Communism Fail? To the General

¶ … Communism Fail?

To the general public one of the greatest shocks at the end of the twentieth century was the demise of the power of the Soviet Union. "the greatest surprise of the end of the twentieth century has been the suddenness and completeness of the Soviet system's collapse. "(Malia, 1993, p.80)

In effect the 'fall' of the Soviet Union meant that communism as a working and viable social and economic reality had in fact failed. In the years since the decline of the Soviet Union as a communist state and its adoption of more open and free market principles, there have been numerous studies, reports and conjecture on the reason or reasons for the failure of communism in this particular instance.

The reasons given for the failure of communism cover many diverse fields and disciplines. One view that has become popular follows from a critique of the communist system as being inherently unable to cope with internal and external tensions due to the very nature of its social and political structure. Other theories focus on an economic analysis of the fundamental cause of Soviet decline; while others point to the internal inconsistencies, conflicts within the system as well as to the overemphasis on bureaucratic procedures and the neglect of culture and nationalistic interests as well as the natural diversity of the different regions.

Possible the most appropriate and definitive view of the cause of the decline and eventual failure of communism is expressed by one critic who states that,.".. The collapse of the Soviet Union was a complex event with no clearly identifiable single cause." (Wilcoxson, 2004. p.51) in other words, it would be more correct from an historical, sociological and political point-of-view to see the collapse of the communist ideology in the Soviet Union as a complex mixture of various aspects.

Coupled with this is the view that the failure of communism in Russia can be compared to and seen in contradistinction to more successful manifestations of the communist ideology. There are many cases in the world where communism has been relatively successful and has been shown to be comparatively viable in the modern global economy and political climate.

One of the most common overarching reasons given for the failure of communism is that it does not provide for personal initiative and therefore individual motivation within the ambit of its ideology. This paper will investigate and explore some of the most prevalent of the reasons given for the fall of communism and will, at the same time, attempt to form some conclusions from the research that will shed light on the underlying and most important reasons for the failure of the communist system.

2. The Fall of communism

2.1. Brief outline of the rise and fall of Soviet communism

The failure of the communism and the decline and collapse of the social system was an awesome and historical occurrence. In reality what took place was the collapse if the political economy of the world's largest country. The Soviet Union comprised "...fully one-sixth of the world's land area..." (Strayer, 1998, p. 4) One of the clues to the collapse of the communist system lies in the fact that the Soviet Union was not a homogenous country but was rather composed of fifteen constituent republics. After the fall of communism, each of these areas "... assumed an independent existence, claiming full sovereignty within the larger international community." (Strayer, 1998, p. 4)

In brief, the Union of Soviet Republics was the result of Russian revolution of 1917. This revolution was the linked to theory and ideology from thinkers such as Karl Marx. Central to the Marxian view of society was the reaction to the capitalistic model of private ownership, unequal wealth distribution and class prejudice. For example, in this view private ownership is replaced by shared ownership of resources as the best way to ensure equality of privilege and wealth in a society. As will be discussed, this central aspect of the communist system is an important part in understanding the demise of the ideology in Russia.

Another constituent of Marxist theory was the ownership of the means of production. Marx theorized the common ownership of the means of production in the society was a crucial factor as those who controlled the means of production in capitalistic society were the privileged or elite class; but they were in the minority and had all the wealth and power. This resulted in a class struggle. In general, communist theory and praxis attempts to realign the unfair distribution of power and wealth.

Very briefly the history of communism can, somewhat simplistically, be divided into three main historical and political phase. The first phase refers to the creation of Soviet communist system under Lenin and Stalin. (Malia, 1993, p.80) This was the experimental phase of communism and was aimed at the creation of a fair and equitable social and political system. The second phase of the development of communism began after its success and victory in the Second World War. Russia also took possession of countries in Eastern Europe and expanded its territories and influence. "This second wave of communist revolution seemed to demonstrate that the system was not only permanent, but was also an expanding, and possibly a future dominant force in world affairs." (Malia, 1993, p.80)

The third phase is the phase that will be the focus of this paper - namely the period that "... extended from around 1965 to perestroika, and it was dominated by the concepts of "modernization" and "institutional pluralism." (Malia, 1993, p.80)

2.2. Overview of the main reasons for the failure of communism

As noted above, the fall of the Soviet Union as a viable communist state was in historical and relative terms, extremely sudden. A study by Malia, (1993) neatly encapsulates this aspect.

