Communism is the worst regime in the history of humankind. Until 1960 there was a balance between capitalism and communism. We have in this periods the economic boom on the capitalist countries and the begining of the fall of communist countries. The communist system was a utopia,he was at odds with human nature. Human being is selfish, ego is the center, while this was replaced in communism with us. The communist system degraded while did not guarantee basic elements of life. We're not talking about human rights and basic freedoms, which systematically oppressed. Obviously different countries have different characteristics, but the conclusion was the same.
There is a rule,every rule has an exception. Exemption in this case was the ex-Yugoslavia. Tito was an intelligent person. He played with both sides. West gave Tito a blank check, this blank check he supplemented himself, spent and in the end did not return anything. For this reasons the ex-Yugoslavia was an success, until the capitan of the ship was died and his place was taken by a pirate, Slobodan Milosevic.
Obviously the two camps spent billions against each other, this period is called Cold War, right? But this war was not won by the one who produced more tanks or cannons,but the one that produce refrigerators, TV and washing machines.
Concerning China, today i will consider a fascist state nothing connection with communism. North Korea is an communist state.
Key features of communism was HYPOCRISY, was a hypocrit system.
P.S.
In communist countries it was forbidden to kill yourself, you can be a considered a deserter and your family suffer the consequences.
Such for that shit of sistem.
(I owe this article to LeBrok).
There are problems with both capitalism and socialism. Some of them are different, among others can be found similarities.
One of big problems of socialism that it was ineffective.
Most countries have nurtured the so-called state capitalism (etatism), Albania too.
But there were exceptions.
In Serbia and Yugoslavia applied specific model of socialism, self-managed socialism.
It was different socialism compared with Albania, but still socialism.
Enterprises in Serbia and Yugoslavia were not state enterprises but social enterprises!
Practically closest model companies in the West would be workers' shareholding.
Good point of Serbian and Yugoslav self-managed social enterprises was it could develop business, enterprises has considered the market, and the productivity too.
And in such companies were developing managerial elite.
It is interesting, between communist elite which had political power, and managerial elite which led enterprises there were tensions, although managers of companies formally mainly were party members.
But, generally, Serbia and Yugoslavia has had a rapid development.
In the same time Albania, as state socialist country, was very poor.
Tens and tens of thousand of people due to poverty left Albania and went to Serbia.
Yes, Yugoslav socialism was a great achievement of civilization.
In Yugoslavia ruled principle of brotherhood and unity and nationalism and religion extremism of any kind had no place.
Both Serbia and Yugoslavia were giving a lot of money for the development of underdeveloped areas, especially where there were Albanians.
Yugoslav president Tito was the humanist, he believed that it was possible to achieve a hundred percent employment.
And Yugoslav laws have encouraged businesses to hire new workforce, and enterprises had obligations.
And Albanians lived in Serbia were massively employed (you can compare with Kosovo today which has a huge unemployement and economic inactivity).
But no state can keep a high rate of growth, Yugoslavia is no exception.
With the reduction of rate of growth problems Yugoslav enterprises there were visible.
Enterprises had objectively more workers than needed.
No managerial talents and abilities could not compensate the high costs due to redudancy.
What happened was that 20%, 30% (somewhere to 50%) workers at enterprises were redudant.
Yugoslav enterprises was gradually becoming uncompetitive.
And in the eighties economic crisis in Yugoslavia was visible.
What was necessary? A real reengineering of enterprises.
Managerial elite was trying to do something but communist elite was not ready for reforms.
Communists were afraid of labour strikes.
Communists were able to fight against all but not against labour unrests, they were primary labor party.
And they have tried to maintain status quo.
Big mistake!
The crisis intensified, enterprises were increasingly innefective, one of temporary solution was to borrow abroad.
And what happens when a crisis arises in multinational country as Yugoslavia, nationalisms began to grow.
In Slovenia and Croatia nationalists began to demand separatism, in Serbia unitarism.
Mr. Jansa and Mr. Tudjman were separatists, and Mr. Milosevic was unitarist, but all of them undermined the Yugoslav government that could cope with the problems.
In a way, they all together were allies!
But Slovenian, Croatian and Serbian nationalists were result of economic crisis of the eighties.
Thus, the self-managing socialism proved innefective even though it had a lot of good points.
Nothing good can arrive from an slavo-orthodox ideology.
It is stupid, it is not for comment.
I'm not saying that a Muslim cannot criticize Christianity, and Albanian cannot criticize Slavic nations, but in this case there are limits of good taste.
