Communism: Utopian in Theory, Destructive in Reality
Dr. Ray Gen
Independent Study Economics January 27, 2009 Tracey Thomas
Throughout the ages, humans have been trying to create a utopian society either in the world or through literature and other works of fiction. At first glance, most utopian societies are perfect and fair, however closer inspection will reveal the true corruption of the leaders and their abuse of power. Karl Marx was a revolutionary thinker and believed that one day communism would be the best form of government, better than democracy. In theory, sharing resources equally amongst a country’s denizens seems like a fair way to take people out of poverty and assimilate previously separate classes, making everyone equal. However, communism has failed repeatedly, despite even the best intentions from its creator, Karl Marx. Communism cannot survive in its ideal form due to human nature, leaving the world with another corrupt form of government.
Karl Marx realized that current forms of
government were corrupt, leaving many innocent victims. Even in the
twenty-first century, capitalism still leaves many people victims of
poverty. The United States is known worldwide for the wealth and
prosperity that is available to its citizens. However, not all of its
citizens are living the American Dream. When Hurricane Katrina hit New
Orleans, Americans saw their own poverty. A shocking, “27% of New
Orleans' 485,000 residents live below the poverty level…[with] economic
abandonment faced by hundreds of thousands of urban working-class
families…[and the] conditions of poverty became
life-threatening”(Wilsdon, 2005). Hurricane Katrina destroyed people’s
homes, jobs, and their lives. People already living at the poverty
level, lost everything they owned. Capitalistic America had supported
many Americans, but still left some of its working-class citizens with
little resources. Marx labeled a society that has working citizens
living in poverty, an unjust government. When citizens are working,
they should be able to support themselves and their families as a basic
human right. Still, American poverty cannot compare to the poverty
experienced in other areas. Walter E. Williams, an economist, says, “No
matter how poverty is defined, if I were an unborn spirit, condemned to
a life of poverty, but God allowed me to choose which nation I wanted
to be poor in, I'd choose the United States. Our poor must be the envy
of the world's poor” (2007). While this statement may not be
compassionate toward the poverty faced within U.S. borders, it points
out a greater problem. While poverty in the United States may seem
unjust, it is worse in other countries. The illegal immigration of
Mexicans into the United States is a controversial issue. However, the
reason for this immigration is obvious and in agreement with Williams;
Mexicans would rather be poor in the United States than in their own
country, Mexico.
Six… members of the US Congress [and] I visited Mexico on
a Teamsters-sponsored trip in order to assess what NAFTA has done to
Mexico…We encountered horrendous poverty, environmental degradation and
a lawless and corrupt environment. We talked with mothers who couldn't
afford to send their kids to school, workers who were fired for the
crime of trying to organize a union and religious workers who were
trying to protect young women from the murders and rapes that were
taking place in Ciudad Juárez, right across the border from El Paso… In
the Anapra colonia of Juárez we visited the dilapidated shack of a
young mother: one light bulb, a dirt floor and no healthcare available
for her sick child. Not an uncommon situation for that community, where
tens of thousands of Mexicans had migrated from the southern and even
poorer parts of the country in search of a better life. [There] the
infrastructure crumbled and the already low quality of life
deteriorated. At a health clinic in the area we were told that many of
the illnesses they dealt with resulted from malnutrition and other
dietary problems (Sanders, 2004, p. 13). The poverty in the United States pales in comparison
to the poverty in Mexico. Many people cannot afford nutritional food,
clean water, or even basic healthcare. This leads to countless
preventable diseases and deaths. Another problem with those living in
poverty is the education of their children. Most children are not
allowed to attend school, but are forced to work in the fields or beg
on the streets to help support their family. This lack of education
keeps the citizens uneducated and unable to rise out of poverty. The
human rights of Mexicans are being violated by their government. In
Marx’s time, similar injustices were observed by him. He created a new
form of communism that he believed would end poverty and make the world
a better place for all.
