Why communism lost

[Citizen James]

Did you want honest feedback on our opinions?

To me, it looks like he skimmed Adam Smith and Abraham Maslow, then got drunk on Ann Rand and went on an ideological bender.  He tosses around 'statist' the same way a psudointelectual socialist tosses around 'boiguis'

As with many ideologues, he seems stuck in a polarized worldview - full lazis faire capitalism, or total communism, no real acknoledgement of the many inbetweens and even differing systems.

Further, in a move that seems rather odd for someone who seems to have libertarian leanings, he acts as though the economic axis is the only parameter to politics.  Sadly, capitalism is no guarentor of personal freedom.  From the brutal dictatorship of Pinochet, to the near serfdom of modern China, to countless abuses in numerous third world nations, examples of capitalism without freedom are plentiful.

He does have a few good points, which are hardly huge revilations, and from which he often jumps off into la-la land. 

Don't get me wrong - capitalism is a great system, and tends to encourage hard work and innovation.  But without a certain amount of checks and ballances to weed out excesses, we tend toward a corporate state - which is little more than another type of communism where the companies control the government rather than vice versa.   Monoplolies, colaberation between rival corporations, and other anti-competitive actions tend to undermine and even remove the incentives which otherwise makes the system so effective.

I find his intelectualistic bashing of so called intelectuals almost amusing.  I kept looking the the april fools punchline.

Specialization of labor and reasonable competiton do drive a healthy economy and increase net production.  No arguement there.  The emphasis is on reasonable though.

Life indeed is not a zero sum game, and few things are.  Capitalism at it's best is a series of win/win situations - I get a product I want, and you get the money you want, then go buy the product you want and it feeds the cycle of comerce.   Nothing new here.

Technology indeed is neither good nor evil, just what you choose to develop and what you do with it.    Atomic energy can power entire cities or destroy them, depending on the grade of material and how you use it.   It is important to be aware of the potential misuses if we don't want to get burned.

I think the soviet union colapsed for a couple of different reasons.

1. Communism is inefficent.  There is little incentive to work hard or innovate.   Shortages replaced inflation as the result of supply and demand problems.

2. Widespread coruption.  This has less to do with their economic system, as their political one.  A government which is not accountable to the people will tend to line it's pockets as much as it can.  Power often corrupts, and absolute totalitarian power corupts a lot.

3. Education.  They educated their people.  When you teach people to think, they often start thinking for themselves - and it's often easy to see the gaping flaws in the party line.   From there they either play the game and grab what they can, they bide their time and seek reform, or they act out and most likely get shot (or run over by a tank).