Communism In The 21st Century

Communism as a political and economic ideology is redundant in the 21st century.

In our increasingly liberal modern society, democratic and capitalistic ideals are taking over the world. Everyone strives for representation and expects their governments to work for their welfare. Many economists and eminent politicians support this ideal and comment on how it is ‘the way forward’. Assuming that this assumption is true, Communism as a political and economic concept in today's world is practically redundant and highly ineffective.

In brief, communism; envisioned under the philosophies of Karl Marx describes a society where all property is owned by the government (or the community) and each person receives benefits depending on their requirement. Although it might sound ideal, the ground reality is that communism is mostly enforced by totalitarian regimes and is the go-to market structure for self-contained parties holding absolute power over a nation. This dichotomy between ideal and reality is why communism bears stark contrast to the prevailing ideologies of democracy and liberalism among the great nations of the world.

The defining promises of communism such as allowing a stable economy, greater productivity, high employment and social harmony internally are what attract modern-day lawmakers and politicians towards adopting the once widespread system. However, seeing as we are living in the 21st century, the inherent disadvantages of communism outweigh the benefits as communism is often plagued by central planning, therefore failing to include the needs of every section of the population. Freedom of speech and private ownership are casualties of the system. Added to this is the fact that it is nearly impossible for the market to achieve internal stability without some form of price mechanism being enforced; which runs the risk of proving detrimental towards certain segments of society. These are the key drawbacks which make communism a bad match for today’s world.

A large number of people use the Soviet Union as an example of how communism in its purest form allows a country to flourish. However, this is not true. Firstly, it is important to notice that during the time of the Soviet Union, state censorship of economic activity was widespread. This can be proven as when Gorbachev took over, his policies curbing state censorship allowed Soviet media to report detrimental, long covered truths about, amongst many other pains, how the standards of living in the West were far ahead of what they were in the Union. Furthermore, when Gorbachev inherited leadership of the Soviet Union, he also inherited a crumbling political system and an economy which was on its last legs. It was due to this immense pressure that Gorbachev was forced to announce the dissolution of the Union and resign. The non-conforming ideal of communism, at that time, even led to strained relations between the Union and the United States; a period commonly known as the ‘Cold War.’

To clarify, this does not mean that pure democracy is the best possible form of government. Any system is bound to bring with its benefits a unique set of difficulties which need to be surpassed effectively in order for the system to function efficiently in the place where it is introduced. The major stumbling block for communism is that the problems faced by communist countries are almost always far more arduous to overcome in comparison to other forms of economic and political structure. The most prevalent of these difficulties is the fact that the people of the nation must be convinced to live peacefully with little to no representation in government and legislative matters and policies. In a world where people from one country can communicate with people of other countries almost effortlessly, maintaining this sense of calm would be almost impossible without some form of censorship which would bring in another insurgency altogether.

Democracy, however, has faced one of its greatest crises in decades with some of its basic tenets coming under attack in many countries around the world. Fundamental guarantees such as those of free and fair elections, rights of minorities and the freedom of the press are accelerating in terms of their decline around the world. Even the United States of America is facing an accelerating decline in political rights and civil liberties. Unfortunately, this spells trouble for other not so powerful nations which seemed like promising success stories. The states of Turkey and Hungary, for example, are beginning to slowly descend into authoritarian rule.

Nowadays, more than ever, even established democracies are facing serious challenges from authoritarian regimes and in an unpredictable scenario such as this, it is important to assess both democracy and communism from above. Assuming a fair study is conducted, even a corrupt democracy stands a good chance to reciprocate better results as compared to a communistic structure simply because the people in a democratic country still have some faith in their representation in the eyes of the government. Satisfaction has been proven to be a direct result of growth in the economy and not the form or structure of the market or government.

It is a thin line that the worlds’ nations tread when they choose to incorporate changes in their policies. Communism, which might act as a saving grace to a weak economy often is a Trojan horse and once its roots grasp the economy firmly, it is near impossible to get rid of it without causing great harm to the country’s economic and political landscape. Realising this, communism cannot be an effective and practical structure in today's’ world making it a redundant and inappropriate belief in the 21st century. It is time we move on from such dated concepts and adopt changes to effectively make the world a better, happier place to live in.

---

Written by Raghav Kapur

Edited by Nandini Nalam