Verified answer

It always fails in the long term. Just as Socialism will fail in America. You can't have half the people paying the other half's way and expect to survive. Everyone needs to pay something.

It works with ants, but humans are different. The statement, "Those who seek power often tend to abuse it", explains this best.

Another reason is self-preservation is a strong survival trait among humans, meaning humans are selfish creatures that watch out for themselves. Think of Communism as an ant colony. The leadership is the queen ant, while the rest of the population represent the peons. Being selfish, some people want a larger slice of the pie. The leadership does not want the same horrible lifestyles the workers have, so they take advantage of their power to live in luxury off the workers. The workers can resent this all they want, but the leadership also controls the military, meaning there is nothing the workers can do.

The Communism problem is not Karl Marx's fault, rather the people/masses dumb enough to prop up and support the corrupt leaders. Without support what hold does a few dozen men have over a million? The soldiers and civilians that support these corrupt leaders are at fault. Marx merely provided the idea while the people carried it out.

North Korea is indeed a messed up place, the leaders import Western luxury goods from China, while the people eat grass. However, other countries are just as responsible for N. Korea; giving aid and food when the more logical step would of been to invade and liberate the people.

Communism itself was a "decent" idea, the people who used communism/socialism never truly achieved the status of true communism; they ended up with a half breed of socialism.

You say it spawned poverty? when In Soviet Russia, Improved dramatically in its early years; life expectancy went up (higher than the US at some point), They had there own NHS, Everyone was earning a income an had a home with heating (its only if you refused to work that you were considered "lazy" etc..)

North Korea While Communism; employs its own type of communism, where it puts the military first an cant feed its own people because of it. Bad North Korea!

An the last answer is because it never "truly" achieved Marxist true regime, just a half-breed of it. So how can they blame peoples own interpretations of his work on him?

Im glad communism In most country's Is over, it had few good point but was overwhelmed by the bad points.

Much Love From Nikolai

The problem with communism is the control of the economy and society. Although socialism has the same concept but only to the economy. Both principles are focused on the centralized organization where the goods and services are produced, owned and controlled publicly. But socialism focused more on the distribution that take place on the amount of individuals’ production of hard work, whereas communism emphasizes that the distribution of goods and services among the public should happen based on the individuals’ needs.

Differences also exist on who controls the structure of the economy. The socialism normally intend to have as many people as possible in order to influence the economy, while communism concentrate on small amount of people which obviously failed.

But there are communist states like Cuba that govern more on the socialist principle and do still exists.

http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/dif...

On the face of it communism sounds good. Study it and you realize it does not take human nature into account or attempts to suppress it. That's why communism, socialism and liberalism all fail. They are ideas without a reality check. In my eyes they are all like driving as fast as possible towards the top of a hill without ever looking to see what is on the other side. There IS a cliff there and it is a big one. Supporters of those belief systems wear blinders and refuse to see that others have already been over the cliff.

Marx's ideology was seemingly well-intentioned. He lived in Europe during the late 1800s and the industrial conditions and power of the ruler aristocracy at that time was pretty bad. They still had things like small children working 16 hour days in the pits of coal mines.

His solution though was very misguided as when brought into practise it was an absolute disaster.

I imagine though that many theoretically ideal political systems like Plato's ideal Republic would be similar disasters if implemented in real life, even though they look very nice on paper.

Why blame Marx for the poor execution of his beliefs by others?

Communism doesn't work, but the idea comes from a good place. Of course capitalism doesn't work either, as we are all finding out right now as Greece has just defaulted and the world slips closer to other economic collapse.

Welcome to a double-dip.

Blunder? No. A deliberate attempt to use ideology to control people. Another "world control" insane idea.

Yes, it is. It assumes total conformity of the populace and honest, fair and benevolent leaders. It is an incredibly naive philosophy. History has shown time and time again that it will never work.

Ideological blunder...no. Reality blunder...yes.