Communism was created by
Karl Marx to be the greatest form of a just government. Marx believed
that a system in which resources are shared equally amongst people
would create a supreme form of government. With Marx,
Communism as the positive dissolution and transcendence of private property, of human self-alienation, and therefore as the real appropriation of the human essence by and for man; therefore as the complete and conscious return of man to himself as a social [gesellschaftlichen], i.e.,
human, man — a return fashioned with the whole wealth of his past
development. This communism is the consummated naturalism =humanism,
the consummated humanism = naturalism. It is
the genuine resolution of the conflict between man and nature and
between man and man — the true resolution of the strife between
existence and true being [Existenz und Wesen], between
objectification and self-confirmation, between freedom and necessity,
between the individual and the species. Communism is the riddle of
history solved; and it knows itself to be the solution
Marx believed that communism was the answer to nearly all problems facing the human race. No longer will the rich own property, while the poor die in the streets. All will be able to live off the land, without ownership. Communism will bring classes together and solve their previous struggles. Men and women will discover their true selves and in turn, become closer to nature. Everyone will be equal. Communism is the best form of government for all people, but the upper class will not give up their power without a fight. Marx exclaims to this, “Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!” (Marx, 1906, p. 64). A communism revolution is in order to fix the abusive forms of government. Then each being will be equal. The working class is honored by communism and therefore needs to bring about this change. “To them, therefore, the fruits of this new power belonged. The newly-created gigantic productive forces… as the common property of all, to be worked for the common good of all” (Engles, 1907, p. 23). Each worker will work for his country and each citizen will receive the same portion of the profits. Thus forming a bond between humans and creating equality for all. Poverty is dead, whereas brotherhood is alive. The destructive forces that have torn people apart have been broken, creating a utopian society.
The former Soviet Union was a communist nation in Russia. Vladimir
Lenin, “had urged the Bolsheviks to strike in the fateful days of
October 1917. And from this perspective, Lenin indeed made history; for
without him, the Bolshevik Revolution could well not have taken place
at all or could have been unsuccessful” (Shlapentokh, 2008, p. 176)
Vladimir Lenin followed the orders of Karl Marx to overthrow the
current government and establish a communist one. The citizens of
Russia were also on board with Lenin because they wanted change and a
more prosperous economy. Lenin wanted to make Russia, “a national
power… [and] allocated the best land, labor, and capital to the armed
forces, space program, and production of capital goods such as farm
equipment and factories” (O’Sullivan & Sheffrin, 2007, p. 36). The
beginning stages of Lenin’s communist plan were already corrupt. He
reserved the best of everything to make his country appear strong and
powerful, while leaving the leftovers for his people. The workers
received less money, and poor quality resources. They had no power to
demand a change. Lenin created a corrupt government instead of a just
government that Marx had envisioned. Lenin, like all humans, was
consumed by greed. He wanted to rule a powerful country, but he also
wanted life’s luxuries, which entailed taking more than his share, and
leaving very little for the working class. The working class in turn,
showed him the same respect that he showed them. “A popular joke in the
Soviet Union went, ‘We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us’”
(O’Sullivan & Sheffrin, 2007, p. 37). The Russian people had no
reason to work hard or do a good job. No matter the input of a worker,
the worker would still receive the same meager pay. Therefore, there
was a steady decline in the amount and quality of the work produced.
Instead of the working class banding together to produce a large profit
to share, people worked as little as possible and some not at all. This
lax work environment had its repercussions. “While
Russia had been a major exporter of wheat until 1913; before long, the
Soviet Union could not keep its own people fed” (O’Sullivan &
Sheffrin, 2007, p. 37). Russia used to make money off of surplus wheat.
Back then, people had incentives to work hard and produce a high yield.
However, under communist rule, they had no incentive to work hard.
Instead they produced so little grain, they were unable to export any
grain for sale, and they could not even feed themselves. The poor work
ethic of the people which was brought upon by Lenin’s greed had
backfired. Now his people were
starving, and Lenin had less money to run the country. He had a nation
more susceptible to attack and citizens who were unwilling help.
Communism, when implemented in Russia, became corrupt through the
greed of Lenin and destroyed the country. Consequently, communism now
has a negative connotation due to human nature, which has destroyed
Marx’s utopian ideal.
