Communism has the same problem as every other system
People
Mao actually said deeper stuff
EDIT: Many communists claim there is no record of this. They are correct - there is no official record of this … in China.
Mao pointing out the depravity of the Yankeestan and willingness to use nuclear weapons against other nations isn’t the own that you seem to think it is. By the way, I love how you follow me around like a court jester. It’s adorable.
Communism is actually bad
What do you mean by that? I think it’s pretty evident by analyzing AES states that shifting the economy into a more collectivized and planned direction comes with numerous benefits. What do you mean when you say it “doesn’t work in practice?”
Should I make one of these that has all the Auth left countries telling the free thinker that “this is the only way to communism”?
Except countries that have existing socialism aren’t doing that. In fact, China very openly says that their system is a product of their history, culture, and material conditions. Unlike western libs, they’re not trying to franchise and remodel other countries into their own image. Neither does Cuba or Vietnam last I checked.
China is only looking for military solutions to expsnd their systen where it is not a product of history : Taiwan, Philippines, bits of India, entire Tibet … scratch that. Tibet is already a product of Chinese “… history, culture, and material conditions.”
This is also why the CPC names their system Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. They want a multi-polar world, where hundreds of different socialisms can bloom on their own without fear of intervention, and especially being attacked by the US:
“Socialism with [insert any country here] characteristics”
I think there’s a bit of a disconnect here. The Anarchist conception of Communism and the Marxist conception are similar sounding, but fundamentally entirely different. This is due to Anarchists seeking to abolish hierarchy, while Marxists seek to abolish class. What does that look like?
For Anarchists, this path generally takes the form of a horizontalist network of communes, or other such unit. Communes have equal ownership within themselves, and trade with other communes via systems of Mutual Aid. The general Marxist critique is that this turns everyone into Petite Bourgeoisie, all interested in the success of their own commune over the entire system the way a Capitalist is more interested in their own profits than those in their supply chain, even if they depend on each other. This can lead to inefficiency and a resurgence of Capitalism.
For Marxists, this path takes the form of collectivizing all industry into full public ownership and planning in a global republic. This requires administration, government, etc, though many of these functions become less necessary when moving beyond class society. The Anarchist critique is that this retains hierarchy.
So, in a way, Marxism is the only path to what Marxists describe as Communism, and is absolutely not a path to Anarchism.
Communism has a 100% success rate.
The problem with the Soviet Union was the lies and propaganda they tried to push was used against them when they got caught.
You can’t have a government for the commoners when you silence them to the point that the commoners no longer believe the government is for them.
Have you thought about a command economy? Centrally run by a Highmaster? Who will no doubt create the prestigious title “Fuel Survey Underlord of the Wilderness Planet at the end of the Noctolium Solar Chain”.
Here’s an audiobook of This Soviet World for anyone who wants. Its also on torrents.
