COMMUNISM

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 441.

The term communism has been used in three different, if related, ways: as a political principle, as a social model or regime-type based upon this principle, and as an ideological movement whose central purpose is to establish such a society or regime. As a political principle, communism stands for the communal organisation of social existence and, in particular, the common or collective ownership of wealth. In the Communist Manifesto ([1848] 1967), Karl Marx (1818–83) thus summed up the theory of communism as the ‘abolition of private property'. There are two versions of communism as a social model or regime-type. The first of these is a model of a future society described in the writings of Marx and Engels (1820–95). Marx predicted that after the overthrow of *capitalism there would be a transitionary ‘socialist' stage of development, characterised by the ‘revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat', which would, as class antagonisms abated, eventually lead to full communism.

Although Marx refused to describe in detail this communist society, he envisaged that it would have the following features:

The second version of communism as a social model is based upon the regimes that communist parties established when they gained power in the twentieth century, for example in the USSR and Eastern Europe and in China, Cuba, Vietnam and elsewhere. Communism in this sense came to mean ‘actually existing socialism', sometimes seen as ‘orthodox communism'. Orthodox communism amounted to a form of state *socialism in which political control was vested in the hands of a monopolistic and hierarchical communist party and the economy was organised on the basis of state *collectivisation and central planning.

As an ideological movement, communism is intrinsically linked to *Marxism: the terms are either used interchangeably, or communism is viewed as operationalised Marxism, Marxism being the theory and communism the practice. However, communism in this sense is better linked to so-called orthodox Marxism, sometimes portrayed as ‘dialectical materialism', because it was as much influenced by the ideas of Leninism and Stalinism as it was by the classical ideas of Marx. Just as Soviet communism became the dominant model of communist rule in the twentieth century, Marxism–Leninism became the ruling *ideology of the communist world. Although communist ideology was reinterpreted in different societies and by different leaders, it was characterised by a number of recurrent themes. The most important of these were a sometimes crude belief in the primacy of economics over other historical factors, strong support for revolution rather than reform, the identification of the proletariat as the revolutionary class, a belief in the communist party as the ‘vanguard of the working class', support for socialist or proletarian *internationalism, and a belief in comprehensive collectivisation.

Significance

Communism as the principle of common ownership long pre-dates Marx and can be found in the writings of Plato (427–347 BCE) and Thomas More (1478–1535); however, its modern significance is almost entirely associated with the theory and practice of Marxism. As an ideological movement, communism was one of the most powerful political forces of the twentieth century, although its influence was largely confined to the 1917–91 period. However, during this period, communism presented the chief alternative to capitalism: it provided the basis for political and social reconstruction in what became known as the communist East, and constituted the principal oppositional force in many parts of the capitalist West. The ideological potency of communism stemmed from its stress upon social equality and the common good, and its promise to bring to an end what Marx called ‘the exploitation of the many by the few'. Its political success was closely linked to its capacity to mobilise oppressed or disadvantaged classes in support of revolutionary leaders who were well organised and followed clear political strategies. Communism in power proved to be a formidable force: the construction of one-party states not only weakened ‘class enemies' and opposition groups, but also allowed communist parties to operate as ‘ruling' parties in the sense that they dominated all aspects of government, the military, the economy and the ideological apparatus. In practice, twentieth-century communism was largely a vehicle for modernisation that was most successful in economically backward societies where its success was ultimately judged in terms of its capacity to deliver social development.

Critics of communism have usually lighted upon the more unattractive aspects of orthodox communism, sometimes tracing these back to the classical ideas of Marx. In this light, communism is seen to be intrinsically dictatorial, if not implicitly totalitarian. The oppressive face of communism stems from the fact that it combines the ideas of concentrated political power and centralised state control (despite Marx's doctrine of ‘withering away'), creating an all-powerful party-state apparatus, typically dominated by a charismatic leader. The dramatic collapse of communism in the Eastern European Revolutions of 1989–91 and the radical reforms that have occurred where communist parties have clung on to power indicate a number of structural weaknesses within orthodox communism. The most important of these are the (arguably) inherent inefficiency of planning systems and the inability of communist states to match the economic prosperity enjoyed in capitalist ones (and in particular, the failure to produce Western-style consumer goods); the tendency towards sclerosis in a political system that was dominated by entrenched party and bureaucratic interests; and the fact that communist political systems lacked the mechanisms through which elite groups could monitor and respond to popular pressures.