Why Marxism Does Not Work (II)
— The Content of Marxism
作者：华言
编辑：周志刚 责任编辑：鲁慧文 翻译：鲁慧文
马克思主义以历史唯物主义和政治经济学为基础，并在政治学、经济学、社会学、文化与意识形态等领域发展出理论，构成了其思想体系。
一、马克思主义政治学–红色恐怖
先制造出阶级，然后想象出阶级斗争。阶级斗争的结果是无产阶级专政，谁是无产阶级？马克思以“剩余价值”学说揭示资产阶级剥削无产阶级的秘密，世界划分为阶级之间不可调和的矛盾，导致阶级斗争。阶级是什么？马克思主义认为，阶级以生产资料的所有权为划分基础：资本家占有生产资料，工人阶级则不占有，因此社会分为两大阶级。在马克思主义看来，阶级一词不是中性概念，而是有高低不等、优劣有别、先进与落后、革命与反动等意义的。阶级是一种单向度的分类方法，为了制造阶级斗争而专断的划分标准。
现代社会学用文化、资产、职业、地位等来划分阶层，更具合理性，因为人是多向度的、幸福也是多向度的，因人而异。资本家和工人一样，是一个生产者，并非不劳而获的寄生虫。资本家开办工厂，不仅要拿出资金，而且要对工厂负更大的责任，从工厂的创建直到生产的每一个环节，他都必须认真思考，做出决策。那种把资本家看成是剥削工人的寄生虫的观点，实在是大错特错的。
阶级斗争理论所产生的谬误:一是以“贫富”评判善恶，颠覆了人类传统的价值体系。比如文革时期所产生的“成分论”。“成分”（也叫“阶级成分”、“家庭出身”）是新中国建国后对个人及其家庭社会经济地位的政治化标记。本来用于土改、镇反、合作化等运动中的社会分类工具，到了“文化大革命”（1966—1976）被极度政治化，演变成判断“红”、“黑”、决定一个人前途命运的核心尺度，这种以政治化出身先验评判人的做法，就被称为“成分论”。其中，“红五类”（被视为“根红苗正”的革命对象）：工人、贫农、下中农、革命军人、革命干部（及革命烈属/贫下中农子女等，口径有增减）。“黑五类”（被定为“专政对象”）：地主、富农、反革命分子、坏分子、右派分子（合称“地富反坏右”）。以“贫富”作为善恶的评判标准。穷人都是善良的, 是阶级兄弟;富人都是邪恶的, 是阶级敌人。人类自古以来都是以人的行为品格作为评判善恶的依据, 而不是以贫富来介定人的善恶。心地善良的人乐善好施, 心地邪恶的人损人利己, 善恶完全取决于人的品行,而不是取决于人的贫富。善恶与贫富没有必然的关系,穷人未必都是善良的人,富人也未必都是邪恶的人。二是煽动仇恨挑起人类相互残杀，破坏了人类的和谐发展。人类的价值体系是人类几千年来承前启后累积建立起来的，人类就是依循祖先建立起来的价值观引导，人类依靠团结合作从野蛮走向文明。人类有合作有冲突，但马克思主义者将一切历史都看成是阶级斗争史，这是思维的懒惰，将人类的历史简化成斗争史是为了煽动仇恨。
马克思主义者认为阶级斗争必然导致无产阶级专政。为了实施这种阶级统治，镇压一切反对者，共产党建立了人类历史上最庞大、最严密、成本最昂贵的专政体系。无产阶级专政是一个由共产党通过它的领袖对整个社会进行全面的、无所不包的专制独裁体系。这是人类历史上空前严密、超高强度的控制体系，触角深入社会每个角落，将整个国家变成高度组织化的庞大政治机体，维持成本极高，劳民伤财。为了确保“党的领导”，共产党在基层建立支部，并按照专政体系的行政归属系统，即系统的条条和地区的块块，建立了党统属的组织系统，且凌驾于专政体系中的每一行政机构之上，从而在专政体系的任何一个行政系统里，形成了行政组织机构和党组织机构同时并存。
“党的领导”，就是共产党的专制独裁，党、政权、群众团体都是按照“民主集中制”的组织原则运转的。个人服从组织，少数服从多数，下级服从上级，全党服从中央，而中央的“领导核心”–党的领袖，全党、全国都要团结在这个“核心”的周围。在无产阶级专政国家里，社会群体被强制地分割为两个部分：专政阶级和被专政阶级，实行着人类历史上最野蛮、最暴虐、最恐怖的阶级统治。
马克思主义的国家学说–暴力机器。马克思主义的国家学说，与其说是国家学说，不如说是马克思主义的政府观。马克思主义者混淆了国家和国家政权的概念，将国家与政府等同起来。现代政治学国家四要素说，国家是由领土、人民、主权、政府等四个要素构成的。国家是居住在固定领土上的拥有主权的国民的共同组织。政府是社会契约产生的，共同生活的人们为了一个有秩序和完善的社会，签订契约，组成政府。
