How ever did communism survive the onslaught of globalisation and democratic beliefs in the 21th century? How can communism still exist after events like the Iron Curtain and the Cultural Revolution? I am not a capitalist, all I want to ask is how society seems so unaffected by these tragic, and sometimes even violent events. Please, share your opinions on this matter, it is much appreciated.
Because despite Science advancing, and developing, and making great breakthroughs every day, we still have not come up with a way to prevent the occasional idiot from being born.
Because despite Science advancing, and developing, and making great breakthroughs every day, we still have not come up with a way to prevent the occasional idiot from being born.
Careful. That can easily be interpreted as a hit on "Special" people.
Anyways, at this point in Earth's history, most communist nations are nuclear powers. And once any country has obtained nuclear power, the "United Nations" set that country aside, and tell everyone not to go near it, until some crazed martyr steals a nuclear device, and then its Black Hawk Down all over again. Communism can only be destroyed by a revolution. You can't try to go in there and wipe it out, because you will never succeed. And not many countries are really into moving into prenhabited land masses. (Except England) So unless the country gets killed from the inside, its not to be touched. Whats it going to do anyway? Nuke itself?
Sorry, I have a rubber keyboard and its really hard to hit the keys, so I don't want to really retype anything. I'm trying to say that unless there is a revolution, communism isn't going anywhere.
Burma - No. Zimbabwe (and other African dictatorships) - No. North Korea - They have the footing, but they are certainly not a power. China - Yes. Venezuela - No. Cuba - No.
Burma - Correct Zimbabwe - Leaning towards Capitalism North Korea - Communist and Might have Nuclear Weapons China - Correct Venezuela - Democracy, but Chavez is more of a dictator Cuba - Used to have Nuclear Weapons on it's land
I think Communism survives because it did not remain to be rigid as it was before. It survives because it did not strive to attain its idealistic perfection it wanted to impose to society.
Communism survived mainly because the Soviet Union spread it to other countries, then built nuclear weapons in those countries to protect themselves, helped spread Communism to other countries and became their allies, and threatened to nuke any country that got in the way of the USSR of spreading Communism. The problem is now, that we can't invade those countries because the Vietnam war damaged our morale.
The problem is now, that we can't invade those countries because the Vietnam war damaged our morale.
Damaged? More like completely and utterly destroyed it in the face of Vietnamese guerrilla warfare. And invading a communist country would just support communists as they have the standpoint of victims of capitalist invasion. That will not help the civilians at all, and the military would be even more extreme and brutal in fear of a civil revolt. It will not help the country and would be worse for the common people in the country.
Damaged? More like completely and utterly destroyed it in the face of Vietnamese guerrilla warfare. And invading a communist country would just support communists as they have the standpoint of victims of capitalist invasion. That will not help the civilians at all, and the military would be even more extreme and brutal in fear of a civil revolt. It will not help the country and would be worse for the common people in the country.
I am referring to countries under the influence of communist ideology, not necessarily a stateless, classless society as that is not possible in today's world.
As I said before, this is why there is still Communism in the world. The Communists are to difficult to change by force, and they don't exactly want to change into a free market. It seems as if you are attacking me.
My point is only that even with the power and resources, taking over would not be a plausible option. Just look at Iraq, and they do not even have a government that's in control of things.
It survises for one main reason, "it is apealing to the poor" for ex. lets pretend america actually hit rock bottom, and other contires where inching in on us and killing us, saying democracy is bad, blah blah... and then while your eating your old soup that is now your meal for the day someone promisses you a job, food, and a house, would you refuse it? maybe with all that american sprit in you no, but after all that you've been through it is to good to pass up, so your new elected president asks to bo dictator and after all that he has done for you and how he has built the country back to its former strenght you can't refuse. That is why it will always be around.
Mugabe dictates what he can, and the rest is anarchy. So what is classifiable of the country, is Communism.
And Cuba used to have an affiliation with Russia, and they ALMOST had nukes on their land. They only ever had silos. The ships that were transporting nukes (or so we though, we were never sure because they turned around without letting us search) was stopped.
Now that their alliance with Russia is dead and the Cold War is over, Cuba is no position to have Nuclear Weapons now or in the near future.
Burma - No. Zimbabwe (and other African dictatorships) - No. North Korea - They have the footing, but they are certainly not a power. China - Yes. Venezuela - No. Cuba - No.
I'd like to add Laos, as I went backpacking there two years ago, and that's definitely a 'No.' Also, Vietnam is still socialist.
I think a more interesting question would be: How has the Red fear survived? Why is communism still perceived as evil in America, when it is no threat to American capitalism. America started the Vietnam War to 'free' the people from communism, by throwing bombs at them. Why hasn't this awful war taught us anything?