Communism has also been practiced by Christians. After Jesus Christ returned to heaven, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God” (Acts 2:44-47a New International Version). The followers of Jesus obeyed his commandments to treat other believers as family, because they were all part of the family of God. They combined all their resources and gave to people in times of need. Not only did they share money, but they also shared their time. The believers ate together and prayed together. They were able to put aside greed while living in accordance with God’s plan. This meant that they treated each other as they would want to be treated, including the leaders who received no more than anyone else. Furthermore, due to their aligned faith, “All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. …There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need” (Acts 4:32-35 New International Version). Due to the bond between the believers and God, they willingly helped others. Everything was shared in accordance with need. All worked for the good of all and not just themselves. Because of this commitment to each other, poverty did not exist within the group, and everyone had their needs met. Thus, creating one of the best success stories of communism. However, human nature eventually took over. In the Bible it states, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23 New International Version). Therefore no man or woman can be perfect. Sin is a part of human nature. Sin infiltrated this holy alliance. “Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife's full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles' feet” (Acts 5:1-2 New International Version). This is the first time that a member did not give everything to be shared amongst the group. However, the couple took it a step further and lied about the price they sold their land for, committing yet another sin. “Then Peter said, ‘Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God.’ When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died” (Acts 5:3-5 New International Version). Despite the group being communist in nature, the free will of the individuals was allowed. They were allowed to choose if they wanted to share all their resources or just a part. All chose to share, but greed overtook this couple and instead of being honest and asking for forgiveness, they lied to cover up their sin, leading to immediate death. Even with God in the equation, humans are not perfect and eventually greed enters the picture, destroying even religious communism.
Karl Marx believed he had created the supreme form of government. A government which exalted the working class and brought people together. He saw the problems brought on by a government, based on competition and the unjust poverty that it created. Many people consider him to be a revolutionary thinker and he still has loyal followers. His ideas of working for the common good of all inspire countless people. However, when communism has been implemented, it leads to destruction. In Russia, communism led to the fall of the Soviet Union and the starvation of its people. In the Bible, communism ended with greed and death. Communism cannot successfully be implemented in a society with human nature. It is human nature that drives competition and thus creates jealousy and greed. It is human nature that needs rewards to work hard and to produce new products. It is human nature to be selfish. However, if human nature was taken out of the equation, Communism could exist in its ideal form. Unfortunately on this planet, communism has created countless problems and destroyed many people’s ability to flourish. While current forms of government have downfalls, communism is certainly not the answer. It will not replace democracy as the world’s best form of government. Instead, communism is grouped with some of the world’s worst forms of government because it exploits its own people. Communism in the world goes against Marx’s views. However, since communism has failed, a new form of supreme government may soon be realized. One that would eliminate poverty and create a bond between its citizens. One without crime and fear. One in which justice will always be served. In this type of government, evil would be eliminated. But without evil, how can one distinguish good? Perhaps the bad must be there so the good times can be truly appreciated. Perhaps a utopian society would be worse than current societies.
References
Engles, F.(1907). Socialism: Utopian and scientific.(E. B. Availing.). Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company. (Original work published 1880).
Kamenka, E. (1962). The ethical foundations of Marxism: 8. communism and the complete, unalienated man. Marxists. Retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://www.marxists.org/archive/kamenka/1962/ethical-foundations/ch08.htm
Marx, K., Engels, F., & LiebknechtNicol. (1906). Manifesto of the communist party. (S. Moore, Trans.). Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company. (Original work published 1848). NIV Study Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1985.
O’Sullivan, A., & Sherrfrin, S. M. (2007). Economics: Principles in action. Boston: Pearson Prentice Hall. Sanders, B. (2004). The view from Mexico. Nation, 278 (4), 13.
Shlapentokh, D. (2008). Lenin: A revolutionary life. Historian, 70 (1), 176 . Williams, W. (2007). Are the poor getting poorer? Capitalism Magazine. Retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5056
Wilsdon, T. (2005). How capitalism breeds poverty: The brutal logic of neo-liberalism. Socialist Alternative. Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://www.socialistalternative.org/literature/katrina/logic.html\ |