Afaik this happened with every single instance of a communist country. Communism seems like a pretty good idea on the surface, but then why does it always become autocratic?

  • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because most real-world implementations of communism was the idea that a “vanguard party” would excercise total control over the country. The idea is eventually the state would “wither away” after communism is acheived.

    Yea imagine how that goes. Once a party gets total power, they ain’t giving it up, that’s the problem.

    • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      To play devil’s advocate, none of those vanguard parties were ever allowed to exist peacefully. They were always attacked, from the inside and out, by capitalist and fascistic powers. It’s kind of hard to get rid of the state when it is needed to defend from other nations and groups looking to destroy it.

      I’m not saying that a Vanguard party would necessarily ever voluntarily give up it’s powers and disintegrate into pure communism without a large part of the world struggling against it, but it would be more likely to.

      That is just pure speculation, though, because we live in a world that has shown that it will struggle against communism until the end. The Vanguard Party idea is flawed, because it fails to account for this indefinitely long struggle, and fails time and time again to offer a valid exit strategy into the next stage of Socialism/Communism.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Arguably defense will always be necessary until we actually achieve world peace, you can’t just unilaterally start acting as if you won’t get attacked. So the vanguard party thing is pretty fundamentally at odds with how the world works, if relinquishing control is actually the goal.

    • mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s crazy how far down one has to go for the right answer. MLs are by definiton highly authoritarian.

      It’s like asking why successful fascist always creat dictatorships… Like that’s their plan.