Has there ever been a point where communism worked well?

[Gelion]

Imho Ussr 1953-1979

 

[Newbunkle]

Communism has never worked well, and never will.

 

[scy12]

Without a market mechanism overproduction is innevitable. While its true that overproduction exists in the capitalist system, it reaches absurd heights in a command economy.
Overproduction in the capitalist system is a result from reinvestment. Investors naturally reinforce their enterprises when they are profitable, and unless demand increases to keep pace, you create a problem of overproduction.
In a planned economy, you almost immediately create a system of overproduction. A capitalist can only expand his operations as far as his profit margins allow. With profit removed from the system, it becomes a question of increasing production as much as possible with the resources alotted by the state. Because there is no market mechanism, goods are merely distributed, there is never a reason to halt expansion of production. While making more goods sounds great, this leads innevitably to economic irrationality and inneficiency, as people only desire a certain product so much, and anything made beyond that is just elaborate waste. This is why you see pictures from the Soviet Union where super markets are filled with things such as vinegar. The problem is not just the underproduction of staple foods; this is intertwined with the overproduction of another product, such as vinegar, which is then cutting into the production of other goods.

But ah! you say, if we create a beurocratic system in which the government can precisely monitor the desire of people for certain products and their fullfillment of others, and we can have the state distribute resources from there. Firstly, there is the fact that no beurocracy is efficient enough to do this, as the Soviet Union demonstrates. Its simply impossible to keep up with what people desire and what they no longer desire, and then allocate resources across the nation based on this. The second is that you then have to recognize that you are still cutting into your efficiency, because for the cost of a market mechanism (nothing) you now have a severe economic cost (equipment, wages, labor, etc.) into this complex monitoring system.

My point isn't one on social justice, distribution of wealth or something of that nature. You can settle that and still have the use of a market method through a liberal-socialist or corporatist system. Its that simply put, Marxist-Leninist planned economies can't work because it an inneficient organizational model, not because of human nature. Automotons will still end up with Supermarkets full of Vinegar and nothing else.

Congratulations i think you have nailed it and expressed my thoughts on the subject quite elegantly(more than i would).

 

[onejayhawk]

A Utopian society wouldn't need a government at all.

How is that different from Marx's communism?

The PRC (Peoples Republic of China) is technically communist and look at their leverage on the world.

The key word is "technically." By no other standard is it communist. See also N Korea.

Without a market mechanism overproduction is innevitable. While its true that overproduction exists in the capitalist system, it reaches absurd heights in a command economy...

In theory a managed economy is the best economy. In practice, no one has sufficient knowledge, authority or skill to do so. In practice, every economy is driven by information. Without information, goods pile up, and needs go unmet. The blunders of Soviet economic history are neither representive nor complete, but they suffice as an illustration. The information never got to the decision makers, in most cases, and political doctrine contravened it in many others. Hence the over and underproduction.

There is a famous cartoon of a 50,000 kilo nail, captioned "The program is achieved." Obviously the goal was to produce 50,000 kilos of nails. I think that is what you mean by "absurd heights." Yet, is the problem in the market, or in the command structure? If the decision maker is aware of the production of the absurdity, will he not stop production and retool the process? In the Soviet case, the question, "Who is in charge?", would be met with contradictory answers: the Commisar, the Party, the KGB, but inevitably it was not the person on site, that is it was not the person with the knowledge. Communism is the antithesis of a top down command structure, which produced bizarre results when mixed with Russian rigidity.

On the subject generally, communism has mostly worked in local situations, under pressure from outside forces. The early church, not meaning the ones in the 2nd chapter of Acts, but later ones in the more Romanized parts of the Empire, had to share a great deal or face extinction. Parallel situations exist now in China. For a group on the edge of survival it makes extremely good sense.

J