After three quarters of a century of communist expansion, and forty-five years of Cold War contest for global hegemony between "socialism" and "capitalism," the world had settled into the view that although the Soviet Union might not be eternal, it was at least permanent. Yet in the short span from 1989 to 1991 the whole Leninist edifice imploded without any of its guardians offering any serious resistance to the debacle. The most militant political movement of the modern age, which in its time had made a career of armed insurrections and minority coups d'etat, at the end proved capable only of the pitiful farce of August, 1991. (Malia, 1993, p.80)

In the first instance, the fall of communism is attributed by many scholars and researchers to the inherent fault lines in the very system itself. In simplistic terms, the failure of communism was due to the fact that it attempted to implement a system which was too idealistic and could not work, given the reality and the trends in human society and the world. Malia (1993) states that "... what the Soviets were trying to accomplish was from the very beginning impossible." (Malia, 1993, p.80)

In essence the central and historical aim of the communist ideology was to achieve a form of social and ideological utopia, which would bring about the end of history and resolve the conflicts between social classes and groups.

A let us recall that their aim was nothing less than to bring history to its culmination and its final perfection with the "building of socialism"; thus they understood socialism in its maximalist sense as the fullness of equality in the stateless, classless society, the overcoming of all alienation, and the passage of humanity "from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom." (Malia, 1993, p.80)

However these goals necessitated certain measures and social programs, which would have extensive repercussion for the communist system and for the society as a whole.

One of the most well - known of the measures that the communists implemented in an attempt to bring to fruition their ideological aspirations, was the abolition all private property. This also had the consequence of suppressing the profit motive and reducing the motivation to produce and create. This is often mentioned as an essential theoretical and practical point that was, in the view of many commentators, the central facet that led to the failure of communism. Therefore we could say that in the light of this analysis that communism failed due to the inability on the part of the communists to realize the innate need to create and produce for personal ends and to obtain private property. As Malia states;

the Soviet goal could be pursued only through a mixture of ideological illusion and raw coercion. But eventually the illusion could not fail to be perceived as such, and the will to coerce would accordingly evaporate; and when this occurred the whole jerry-built structure of what Brezhnev called "really-existing socialism" would come precipitately tumbling down. (Malia, 1993, p.80)

However, while this reasoning which does explain part of the puzzle of why communism failed, it is too simplistic and does not take account of a myriad of other factors and variables.

Another view which is in fact closely linked to the above analysis is that the fall of communism began from within the system. This view is supported by the fact that that the very strict totalitarianism of the Soviet Union began to change after the death of Stalin. After Stalin's death the rigidity of Soviet Communism began to weaken, which was so to result in a reassertion of personal and nationalistic will and aspirations within the various countries and regions in the Soviet Union.

People also began to feel more positively disposed towards the West as the strict and regimented tenets of communism started to loosen. In a sense communism was only successful while it kept all of it disparate parts together and cohesive through often brutal dictatorial coercion. After Stalin there was a decline of the rule of mass terror and an"...opening up partially to the outside world." (Malia, 1993, p.80) as one commentator describes the changing situation; "...the system indeed softened and "de-ideologized..." Malia. (1993)

As this slow but intense change began to grow within certain areas of the Soviet Union there was more dissent and open debate about the negative aspects of the communist system. This dissent emerged from within Russia and was often dealt with harshly by the authorities. However the end result was a critique from within, which gradually began to eat away at the iron facade of communism.

However, what has to be continually kept in mind in attempting to understand the failure of communism in Russia is that one single reason is not adequate to explain the massive and sudden change in the society. This is a view held by scholars such as Paul Winters. In the Collapse of the Soviet Union, he states that there many complex and interrelated reasons for the demise of communism. (Winters, P.A., 1999)

Some of the other factors that contributed to the fall of the communist regime in the Soviet Union included the prevalence of internal corruption within the party and the state; disagreements and conflict within the communist party itself and the problems that the centralized bureaucratic structure of the government created.

In a review of theory, Wilcoxson (2004) states that there are three themes that can be seen to be important throughout the communist period in Russia. These are defined as "productionism, careerism, and bureaucratism." (Wilcoxson, 2004, p.51) Protectionism is the emphasis on industrial output that was achieved at, "... costs in the short and medium term in order to build the revolution in the long-term." (Wilcoxson, 2004, p.51) Careerism is the process whereby individuals joined the communist party not necessarily to serve the higher ideals of the party but rather to further their own careers.

