Does communism have any inherent systemic defects?

Does communism have any inherent systemic defects?

Its strange to see that every attempt to bring about full communism implodes on itself quite rapidly. Ive heard the argument that this is due to "capitalist meddling from the outside" but I think that's just part of the problem…competition and war are facts of life that economics has to deal with.
But I think something more sinister is going on at the central committee level, something about central planning and limiting entrepreneurs and distributing goods as rations seems to demotivate people…

Thoughts?

It is inferior to Anarchism in every single way

That is a significant and inherent systemic failure

I would consider this a burn if you weren't a delusional narcho yourself.

You think attemps at socialism?

And yes those had internal defects, but those were not inherent to the mode of production of socialism, just a result of poor implementations and bad planning.

Thats why theres lots of different kinds of socialism, all of which (should) lead to communism. USSR-style central planning obviously didnt work out so we have to analyse what went wrong and why, and design a new system to not make those same mistakes.

You can't just say "one kind of socialism didnt work better keep capitalism" because we know capitalism has lots of inherent systemic defects, which is what we will try to solve with socialism. You cannot stop attempting to improve because there is a chance the fix you try doesn't work either.

this and only this

its just a retarded dead meme that welfare capitalists and technocrats bandy around for the purposes of moral signaling to each other that they're "left" and not "right" or shitlibs. it would never come about from state socialism ever

CALCULATION PROBLEM

In order to ensure equality an establishment must be set up to take from those who want more and give to those who have less.
The entire theory of Communism is that you can get rid of this structure over time. But that is the flaw. You can't get rid of it. So you never actually reach the "True Communism" We are told about.
The reason you can't get rid of it is because of human nature. It doesn't matter if a speed limit exists, people will speed. It doesn't matter if laws exist that tell you not to steal, rape or kill. People do these things. So if you have a system that says you must share equally, people also will not obey. They structure can not go away because it always must ensure that people obey the rules of Communism. And so you end up with those who enforce Communism and groups of people who do not want to obey Communism. Direct Democracy is no longer an option because those groups might convince others to vote against Communism. And those groups are dealt with harshly by the Law Enforcers to ensure that they do not overthrow the system.
Basically it's a huge, huge lie. And can only lead to once group of people having complete control over everyone else. And there is no way around it.
It doesn't matter what the books say, they are pure fiction, reality tells us the truth.

I really don't like the idea of "forced" collectivism, people being forced to live communally via distributivism and central planning.

But anarchism is not a political ideology or economic system, it's an individualist mode of living.

Where the hell did you hear that?

Leninism has inherent systemic defects stemming from its party structure and inabillity to integrate opposition.

anarchism that isn't amoral, individualist stirnerism is going to be a pseudo-anarchism.

It involves humans.

stopped reading here
2 feels>reals/10

At least with anarchism we didn't have man-made famines on purpose. Fag.

stalin=/=communism
I thought you would know that by now

...

What the fuck are you talking about? How is the Soviet Union or whatever communism? You sound like a conservative radio host.

Unfortunately I cannot falsify anything you are saying. You have made a very narrow construct of state "socialism" with the worst aspects of twentieth century "socialist" experiments. Of cores all the things you have listed are excellent and flawed, this is a good thing. Many modern socialist have moved away from the rigid ideological purity of the Comintern days.

To summarize, yes these are all flaws to the socialist system, but it's a good thing they don't affect the socialist system!
if you know what I mean

I hate Stalin just as much as you m8!
maybe you shouldn't jump to conclusions so quickly

Someone has to enforce property non-claims.

Cant hear you the fact that workers coops and mutual banks working along the ideas of Proudhon are currently enabling workers to keep all of the value they produce

Tell me more about XX century failed states pls

Well communism, as I understand, isn't exactly a system. It's the end goal, the general way of living we hope to attain in the future. The system is what we're always arguing about. Capitalism is a system, it's goal being bourgeois supremacy, and it's damn good at achieving that.

It is called logistics.

It ignores human nature.

Where you just born stupid?

This is a dumb question

It has inherent systemic defects like all political systems have had in the past.

Central planning is just the Leninist/Stalinist interpretation for Communism, it is not a necessary component to it.

The real question would be which is more effective, Capitalism or Communism. Marx said Communism would be more effective due to 100% labor output, and this was demonstrably true as seen in the Soviet Union's war time economy.

That was the moment which you went completely apeshit stupid.