• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Another issue is that the moment the “seize the means” step starts, the bourgeois pull up tent stakes and leave with everything that isn’t nailed down. They flee to the most convenient neighbor where they can continue. This means what’s left in the original country is “less”. Then the country is at a competitive disadvantage with it’s neighbors wrt investment capital and such.

    Next, for anyone who isn’t passionate about the mission, the new standard of living is a concern. Namely, for anyone (proletariat) who was “more successful” , the new standard of living is technically a personal reduction in lifestyle. Obviously for many it’s an upgrade. Point is the “new way” might not necessarily be exciting them, and if there are places they can immigrate to, that’s tough for their home country as they may do so, chasing personal lifestyle improvement. This can cause brain drain as a “successful proletariat” is probably a veteran in their industry that they labor in

    I think communism surrounded but other capitalist nations is a very tough thing to make succeed. Seems like it would need to be global to every truly get out of the “benevolent authoritarian” stage

    Disclaimer: I don’t know shit about fuck, but I say all the above in good faith

    • @kryptonianCodeMonkey
      link
      24 months ago

      Those are all fair points too. You can pretty much boil the problems with communism down to that it basically requires idealism and passion/buy-in from almost everyone, especially those who stand to lose the most advantage over others.