马克思所说的国家是统治阶级进行阶级统治的工具，这里的国家指的其实是国家政权，国家政权就是政府。马克思主义认为，国家是阶级斗争不可调和的产物，法律只是统治阶级意志的表现。马克思主义者侧重认为：政府是为一个特定的阶级服务的；现代政府学说认为，政府是制定规则、提供服务、市场监管、公正中立裁判的机关。按照马克思主义的观点，国家是为统治阶级服务的，对国家与政府不作区分，显然是错误的；按照现代国家的观念，国家是生活共同体，政府是为保障生活共同体正常运转的守护机关。
马克思主义的政府是专政机关，政府的产生是由人民决定的，而不是由全体国民决定的。人民是谁，由统治阶级根据自己制定的法律和政策来定义，可以根据形势随意修改，这导致国民恐惧政府，害怕随时被打上阶级敌人的标签，成为被专政的对象。马克思的国家观和政府观是扭曲的，与现代文明社会的民主、自由观念格格不入。
普列汉诺夫早在1918年的《政治遗嘱》中就已经指出：“任何一种专政都与政治自由权利和公民自由不相容。……布尔什维克政权将演变如下：列宁的无产阶级专政将迅速变为一党专政，党的专政将变为党的领袖的专政，维持领袖权力的起先是阶级恐怖，后来是全面的全国恐怖。布尔什维克不能给人民以民主和自由，因为他们一实行民主和自由，马上就会丧失政权。列宁很清楚这一点。”
用来维持共产党党魁无限权力的，必然是“阶级恐怖”和“全面的全国恐怖”，这是红色恐怖，百倍于白色恐怖。
二、马克思主义的经济学–饥饿的游戏
由于集体中的权力是集中的，集体主义更容易成为“集体”中“老大哥”侵犯“集体”内的无权力个人甚至集体利益的一种“假公济私”工具。事实上，几乎所有强调集体主义的“集体”都不同程度地在集体主义的大义下侵犯甚至剥夺集体内个体的一切可以被侵犯的利益以图肥己。若仅仅是存在不能完全消灭阶级的问题，集体主义也许还能在不完美状态下有效运作，然而最大问题在于人的自私性。没有人像蜜蜂中的工蜂一样，只为了团体而无止尽献出自己的脑力或体力生产力，却只和别人一样享受同等的资源，所以产生“向下对齐”的效应，大家尽量偷懒与减少付出，以不被惩罚为原则，反正分配资源时懒与勤的人都是拿差不多的分量，尤其是难以量化的无形创意或研究付出根本不会得到增加资源的奖励反馈，更无人乐于从事。在人性自私本质下，最后集体主义造成的并不是集体进步，而是集体的沦落和最终走向崩解。
马克思主义的经济学：公有制+计划经济。公有制：所谓的国家即党和政府，对社会生产资料和社会生活资料–所有的社会资源与自然资源，实施全面、彻底、高度集中的独占垄断。本质上是：共产党对社会劳动资料——一切生产部门社会总产品和社会生活源泉绝对的独占垄断，对全社会经济运行、社会财富的生产和再生产以至整个社会生活全面的、独一无二的、高度集中的一体化掌控。计划经济：生产的国有化和交换的国有化。生产的国有化：垄断“一切生产部门”。实施这种垄断，完全是运用国家暴力机构，通过激烈的、暴风骤雨的阶级斗争去实现的。在城市，工商业者的企业、工厂、商店、手工业者的作坊及其生产资料，通过“没收”“剥夺”“合作化”等手段，全部被剥夺殆尽。在农村，地主、富农的土地、财产和粮食全被没收，农民的全部土地和牲畜、农具被“集体化”“合作化”。交换的国有化：通过“国家收购”“统购统销”“凭票供应”，消灭市场经济，垄断和掌控一切产品流通过程和价格体系，完全而彻底地垄断了社会生活必需品资源。
劳动资料和生活源泉的垄断是无产阶级的“依附性及一切形式的贫困和奴役的原因，这就迫使人们沦入了对共产党专政国家完全、彻底的人身依附，因而也就无可奈何地忍受它的盘剥和奴役。
希莱尔·贝洛克说：“对财富生产的控制，就是对人类生活本身的控制”，揭露了共产党专政国家控制社会总产品进行社会财富再生产的计划经济，实质上是对人们生活本身，不仅是人们的经济生活，而且也包括他们的社会、思想、政治生活，实施全方位和一体化的控制。
共产主义国家的历史证明：人一旦失去了维持和保障自身生存必须的生产和生活资料，必然丧失人身自由，不得不依附于生产与生活资料的垄断者。
三、马克思主义意识形态–灌输虚假
如果一个社会的言论全是一个来源，一种声音。民众所能得到的讯息都是被严格筛选后的，真实世界和多元化思潮被阻隔。那么，文化将失魂精神落魄，心智将沦丧文明枯竭，这样的社会不需要动刀动枪，就已经彻底沦陷了。