Possibly one of the most negative developments in communism was the emphasis on plutocracy and bureaucratic control. "...the revolution gave rise to endless agencies that employed large numbers of apparatchiki (bureaucrats) and yet seemed to accomplish very little." (Wilcoxson, 2004, p.51)

Wilcoxson and others state that these three themes were major influences and factors in weakening the internal cohesion and integrity of the communist organization and government and that these problems were "... never successfully overcome." (Wilcoxson, 2004, p.51)

Another aspect that weakened structure of communism was the manifestation and the enduring presence of internal strife and even rebellion in the various regions of the Union. There was a gradual revolt from many of the countries and regions in the Soviet Union against the hegemony of the Soviet communist party and its centralized bureaucracy. This was particularly the case in Eastern Europe and refers to, "The huge outbreaks of popular protest and rebellion that periodically convulsed Communist systems" (Sharman, 2003, p. 1)

Briefly stated, the communist system does not allow for the normal expression of dissent and complaint. "In Communist systems a specific combination of a centralized and unelected state apparatus, command economy, and scarcity or absence of independent civil associations tightly restricted the repertoire of action for those looking to defend their interests or press demands on the government." (Sharman, 2003, p. 2) This was to result in many serious social and political expressions of dissent against the communist system.

In this regard some analysts are of the opinion that, "... The 1956 revolt by Hungarian freedom fighters against the Soviet Union was the seminal event in the fall of that communist empire..." (Watson,1998, p 16) This revolt against the communist regime was a strong indicator of the hidden revolt and inner turmoil that lay within the Soviet Union.

After eight years of Stalinist repression and communist tyranny, revolution breaks out as the whole world watches. Freedom fighters, most of them working-class teens and their parents, confront Russian tanks with rifles and homemade weapons, seeking independence from the Soviet Union and basic human freedoms.

Watson,1998, p. 16)

There is a general consensus from many scholars that although the Hungarian uprising in 1956 was repressed, yet the revolt was "...a mortal wound delivered directly at the body of Soviet power," and it was a wound from which the Soviet Union and communist Eastern Europe never fully recovered, and which contributed to their ultimate collapse 34 years later." (Watson,1998, p. 16)

Furthermore, dissent was to foment and grow during the next thirty years in the Soviet Unions and an anti-Soviet movement took shape in the Warsaw Pact countries in October 1989. These were all signs of growing nationalism that was to shake the rigid structure of communist rule. This was eventually to result in the tearing down of the Berlin Wall and communism was "...repudiated in each of the Warsaw Pact countries." (Watson, 1998, p 16)

Another reason that is put forward for the collapse of communism is that in many senses the communist system became 'inefficient'. This can be particularly related to the economic arena. In general it was the inability of the communist system to relate to and integrate with the developing global system of commerce and other aspects of modernization that were to have a negative effect on the Soviet Union.

A the Soviet Union "became" inefficient and collapsed when it attempted to integrate itself into a world system that was passing from its modernizing to its postmodern stage, a system that by its new rules of operation was therefore running at an incomparably higher rate of "productivity" than anything inside the Soviet sphere. (Young, 1996, p. 235)

In essence what this meant was that the rest of the world and the capitalistic countries were driven by personal incentives and profit motives, and this enabled larger countries to develop at a pace which the communist country could not match. This was mainly due to the central ethos of communism which placed state and ideological motives over personal profit and individuality. In simple terms the ideological restrictions imposed by communism meant that it reduced incentives to compete economically on the global market.

3. Conclusion

All of the above facets can be combined to create a more holistic picture of the reasons of the failure of communism. If one had to select a central factor for the decline of communism from a historical and political perspective, it would be the continual and increasing pressure of dissent and rebellion from within the Soviet Union itself.

It should be remembered that communism was an ideology that was enforced through a strict and often tyrannical application of doctrine. Coupled with this is the fact that the acceptance of communism in many areas of the Soviet system was weak from the beginning. "In the countries subjected to Soviet domination after 1945 indigenous communism was generally weak and revolution was enforced from above with Soviet assistance." (Young, 1996, p. 235)

This is a factor which is possibly not always fully recognized by those viewing the fall of communism from the outside. In other words, there was a resentment in many societies and countries within the Soviet Union to the way that communism in essence usurped their traditions and societal norms. The communist governments "...began to introduce Stalinist-type reforms in the economy: breaking up the old aristocratic estates and sharing them out between landless labourers and smallholders, nationalising important industrial and mining concerns..." (Young, 1996, p. 235)

There was also the issue of corruption that added to the revolt from many communist countries.

For example the elections held in many areas were perceived by many to be "rigged" in favor of the party elite. "...since everyone knew the elections were rigged, the new regimes never did obtain real legitimacy in the eyes of the people. Instead, whatever the Marxist insistence on the inevitability of communism... The Eastern European governments were an alien political form... (Young, 1996, p. 235) This view of the causative factors of the failure of communism would suggest that the suddenness of the fall of communism is a perception from a Western point-of-view; and in fact communism had been undermined for many years.