Even partial communism fails, just more slowly.
Printable View
What they argue, which is derived from the work of anthropologists such as Louis Dumont, is that socialism is only conceivable in a society where individualism has already taken root. The Marxist paradigm of class conflict wouldn't even make sense in a premodern, holistic context. Marx is actually denounced as an individualist because no where and at no time did he ever have the intention of reestablishing organic social structures. Marxist thought played a prominent role in the autonomy of the economic sphere. Goifn to read this next:
https://www.amazon.com/Mandeville-Ma.../dp/0226169812
Thanks for the clarification! That makes sense that it had to arise in an individualist context and wouldn't have in a premodern setting. Dumont is given a section in the chapter on the new right. From Mandeville to Marx: Genesis and Triumph of Economic Ideology is now in my cart while I search for a cheaper one.
Dumont, Pierre Rosanvallon and Marcel Gauchet are three names that come up a lot.
I was thinking the same thing. That's a little pricey. B&N has it for $16 but they're out of stock.
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/fro...ont/1114535937
I don't think communism was ever what the USSR and their offshoots like China and others practiced. The revolution that put them in power in Russia was partially created and then stolen by rich and powerful people who wanted a base of operations to create a world government. They backed a hack writer (karl Marx) to sell their disinformation to the boobgeoisie in Russia and other countries and used anyone who would go along with them to push their agenda. Its about concentrating all power into just a few hands and using fear and terror to keep the power once they have obtained it.