“意识形态”是一种图景，可以简化我们的思维，方便我们理解杂乱无章的世界；它是关于世界是什么、人应该怎么生活、生命的意义等一系列价值观念系统；它提供了信仰般的命题：现实是什么样的，未来应该是怎么样的，如何现实走向应然。
马克思主义意识形态论述：一是意识形态是人们物质生产生活的产物，并随之而不断发展变化。二是意识形态是阶级利益的集中体现，具有鲜明的阶级性。
一切共产主义国家的意识形态：一、马克思主义意识形态是为政治、政党服务的思想话语体系，主流意识形态要体现统治阶级的意志；二、意识形态与政治及国家利益紧密相关，意识形态的斗争总是为政治及国家利益服务；三、意识形态的内核是主导价值观，在现实中体现为话语权。
苏东剧变后，马克思主义思潮在世界范围内的影响力有所下降，马克思主义“过时论”“无用论”“有害论”受人关注，马克思主义的阐释力说服力难以应对现实世界的冲击。非政府组织、现代传播媒体、宗教、外交以及经济等话题对僵化的意识形态构成致命的打击，共产主义国家无不重视做好意识形态工作，防范和抵御所谓的错误思想的渗透和影响。反观西方发达资本主义国家，没有意识形态的管理机构，更没有意识形态的指导政策和文件，谁对自己的观念更加自信，一目了然。
共产党实施意识形态垄断，严密的社会意识形态、严酷的思想控制，要求人民思想一体化的目的，对人民行动和整个社会生活的有效控制。为此，推行整风运动、思想改造运动，以阶级斗争和专政原则处理意识形态问题。
共产党绝对控制着一切有关意识形态的人力资源、生产机构、生产资料和文化资源，控制着从中央到地方的报纸媒体和从业人员，媒体业被定位为党的工具与党的喉舌，要求一切从业人员，必须为无产阶级政治服务，成为党的驯服工具。
四、马克思主义社会学–新阶级特权
共产党人虛构了一个不劳而获的资产阶级，忽悠了一群想不劳而获的无产阶级，建立了一个真正不劳而获的官僚阶级。
马克思主义社会学构造了一个人人平等、广泛自由、生活富裕、精神文明极高的社会。但实际上，那些掌管国家事务的人，很快就形成一个新阶级，社会形成比资本主义社会更大的阶级矛盾，官僚阶级（新阶级）和被统治阶级。
1.不平等的原因。共产党要安置维护巩固好这个新阶级，因为要倚靠这个新阶级来巩固其无产阶级专政的，新阶级高唱漂亮的口号，却在追求最世俗的东西，干着最肮脏的勾当。国家统治一切、管理一切，它需要有一套庞大的官僚机构来管理这些事，一个特权阶层横空出世，那个宣称要做到人人平等的理想没有了，共产主义的目的–追求平等和手段–庞大的官僚阶级之间产生了矛盾，共产主义实际所获得的恰恰是自己所反对的。共产主义的生产模式决定了不能做到它所企求的人人平等。共产主义要做到人人平等，但为了强迫达成这种平等，又必须建立起一套享有种种特权的暴力机构，使平等之目标荡然无存。
2.短缺经济。共产主义国家中衍生出来的那一套官僚机构，也造成经济上的种种失败，短缺是本质特征。失败的原因：一、那些官僚，既没有水平也没有激励机制，使他们能积极认真地去经营那些生产资料，生产不断下降必不可免；二、集中管理带来的高制度成本，使共产主义经济成果很大部分由管理成本所吞没。结果是共产主义没有能提供生活上的富裕，有的是占大多数被统治阶级的共同贫穷。
3.有限的自由。历史事实证明：只有在财产权得到坚定不移的保护时，个人的自由权利才有保障，财产权对个人和家庭构成最有效的壁垒，可用来抵御国家的干涉。共产主义把一切生产资源都收归国有，就是把所有的公民都变成政府的附庸。公民就没有任何有效的措施来限制国家的权力。共产主义废除财产私有制，必不可免地会使人们丧失自由，把人们变成统治者的奴隶。
Why Marxism Does Not Work (II)
— The Content of Marxism
Author: Hua Yan
Editor: Zhou Zhigang Executive Editor: Huiwen Lu Translation: Huiwen Lu
Abstract: This article elaborates in detail on the absurdity of Marxist concepts in the fields of political science, economics, sociology, culture, and ideology.
