3 ms·

It could, but the correlation doesn't automatically imply causation. Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre-existing tendencies to authoritariani

It could, but the correlation doesn't automatically imply causation. Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre-existing tendencies to authoritarianism and corruption are more likely to give rise to communist regimes. If a society with stronger civil traditions or more capital attempted to implement a communist system, the result might be radically different than what we've seen so far. I also think that in modern-day practice, the lines between what we term communist, capitalist, socialist, etc. are much blurrier than we tend to admit. The gp post demonstrates how so-called capitalist countries can enact strongly "socialist" or "communist" behaviors and polices, and vice versa--they just do so with different rationalizations and rhetoric. If you could somehow find an absolute measure for the success level of each country in the world and plot it according to the political system they supposedly espouse, I don't think you'd find nearly as much cohesion compared to if you plotted them according to measures like the strength of judicial and education traditions, beneficial geography, balanced ethnic makeup, and so on. These labels get applied after the fact, they aren't the structural drivers that make various governments and societies function the way they do.

ajuc 14y ago
> It could, but the correlation doesn't automatically imply causation. Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre-existing tendencies to authoritarianism and corruption are more likely to give rise to communist regimes. Communism was introduced by force in many countries, in few cases it was introduced to half a country, and the half that stayed capitalist, benefited. You'd need to assume countries with high probability of dictatorship and corruption are more probable to be forced to become communist states by others, and that the difference between West and East Germany, North and South Korea regarding authoritarianism and corruption tendencies are bigger, than the same differences between for example East Germany and Russia, or West Germany and Spain. I think from the data we have it's more probable, that communism just don't work. > The gp post demonstrates how so-called capitalist countries can enact strongly "socialist" or "communist" behaviors and polices, and vice versa--they just do so with different rationalizations and rhetoric. Communism is "from everybody according to their needs, to everybody according to their needs". So salary and employement doesn't depend on productivity, free market doesn't dictate prices and volumes of produced goods and services. Public road system, army, health care system and free education are implementation details, compared to centrally planned economy.
pyre 14y ago
> Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre- > existing tendencies to authoritarianism and corruption > are more likely to give rise to communist regimes Seems more likely that whenever someone wants to rise to power as a despot, it's a lot easier when you are claiming to be communist/a workers' paradise/a government for the people, even if that description is in name only. E.g.: Why do you want to over-throw $despot? You must be an enemy of 'the people.'

ajuc 14y ago

> It could, but the correlation doesn't automatically imply causation. Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre-existing tendencies to authoritarianism and corruption are more likely to give rise to communist regimes. Communism was introduced by force in many countries, in few cases it was introduced to half a country, and the half that stayed capitalist, benefited. You'd need to assume countries with high probability of dictatorship and corruption are more probable to be forced to become communist states by others, and that the difference between West and East Germany, North and South Korea regarding authoritarianism and corruption tendencies are bigger, than the same differences between for example East Germany and Russia, or West Germany and Spain. I think from the data we have it's more probable, that communism just don't work. > The gp post demonstrates how so-called capitalist countries can enact strongly "socialist" or "communist" behaviors and polices, and vice versa--they just do so with different rationalizations and rhetoric. Communism is "from everybody according to their needs, to everybody according to their needs". So salary and employement doesn't depend on productivity, free market doesn't dictate prices and volumes of produced goods and services. Public road system, army, health care system and free education are implementation details, compared to centrally planned economy.

pyre 14y ago

> Perhaps the pattern arises because societies with pre- > existing tendencies to authoritarianism and corruption > are more likely to give rise to communist regimes Seems more likely that whenever someone wants to rise to power as a despot, it's a lot easier when you are claiming to be communist/a workers' paradise/a government for the people, even if that description is in name only. E.g.: Why do you want to over-throw $despot? You must be an enemy of 'the people.'