Inca did when it conquered new territories, absorbing the local religions and customs into its metaphysics and governmental philosophy in an effort to make the new kings more palatable.  It was a remarkably successful strategy, and for years I never really understood why Mao's Cultural Revolution was so down on Kong Fuzi and his teachings, but I've finally had an epiphany that explains that.  It was important to stamp out any traces of the old, pre-Red philosophy in order to guarantee fielty to the new cause.  Success depended upon replacing all philosophy and religion with the new philosophy and the new religion, which was Chinese-style Communism.

Anyway, China's successes aren't due to Communism, but to a much older collectivism, but that doesn't mean that it can't be considered the most successful of the Communist countries. 

[tpfkaw]

Maoism always seemed to me like a more Mao-centric version of Confucianism.  It even had the same social hierarchy (Emperor > lesser government officials > peasants > merchants) and pseudo-religious elements.

[Mr. Taft Republican]

Yugoslavia is my favorite communist country. I think it did pretty good for a while, especially on maintaining independence from Moscow.

[angus]

Maoism always seemed to me like a more Mao-centric version of Confucianism. 

Same to me, which is why it bothered me so much that Chairman Mao wanted to stamp out the philosophy of Kong Fuzi (and all of his living ancestors!)  But there are subtle differences.  After all, the Emperor is no more.  He is de-throned, and replaced by a bureaucracy.  Also, peasants who are willing to become loyal to the party rise.  In the Emperor's time, peasants are always peasants, by virtue of the fact that they're born peasants.  Not so with Communism.

[minionofmidas]

Utah?

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Cuba, because there are no other real communist countries.

[Antonio the Sixth]

In terms of implementing the Marxist vision, Democratic Kampuchea

Thanks for showing how you've no clue what Marxism is.

[Redalgo]

Leninism and its ideological off-shoots never took a country beyond state socialism; over the course of several decades Cuba has not made much headway - nor do I expect it will ever - in dismantling the state and achieving a communist society; the PRC and Vietnam dabble in policies which incline me to deem their economies socialist / neo-mercantilist hybrids that stray from focusing on communist goals; and in at least some respects, parts of the First World got a lot closer to classlessness than in the Second.

I do not know enough about its history to claim if it is a genuine example - perhaps it was another deformed system under a veneer of propaganda - but from what little I know right now I would say the closest thing to a successful communist country the world has had in the last few centuries is the anarchist, Makhnovist "Free Territory" in what is now an eastern chunk of Ukraine. Ironically, it was crushed after a short period of time by the Soviets.

[© tweed]

the Soviet Union.


or by another standard, anarchist Catalonia, which was destroyed by twin capitalist and Stalinist aggression precisely because it threatened to be so successful.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Catalonia is a reasonable answer. So are (for a given, pre-modern value of 'Communist') some of the more functional Jesuit Reductions and, from what little is known of it, Yamatai of Wa, the similarities between whose histories and that of Catalonia a-l-m-o-s-t convince me of some form of Hegelianism at work.

wormyguy, any discussion of your ideals in reference to Somalia on this forum is not an indictment of libertarianism in general,  many strands of which are actually respectable and have at least a baseline understanding of history. It's an indictment of you.

[Хahar 🤔]

Republican Catalonia was as close as the industrialized world has come to a workers' state.

Democratic Kampuchea's ideology was descended from Marxism, but only in that sense can it be considered Marxist. Rather than moving toward a dictatorship of the proletariat, Angkar specifically targeted the Cambodian proletariat for liquidation. Just as Leninism adjusted Marxism and Maoism adjusted Leninism, Polpotism adjusted Maoism until there was none of Marx left. That said, I wouldn't object to labeling the Khmer Rouge as communistic, since it did envision a classless agrarian society.

[tpfkaw]

In terms of implementing the Marxist vision, Democratic Kampuchea

Thanks for showing how you've no clue what Marxism is.

Really?  I was under the impression it was whatever you want it to be.

wormyguy, any discussion of your ideals in reference to Somalia on this forum is not an indictment of libertarianism in general,  many strands of which are actually respectable and have at least a baseline understanding of history. It's an indictment of you.

I'm crushed.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Define "successful"?

In terms of having power, no doubt the USSR.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

In terms of implementing the Marxist vision, Democratic Kampuchea

Thanks for showing how you've no clue what Marxism is.

Really?  I was under the impression it was whatever you want it to be.

Karl Marx can do anything you want, baby. Fifty dollars hourly or three hundred all night long.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm crushed.
[/quote]

It's okay, plenty of good people have been indicted.

[Free Palestine]

Free Territory of Ukraine, Anarchist Catalonia.

[2952-0-0]

In Hungary, there was a degree of free markets, without long lines for basic goods. It does seem like a communist version of Singapore.

Yugoslavia imploded into a bloody mess, which alone excludes it. Modern day China and Vietnam have far more in common with Germany under Wilhelm than Communism.

[freefair]

China, even though it isn't Marxist as such.