Marxism, based on historical materialism and political economy, has developed theories in political science, economics, sociology, culture, and ideology, forming its ideological system.
I. Marxist Political Science — The Red Terror
First, create classes, then imagine class struggle. The result of class struggle is the dictatorship of the proletariat. Who are the proletariat? Marx, through the theory of “surplus value,” exposed the secret of the bourgeoisie’s exploitation of the proletariat. The world is divided into irreconcilable contradictions between classes, which leads to class struggle.
What is class? Marxism defines class based on ownership of the means of production: capitalists own the means of production, while the working class does not, thus society is divided into two major classes. In Marxism, the term “class” is not neutral, but implies hierarchy and value judgments — superior vs. inferior, advanced vs. backward, revolutionary vs. reactionary. Class is a one-dimensional classification method, an arbitrary standard imposed to manufacture class struggle.
Modern sociology, by contrast, uses culture, assets, occupation, and status to categorize strata, which is more reasonable, since human beings are multi-dimensional, and happiness is also multi-dimensional, differing from person to person. Capitalists, like workers, are producers; they are not parasitic idlers. The capitalist not only provides capital to establish a factory, but also bears greater responsibility — from its creation to every link in production, he must carefully think and make decisions. The notion that capitalists are parasites exploiting workers is a grave error.
Errors produced by the theory of class struggle:
1. Judging good and evil by “wealth or poverty,” thereby overturning the traditional value system of humanity. For example, the Chengfen doctrine during the Cultural Revolution. “Chengfen” (also called “class origin” or “family background”) was a political label in the PRC marking the socio-economic status of an individual and his family. Originally a classification tool for land reform, campaigns against counterrevolutionaries, and collectivization, it became extremely politicized during the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976), evolving into the decisive standard for labeling people as “red” or “black” and determining their life prospects.
• The “Five Red Categories”: workers, poor peasants, lower-middle peasants, revolutionary soldiers, revolutionary cadres (and revolutionary martyrs’ families/children of poor and lower-middle peasants, with some variations).
• The “Five Black Categories”: landlords, rich peasants, counterrevolutionaries, bad elements, and rightists (collectively called landlords, rich peasants, counterrevolutionaries, bad elements, rightists).
Here, wealth and poverty became the standard of morality: the poor are virtuous “class brothers,” while the rich are evil “class enemies.” Yet since ancient times, humanity has judged good and evil by conduct and character, not by wealth. A kind-hearted person helps others; an evil-hearted person harms others for self-interest. Good and evil depend entirely on personal character, not on wealth. Poverty does not guarantee virtue, nor does wealth guarantee evil.
2. Inciting hatred and pitting humans against each other, thus destroying harmonious human development. Humanity’s value system has been built over thousands of years, passed down from generation to generation, guiding mankind from barbarism to civilization through cooperation. Human history includes both cooperation and conflict. Marxists, however, reduce all history to class struggle — a lazy form of thought, simplifying history into a struggle narrative in order to incite hatred.
