The myths of communism, carefully invented by the capitalists

It so happened that modern public opinion about communism is based on various myths and prejudices. The inhabitants, influenced by the ubiquitous propaganda, consider this system tyranny. But this is not so.

Adherents of capitalism often reproach communism for dictatorship. In fact, democracy in the bourgeois system is nothing more than the freedom of the “masters of life” to mercilessly exploit the workers and punish them in case of resistance. In turn, the so-called "dictatorship of the proletariat" is the comprehensive power of the working people in the complete absence of class discord.

Another myth says that communism is a solid “egalitarianism”. However, the discussion here is just about the aforementioned class discord, and not about personal needs and everyday life, which the capitalists like to frighten the modern "consumer society".

The common misconception “ascribes” to the planned the economy shortage of goods and endless lines. Such propaganda is reinforced by archival personnel from the USSR during perestroika. In fact, communism implies the abundance necessary to maximize the satisfaction of human needs. And in the Soviet Union (before the Kosygin reforms) there was complete commodity independence.

Of course, the myth of the total “take and share” is absurd. Communists have always advocated the destruction of private ownership of the means of production based on the exploitation of man by man. But this in no way applies to personal property of citizens.

And finally, communism is not a utopia, as many believe. It ceased to be the lot of dreamers thanks to the efforts of Marx and Engels, who laid the scientific foundation in it through the universal laws of the development of society.

Communism is a system where all means of production are in public ownership and belong to the people, and not to a small handful of rich exploiters, as under capitalism.

We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 6 February 2020 09: 55

    Multiplicity is the sister of talent!

    There is nothing to add to the article!
    1. mor7d Offline mor7d
      mor7d (mor7d) 31 March 2020 14: 00
      Even add to the article NOTHING

      You are right, nothing. None of what was written in the article was. NOTHING. Firstly, there was never any communism. Secondly, in what was, there was a dictatorship, there were queues, a total deficit of literally everything and all other charms.
  2. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
    Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 6 February 2020 10: 28
    And who wrote this nonsense ??? Gulchatay, open your face - the country should know its "heroes" ...
  3. Alexzn Offline Alexzn
    Alexzn (Alexander) 6 February 2020 22: 02
    If we compare the hypothetical theory and social practice ...
  4. delvin-fil Offline delvin-fil
    delvin-fil (Alex) 7 February 2020 04: 17
    Quote: Igor Pavlovich
    And who wrote this nonsense ???

  5. Oleg Rambover Offline Oleg Rambover
    Oleg Rambover (Oleg Pitersky) 7 February 2020 21: 50
    Communism has never been realized anywhere and therefore discussing it is like discussing a spherical horse in a vacuum. But try.
    1. Communism implied the withering away of the state, and without a state it is difficult to imagine a dictatorship.
    But on the way to communism, the “dictatorship of the proletariat” was supposed to be, and this is precisely the dictatorship (the author’s definition is erroneous), unlimited power to destroy the existing political system and suppress the resistance of this transformation.
    Critics pointed out (among socialists) that the dictatorship of the proletariat is impossible and will degenerate into the dictatorship of the party (nomenclature) or personal dictatorship. Which was successfully demonstrated by the USSR.
    2. Regarding “leveling” ... The founder of communism said:

    From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

    - in my opinion, this motto is precisely equalization.
    3. I do not know how under communism, in theory, this:

    The distribution of products will then not require a normalization on the part of society for the amount each product receives; everyone will be free to borrow "as needed."

    Critics pointed out that human needs are unlimited, and therefore no resources will be sufficient to satisfy his needs.
    In practice, all the states that built socialism-communism experienced a shortage, including the USSR, including before Kosygin. Deficit seems to be a systemic problem of socialism.
    4. I think that in the 30s a peasant in the USSR could not very well distinguish between personal and private property when a horse or a tractor was taken from him. Under communism, they did not intend to take anything away; everyone had to do at the stage of the dictatorship of the proletariat.
    5. Almost 150 years have passed since the time of Marx and it is safe to say that he was not right about everything. The idea of ​​communism was hardly buried under the rubble of the USSR. In my opinion, rejection of the state and "to each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" is possible, but in the distant historical perspective, when the possibilities of mankind become practically limitless and a person will become different. And, of course, without a proletarian revolution, rather, bourgeois evolution.