Without that terror,
Was the terror not just a way to reinforce the failing system?
I mean, it doesn't appear to be the root cause of the failing of communism but just a way to maintain it through brute force and terror, as you say.
communism was a foreign concept imposed upon them by the enemy.
This is a great point that I think many people from the other side of the iron curtain miss.
one of the main premises of its existance is elimination of private property. No human will ever care about something not his more than about his/her own.
I agree, reminds me of the free bikes they had in Holland.
The idea was that white bikes were to be used by everyone, you just pick them up cycle wherever you want and leave it outside for the next person.
They were painted black and sold off.
"correctness" of one party
It can also be argued that there is a correctness in two parties (as we have now in many countries) that are no different from each other, so it really makes no difference who you vote for.
there is no sex in Communism ;)
? No? ;)
you HAVE to believe that a leader in some remote Russian (sorry for my bias) village is thinking how to make your life better, day and night. He might even not eat just to make sure that everything is Ok at your crammed apartment. You simply have to BELIEVE, reality doesn't matter - it is a lie anyway.
The state will look after you personally.... never gonna happen.
I don't think it is biased to say Russian, it was the U.S.S.R after all.
People do not like to be constraint by their government and so communism had to fail.
Again was the constraints not trying to desperately hold on to a failing system, it wasn't the cause of the initial problem itself, was it? but just a way of keeping it going?
The better question would be why did Communism fail.
That was the thread title, someone must have edited it but that's okay :)
Because it failed to provide its citizens the quality and quantity of consumption that had become the standard of modernity over the last third of the twentieth century.
Why did it fail to provide the quality and quantity of consumption?
I will suggest a hypothetical to dispel what I am led to understand if I am incorrect, if it was managed more efficiently would it have succeed?
I ask because it is not discussed much outside of countries that were effected by it and to understand it so it doesn't happen again.
Seems to me,Red,white or polka dot coloured banners its all the same,its always the few ,the rich and powerfull who controll the many whether thats the rich and powerfull communist in a Volga or the rich and powerfull capitalist in a Maybach.
The democratic Capitalist system we have today, for all it's disappointments, still the people could (theoretically) vote in whoever they want and what they want.
Ironically, the monopolization of banks and multinational corporations, along with "two" party elections that are not much different from each other seems more and more like a kind of Neo-communism.
The worst is when you see the worthless scum on the post-communist horizon driving on stolen money while some others haven't got their salary for a few months.
I find this to be a very good point, it seems to me that communism did not allow people's natural behaviour.
As in stark contrast to The American Dream
: "if I have a good idea and work hard enough, I too can drive a nice big car."
Whereas in communism, it just seemed to build resentment and was just really unfair, no chance of material success, a comfortable life, holidays anywhere you wanted every year and simple things like sugar or bananas in the shops.
On a personal note, I dislike it when people say "Poles were not so materialistic during communism" because the exact same thing was said about Ireland when we were poor.
I find that remark condescending because it is always someone from a rich country who visits Poland or Ireland for short periods and finds the people ''friendly'' and ''quaint''.
"Oh how lovely, Look at the people ploughing the fields with a horse and plough."
And then feck off back to their home entertainment systems and convertible cars.
Whereas the people stuck in the field are meant to continue "happily
" with their back breaking work.
Feck that, give these people half a chance and they would work and live a much more comfortable life, why wouldn't they?
And then we get told how materialistic we have become?!?
We were always materialistic, it's just we had no materials!!!
Okay, the 'consumer culture' has gone too far, even for me but when you are poor or you can't get the things that make your life easier, it isn't quaint, it's a day to day struggle.
Rant over* :)