Marxists believe class struggle must inevitably lead to the dictatorship of the proletariat. To implement such rule, and suppress all opposition, the Communist Party established the largest, most tightly woven, and most costly dictatorship system in human history. The dictatorship of the proletariat is a comprehensive, all-encompassing system of totalitarian control exercised by the Communist Party through its leaders over the entire society. This system penetrates every corner of society, turning the whole state into a highly organized political machine, extremely costly to maintain and exhausting to the people.
To ensure “Party leadership,” the CCP establishes Party branches at the grassroots level, and overlays the administrative system with a parallel Party organizational system, which is placed above each government institution. Thus, in every administrative system, Party organs and state organs coexist, with Party organs in ultimate control.
“Party leadership” is in fact the CCP’s dictatorial monopoly. The Party, the government, and mass organizations all operate according to the principle of “democratic centralism”: the individual obeys the organization, the minority obeys the majority, the lower level obeys the higher level, the whole Party obeys the Central Committee, and the Central Committee obeys its “core leader.” In a dictatorship of the proletariat, society is forcibly divided into two parts — the ruling class and the ruled class — enforcing the most barbaric, violent, and terrifying class rule in human history.
Marxist theory of the state — the violent machine. Marx’s state theory is essentially a view of government. Marxists confuse the concept of the state with state power, equating the state with government.
Modern political science defines the state as consisting of four elements: territory, people, sovereignty, and government. The state is the community of citizens with sovereignty residing on a fixed territory. Government arises from the social contract — people living together form a government to ensure order and a well-functioning society.
Marx, however, claimed that the state is the tool of class domination, but what he referred to is actually state power — that is, government. Marxists believe the state is the product of irreconcilable class struggle, and law is merely the expression of the ruling class’s will. In their view, government serves a specific class. Modern political science, however, holds that government makes rules, provides services, regulates the market, and acts as a neutral arbiter.
According to Marxism, the “people” are defined arbitrarily by the ruling class under its laws and policies, and this definition can be changed at will. This produces fear of government among citizens, who dread being labeled “class enemies” at any moment, subject to dictatorship. Marxist views of the state and government are thus distorted, in fundamental conflict with modern ideas of democracy and freedom.
As early as 1918, Plekhanov, in his Political Testament, pointed out:
“Any form of dictatorship is incompatible with political freedom and civil liberties. … The Bolshevik regime will evolve as follows: Lenin’s dictatorship of the proletariat will quickly become the dictatorship of a party, the dictatorship of the party will become the dictatorship of the party leader, and maintaining the leader’s power will at first require class terror, and later comprehensive nationwide terror. The Bolsheviks cannot give the people democracy and freedom, for if they do so, they will immediately lose power. Lenin knew this well.”
What sustains the Party leader’s unlimited power can only be “class terror” and “comprehensive nationwide terror.” This is the Red Terror, a hundred times worse than the White Terror.
II. Marxist Economics — The Hunger Games
Because power in collectivism is centralized, collectivism easily becomes a tool for “Big Brother” to exploit powerless individuals in the name of “serving the collective.” Almost all collectivist structures, to varying degrees, encroach upon and even strip away individual rights within the collective, under the guise of collective good. The greatest flaw is human selfishness. No one, unlike a worker bee, devotes limitless labor or creativity purely for the group without reward. Thus arises the “leveling downward” effect: everyone slacks off to avoid punishment, since in resource distribution the lazy and the diligent receive nearly the same. Particularly, intangible contributions like creativity or research, hard to quantify, receive no greater reward. In such a system, no one is motivated to contribute. Ultimately, collectivism produces not collective advancement but collective decline and eventual collapse.
Marxist economics = public ownership + planned economy.
• Public ownership: In practice, “the state” — meaning the Party and government — monopolizes all means of production and resources. This is essentially absolute control by the Communist Party over all productive forces and sources of life, imposing centralized, monopolistic control over economic activity and social life.
• Planned economy: Production and exchange are nationalized.
• Nationalization of production: All industries are monopolized by the state, enforced by violent class struggle. In cities, entrepreneurs’ factories, shops, and workshops were confiscated through “seizure,” “expropriation,” and “cooperativization.” In the countryside, landlords’ and rich peasants’ land, property, and grain were seized, and peasants’ land, livestock, and tools were collectivized.
• Nationalization of exchange: The state monopolized distribution through “state procurement,” “unified purchase and marketing,” and rationing, thereby eliminating the market and controlling all circulation and prices of goods.
Such monopolization of labor and life resources forces individuals into total dependence on the Party-state dictatorship, enduring exploitation and enslavement.
