[Epaphras]

My Political Science teacher made an interesting observation the other day.

From Revolution to Fall, Communist Russia lasted 70 years or so. He said the main reason was the generation that took part in the Revolution worked for a better Motherland for their children. That generation wasn't as passionate. Their kids were even less passionate, and were the ones under which communism fell.

He reckoned that if this general pattern continues, and the three major communist nations today - China, North Korea, Cuba - all had their revolutions in the late 50s and early 60s, that means that (according to Russia's timetable) all three are due to fall sometime between 2015-2025.

Thoughts?

I think it's a little naiive to believe that, but I wouldn't be surprised if I saw the fall of Cuba or even North Korea in my lifetime.

_Epaphras

[jfahler03]

Originally Posted by Epaphras

My Political Science teacher made an interesting observation the other day.

From Revolution to Fall, Communist Russia lasted 70 years or so. He said the main reason was the generation that took part in the Revolution worked for a better Motherland for their children. That generation wasn't as passionate. Their kids were even less passionate, and were the ones under which communism fell.

He reckoned that if this general pattern continues, and the three major communist nations today - China, North Korea, Cuba - all had their revolutions in the late 50s and early 60s, that means that (according to Russia's timetable) all three are due to fall sometime between 2015-2025.

Thoughts?

I think it's a little naiive to believe that, but I wouldn't be surprised if I saw the fall of Cuba or even North Korea in my lifetime.

_Epaphras

I completely see what he means by that, and would say I agree (especially in the capitalistic global economy); but my concerns (other than the fact that I don't believe following another nation's timetable is safe, as nations have their own traits and patterns which differ):

1. China's predominance in the international economic and political worlds. At the same time, I do realize that China's economical prowness may be her downfall as a communist economy. Recently, there came news that China's use of fossil fuels have gone up 30% in one YEAR. (Compared to the US's avg. of about 3-4% per year; I could be wrong on the numbers)... The communist party in China is obviously holding on to power very desperately, however the fact of global economy cannot be avoided.

2. The reason for communism and other political upheaval of the era were economic depression combined with repressive regimes (ie pre Bolshevik Russia, before and during the Great War). While George W. Bush might say that we have eliminated a repressive regime (which I will not deny), there are still plenty of repressive regimes out there, on top of the ensuing global depression which we have been in and out of for some time.

3. "World War IV" as some in the academic world call it (War on Terrorism; where Cold War of 46-early 90's would be WWIII).

So... in other words, I'm trying to say that while Communism is on the downfall, it will only take itme for it to be replaced by another extreme economic or political system (which will probably be based again on socialism). Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin, and many other world dictators are interesting because they came to power during uncertain economic times. With the war going on and the economy slowing down, we cannot view a downfall of communism as the end of our foreign relation problems.

[guitarmonkey<><]

I think Cuba, will go as soon as Castro dies... honestly.

[Qingu]

I don't think communism has ever been "in." As a whole, communism is a hopeless ideal. This has not stopped countries from trying to implement some of its ideas. Sometimes this has worked out, as was the case in more socialist-leaning countries such as Norway and Canada that are doing fine today. Sometimes, it didn't work out, as is the case in Russia. American labor incorporated communist ideas into labor unions, which, along with Roosevelt's socialist reforms, saved America from economic collapse (though both labor unions and American socialism are, alas, on their way out).

By the same token, pure capitalism has been dead for a very long time, if it ever existed at all. All real countries are a mix, to varying degrees, of capitalist and communist ideals. I find that the word "communist" is thrown around as a derogatory word nowadays more than anything else.

[Epaphras]

Originally Posted by Qingu

I find that the word "communist" is thrown around as a derogatory word nowadays more than anything else.

Almost as much as the word "Christian"...

By "communism" I mean basically socialist-dictatorships.

_Epaphras

[JerryLove]

Almost as much as the word "Christian"...

Please avoid rhetoric.

By "communism" I mean basically socialist-dictatorships.

How was the USSR in the 80s any more of a dictatorship than the US?

[guitarczar]

I believe the correct definition in it's most basic sense is the "common ownership of the means of production," at least in theory. In practice it might be closer to what you said.

["BrooksB"]

I think it's just a matter of time before one of two things happen:

A) Communist governments evolve into something less communist due to the natural impossibility of such a system to sustain itself for long periods of time. By this point, it wouldn't be truly communist, but it would be moreso than the capitalistic societies like America.

B) Communist governments find a figurehead nation (like China, perhaps) that is able to exude enough power to thrive economically off the more capitalistic countries to support their collectivist ideals. For instance, China is incredibly productive, but their 'stock' in the American economy is ever-increasing. If they can exploit this cleverly enough, perhaps they could subjugate America into picking up the slack that their economy's "command center" leaves.

[jc-16]

your teacher is very smart

["BrooksB"]

whose teacher?

[Epaphras]

Originally Posted by BrooksB

whose teacher?

Mine. My political science teacher noted the trend that "communist" nations crumble within 3 generations of Revolution. Refer to my first post.

_Epaphras

["BrooksB"]

You could say that about virtually every type of government that ever existed, only replacing the number 3 with some other finite value. No government has very much staying power. Ancient Rome was better than most, having lasted a few hundred years before evolving into one of the most despicable political periods this side of Jesus' lifetime.

Either way, governments are temporary. None are supreme, though some are superior when compared to others. This can be judged by how long it takes for a government to slip into some form of tyranny. As far as I know, every government in history has moved to that stage at some point, with the exception of some that are in place now. However, it's only a matter of time before current governments to become tyrannical themselves.

Consider anarchy: it is impossible because if no one is granted power, someone will take it. Whoever takes it will do so because he is most fit for assuming that power until someone else takes that power from him. The same goes for when power is spread out over a large number of people. Theoretically, they may have that power, but whoever is capable of taking that power and concentrating it will naturally do so, thus pushing the society away from democracy and towards monarchy.


Besides, was Russia the only example he had?

[JerryLove]

No government has very much staying power.

Monarchies last the longest... statistically speaking.

Of course, communism has the "only just invented" defense.

["BrooksB"]

Originally Posted by JerryLove

Monarchies last the longest... statistically speaking.

What monarchy?

Of course, communism has the "only just invented" defense.

That's where I was going with my last question. We will not know definitively whether or not communism has much staying power. With our one example of a fallen communist gov't, we could deduce that it wouldn't, but science would ask us to try again.

[JerryLove]

What monarchy?

Britain, China, Japan, Monoco, Liechtenstein, etc.