Communism is an "ideal" ideology in creating classless utopia world.

It is pretty in theory however it is not practical.

Human Needs:
- Food to eat
- Education (food for thought)
- Ownership of things
- Differentation/Superiority

It addresses the fundamental needs and not the others.

Many society started with socialism/communism, as it evolves/improves, democracy with capitalism structure start to take over.


As many forumer mentioned here already, it creates a divided power to top tier of the hierarchy and fails to address the greed and the will to be superior within human being.

It is an idea resulted from the society observation during the non structured/chaos era.

Example, if 1 billion people lives life in poverty, hardly enough food to eat, jobless, education is out of the question, what is the best society structure to address this issues temporary? Sharing resources would be the best temporary solution.

Just take PRC as an example, after WWII, as the entire nation is still in poverty, socialism idea at least address the hungry mouth issue first. Once the nation as a whole is progressing, then the policy is gradually structured/transformed to capitalism.

In my opinion, this progression ideology is a better model for such a large population society.

Looking at the other two examples, Soviet and India, they started with socialism ideology. However, the introduction of democracy is too drastic until the whole nation collapsed (Soviet, every state wants to have their own rights, independent and currency) or the gap of the wealth is huge (India).

In certain so called democratic countries, as the gap of the wealth is huge, instead of sending their children to school, the poor parent makes them children labor, which receive 50 cents a day or so.

In summary, one ideology that fits one country does not necessary fits another. The leader need to look into the history, culture, society and modify the ideology accordingly. Else it would becomes another fallen empires like what we always saw and learned from the history.

One main reason why Communism ideology fails is the way it handles the economic of a country. It assumes that the economic of a country is finite. Don't get me wrong, finite here doesn't mean that the regime leader comes out with a GDP of says 1Billion for year 2010 for that country.

"Finite" means the economic is determined by the regime leader and his team in a hierarchy structure. A team does infrastructure, B team food, C team medical, D team weapon....etc. The nation's wealth is determined by the top tier of the hierarchy. The job creation, the number of companies are all are predetermined by the leader. Food is distributed to each citizen in the form of coupon (like North Korea). The country will need to shield the entire nation from the outside world (capitalism) in order to maintain the ideology.

On the other hand, why capitalism is a better model? Because it started with the assumption that economic of a country is theoretically infinite.

Looking back at the history of western economy capitalism model, prior to 17th century, there were kings, dukes, rich man or central planner who control the entire piece of lands and everything (includes everyone) in it.

There was one Scotsman who proposed a new model called "Invisible Hand". He argued that when each person pursues his own line of work, the general population is far better off that it is when the king or the central planner runs the economic show and dictates who does and gets what (e.g. cloth, hat, vegetable). He argued that if millions of individuals making and selling whatever they pleased, and going off in all directions at once, could create an orderly society in which everyone had clothes, food and a roof over their heads. What if 99% of the people decided to make hats, and only 1% decided to grow vegetables? The country would be flooded with hats, and there would be nothing to eat. But this is where the Invisible Hand comes to the rescue.

There wasn't really an Invisible Hand, of course. It is a metaphor. For instance, if too many hat makers made too many hats, hats would pile up in the market, forcing the hat sellers to lower the price. Lower price for hats would drive some hat makers out of the hat business and into a more profitable line of work, such as vegetable farming. Eventually, there would be just enough vegetable farmers and hats makers to make the right amount of vegetables and hats.

The "invisible hand" method proposed is the basics of how a free market works, and they still hold true today. He was referring to supply and demand kept goods and services in balance. His idea seems obvious today, but in 17th century, it was a novel idea by one human being when such ideology was never heard and never implemented before.

His name was Adam Smith aka The Father of Modern Economics. And his idea was written down in the book called "The Wealth of Nations".

If a country wants to be prosper, it needs to adopt "free market" concept where the wealth generated is theoretically infinite. In summary, bottom up (capitalism) is a better model then top down (communism) from economical perspective.

One can still argues that there are pro and con with "free market" capitalism concept. I agree. Look at Tulip bubble, Automotive bubble, .Com bubble and lately property bubble in Dubai. Again, as Adam has mentioned, this is how the free market work in cyclic order, where price goes up will eventually comes down and this cycle will continues......just like the hats maker and the vegetables farmer.....