As Hilaire Belloc said: “Control over the production of wealth is control over human life itself.” Thus, the Communist planned economy — monopolizing social wealth — was in essence control over people’s lives, not only their economic existence but also their social, ideological, and political existence.
History of communist states has proven: once people lose the means of production and livelihood, they inevitably lose freedom, reduced to dependence on those who monopolize them.
III. Marxist Ideology — Indoctrinating Falsehood
If a society has only one source of discourse, only one voice, and all information available to the public is strictly filtered, then the real world and diverse ideas are cut off. Culture becomes soulless, minds degenerate, and civilization withers. Such a society, even without knives or guns, has already collapsed.
“Ideology” is a worldview, simplifying thought and helping us make sense of chaos. It is a system of values about what the world is, how people should live, and the meaning of life. It provides doctrines with quasi-religious weight: what reality is, what the future should be, and how to move from “is” to “ought.”
Marxist ideology claims:
1. Ideology is the product of material production and life, and changes with them.
2. Ideology is the concentrated expression of class interests, and thus has a distinct class character.
In all communist states, ideology takes the form of:
1. A discourse system serving politics and the Party, where the dominant ideology reflects the will of the ruling class.
2. Ideological struggle is always tied to political and state interests, serving them.
3. The core of ideology is dominant values, manifested in discourse power in reality.
After the upheavals in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, the global influence of Marxist thought declined. The theories of Marxism being “outdated,” “useless,” or even “harmful” gained attention. Marxism’s explanatory and persuasive power has struggled to withstand the impact of the real world. Topics such as NGOs, modern mass media, religion, diplomacy, and economics dealt fatal blows to its rigid ideology. Communist states all attach great importance to ideological work, seeking to prevent and resist the so-called infiltration and influence of “erroneous ideas.”
In contrast, developed Western capitalist countries have no institutions managing ideology, let alone guiding policies or documents on ideology. Whose ideas display greater confidence is self-evident.
The Communist Party enforces an ideological monopoly through strict social ideology and harsh thought control, aiming for the unification of people’s thought as a means to effectively control people’s actions and the entire life of society. To this end, it launched “rectification movements” and “thought reform movements,” handling ideological matters through the principles of class struggle and dictatorship.
The Communist Party absolutely controls all human resources, production institutions, means of production, and cultural resources related to ideology. It controls newspapers, media, and personnel from the central to the local level. The media is positioned as the Party’s tool and mouthpiece. All media workers are required to serve proletarian politics, becoming obedient instruments of the Party.
IV. Marxist Sociology — The New Class Privilege
Communists fabricated an image of an unearned, parasitic bourgeoisie, deceived a group of proletarians who dreamed of living without labor, and in the end created a truly parasitic bureaucratic class.
Marxist sociology constructs an ideal society where everyone is equal, broadly free, materially affluent, and spiritually advanced. But in reality, those who control state affairs quickly form a new class. Society develops contradictions sharper than those of capitalist societies: a bureaucratic class (the new class) versus the ruled class.
1. The Cause of Inequality.
The Communist Party must install and secure this new class, because it relies on them to consolidate its dictatorship of the proletariat. The new class sings lofty slogans but pursues the most worldly gains, engaging in the dirtiest deals. The state controls and manages everything, requiring a vast bureaucracy. Thus emerges a privileged stratum. The ideal of equality vanishes. The goal of communism — equality — and the means to achieve it — a vast bureaucratic class — are inherently contradictory. The communist mode of production makes equality impossible. To force equality, communism must create a privileged apparatus of violence, thereby annihilating equality altogether.
2. Shortage Economy.
The bureaucracy inherent in communist states also leads to economic failures, with shortages as their essential feature. Reasons for failure:
• First, the bureaucrats lack both competence and incentive mechanisms to manage production properly, making decline inevitable.
• Second, centralized management generates enormous institutional costs, which swallow much of the economic output.
As a result, communism cannot provide material prosperity. What it produces is collective poverty shared by the majority ruled class.
3. Limited Freedom.
Historical facts prove: only when property rights are firmly protected can individual freedom be guaranteed. Property rights form the most effective shield for individuals and families, protecting them from state interference. Communism nationalizes all means of production, turning citizens into dependents of the state. Citizens thus have no effective means of limiting state power. By abolishing private property, communism inevitably strips people of freedom and turns them into slaves of the rulers.
