The difficulty we have today is the “Maoism and Capitalism” of economic and social systems. Where once we knew as much (actually, much more) about Maoism as we know about capitalism, now it is hard to find anyone who has even read Lenin, much less a devastating critique of him such as one finds in Solzhenitsyn.
The trick is recognizing that the critique is a riddle making use of Churchill’s famous statement about democracy, capitalism is the worst possible system except for all the others. In reality there are two extremes: total control of economic matters and total “hands off” of economic matters. In reality, every system is a compromise. Yet it has long been understood (not by the Maoists or certain others) that there are “red lines,” the closer one goes to either extreme.
There are limits which are exceeded at great peril to the society concerned. In point of historical fact, it has rarely been the case that the “hands off” red line has been crossed, quite often that the “too much supervision” red line has been crossed.
What I also understand is that “capitalism” is not an economic system so much as recognition of a fundamental reality: it is the accumulation of “capital” which allows investment, which allows creation.
That such efforts normally fail is simple. That is, it proves very difficult to tell people to “be free” in certain areas but not in others. Sooner or later, they start crossing the regime’s red lines!
On the other side I argue with Adam Smith who said, “civil government, so far as it is instituted for the security of property, is in reality instituted for the defense of the rich against the poor.” Smith would have railed against giant corporations if he were alive today. They plunder the world and we fight wars for them like in Iraq.
I think Marx was one of the most misunderstood. He believed in a dialectic that eventually would destroy all class divisions and finally create a wonderful society without any. It remains to be seen if it will ever happen. I know I won’t live to see it nor do I necessarily believe it can or will happen.
Why Many Deaths Then?
1. The most severe accusations made against Communist states is that they were responsible for tens of millions of deaths.
Most Communist states held the death penalty as a legal form of punishment for most of their existence. A number of Communist states also held forced labor as a legal form of punishment for certain periods of time, and, again, critics argue that the majority of those sentenced to forced labor camps died.(Source:en.wikipedia, 2006)
“It is difficult to deal with tragedy when you and your family have to suffer at the hands of others – others who merely claim they know how the world should be and kill others to make it that way. When they claim to have all the answers for the world, and when it is willing to kill all those who do not agree, we have a problem. That is what has happened to Nepal”. My friend Tom added.
I take a humanist position against all Maoists, wars and injustice. I hate all the “isms”.
I believe, peace and true economic halth with a good system is very hard to establish and even harder to hold onto.
If we want good economic systems, then end bad policies, end bad leaders, end terrorism, and end innocents’ deaths.
If people have a society based on equity and justice for everyone the problem would be solved. Most countries do the opposite.
It’s always the issue of the privileged not caring, the poor and desperate get hurt and women especially get hurt the most and they start to support a different system.
There are many good people everywhere fighting against injustice and for peace. Problem is there aren’t enough of them and their resources are limited.