Happy May Day! Communism Killed 94 Million In The 20th Century!

[Wilikon]

According to a disturbingly pleasant graphic from Information is Beautiful entitled simply 20th Century Death, communism was the leading ideological cause of death between 1900 and 2000. The 94 million that perished in China, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Afghanistan, and Eastern Europe easily (and tragically) trump the 28 million that died under fascist regimes during the same period.

During the century measured, more people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communism’s total by only 9 million.

It gets worse when you look at the lower right of the chart—The Natural World—which includes animals (7 million), natural disasters (24 million), and famine (101 million). Curiously, all of the world’s worst famines during the 20th century were in communist countries: China (twice!), the Soviet Union, and North Korea.

Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this country’s needs than our current system.


http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-century

[Chef Ramsay]

I'm certainly not celebrating this disgusting and irrational ideology of misery and death. There are no individual rights under this system. People exist for the benefit of the state and are expendable to the nth degree.

[Wilikon]

I'm certainly not celebrating this disgusting and irrational ideology of misery and death. There are no individual rights under this system. People exist for the benefit of the state and are expendable to the nth degree.

Yep. Some among us are younger than I. A nice graphic may have an impact as a reminder...

 

[practicaldreamer]

Do you know what Wilikon - I'm going to move to the US - I want to know, for once in my life, how it feels to be free 

Shill.

[Wilikon]

Do you know what Wilikon - I'm going to move to the US - I want to know, for once in my life, how it feels to be free 

Shill.

Be free in your mind first. You'll feel it anywhere then.

[practicaldreamer]

Only problem is :-    1) I don't have 2 bits to scratch my arse with   2) I have a previous conviction from when I was 17 for possession of 1/16 of an ounce of blow   3) I was once a fully paid up member of the Socialist Workers Party of Great Britain      and  3) I don't believe in Jesus.

Ask Oppenheimer about slaughter - one of your boys I believe.

Save us the vacuous lessons in morality hey Wilikon - some of us residing herein aren't total idiots after all you know.

[u9y42]

I'm certainly not celebrating this disgusting and irrational ideology of misery and death. There are no individual rights under this system. People exist for the benefit of the state and are expendable to the nth degree.

Yep. Some among us are younger than I. A nice graphic may have an impact as a reminder...

 

It's kind of a pretty deceptive reminder though.

First, it's questionable to what degree those really are Communist countries, and not simply Authoritarian State Capitalist or State Socialist countries. Then, the article should probably point out that the first famine in China it mentions occurred during its Republic, in a phase of civil war, and with World War Two going on in the background. But even if you don't want to bother with those details, then what about, for example, Amartya Sen's work, that studied mortality rates from 1949 to 1979, in India and China? His work not only shows China had a drastic reduction in mortality rates, starting in 1949 (due to its "communist" reforms, when the People's Republic of China was created), but goes further to state India could have saved something like 3.8 million people a year if it had the same mortality rates as China - that is, Communist China probably saved over 100 million lives when compared to Democratic Capitalist India. Is that anywhere in the comparison the article is making? Or the studies that show the increase in China's mortality rate starting in 1979 (when its "capitalist" reforms started)?

It's fine if you don't like Communism (there's certainly a lot of valid critics to be made), but that article is just silly.

[bryant.coleman]

Toll from communism in the former USSR is not 20 million as it is given in the graph. I suspect that it is many times that number. In addition to millions who died in the gulags and labor camps, many more millions died in the famines and purges. However, the numbers given for North Korea and China seems to be more or less accurate.

[loulis]

DEATHS CAUSED BY CAPITALISM:

369 million (369,790,731), according only to the statistics I could get sources for. This number doesn’t even scratch the surface.

But, guess what? Tomorrow, we know for sure that capitalism will kill at least 77,000 more people.

See more:  http://southern-feminism.tumblr.com/post/95712821699/dont-you-know-communism-has-killed-millions

[hua_hui]

At the beginning the new social system intends to dominate the world and have to compete with old existing system. Such as  Wars, death, chaos,killing and destruction  are all around. I don't think it is the fault of communism! Capitalism is the same! Such as American Revolutionary War, Korean War in 1950s. No matter communism or capitalism's ideology and social system is for the interests of their ppl.

[Wilikon]

Only problem is :-    1) I don't have 2 bits to scratch my arse with   2) I have a previous conviction from when I was 17 for possession of 1/16 of an ounce of blow   3) I was once a fully paid up member of the Socialist Workers Party of Great Britain      and  3) I don't believe in Jesus.

Ask Oppenheimer about slaughter - one of your boys I believe.

Save us the vacuous lessons in morality hey Wilikon - some of us residing herein aren't total idiots after all you know.

I never said you and others defending communism were not totally... useful.

 

[Wilikon]

I'm certainly not celebrating this disgusting and irrational ideology of misery and death. There are no individual rights under this system. People exist for the benefit of the state and are expendable to the nth degree.

Yep. Some among us are younger than I. A nice graphic may have an impact as a reminder...

 

It's kind of a pretty deceptive reminder though.

First, it's questionable to what degree those really are Communist countries, and not simply Authoritarian State Capitalist or State Socialist countries. Then, the article should probably point out that the first famine in China it mentions occurred during its Republic, in a phase of civil war, and with World War Two going on in the background. But even if you don't want to bother with those details, then what about, for example, Amartya Sen's work, that studied mortality rates from 1949 to 1979, in India and China? His work not only shows China had a drastic reduction in mortality rates, starting in 1949 (due to its "communist" reforms, when the People's Republic of China was created), but goes further to state India could have saved something like 3.8 million people a year if it had the same mortality rates as China - that is, Communist China probably saved over 100 million lives when compared to Democratic Capitalist India. Is that anywhere in the comparison the article is making? Or the studies that show the increase in China's mortality rate starting in 1979 (when its "capitalist" reforms started)?

It's fine if you don't like Communism (there's certainly a lot of valid critics to be made), but that article is just silly.

I guess I'll have to take your word as divine truthfulness. I wish I could know more about those communist reforms that saved 100 million lives though...

 

[Wilikon]

DEATHS CAUSED BY CAPITALISM:

369 million (369,790,731), according only to the statistics I could get sources for. This number doesn’t even scratch the surface.

But, guess what? Tomorrow, we know for sure that capitalism will kill at least 77,000 more people.

See more:  http://southern-feminism.tumblr.com/post/95712821699/dont-you-know-communism-has-killed-millions

I always sort through tumblr's many porn pages to get the truth, seeking historical facts first, before any other places. Not from books made out of paper. Not from actual witnesses. 

I am guessing the message I get from your link is: "If capitalism did it, why be sad about communism killing people? Same thing..."

[Nemo1024]

One thing people tend to forget about the May Day - or the International Day of Workers' Solidarity - is that its very existence, as an extension of Soviet Union significantly increased the working standards and wages in the Western countries. Until recently - until Soviet Union got killed off - trade unions worldwide were a force to be reckoned with, giving workers decent wages and decent working conditions and the right to work to begin with.

And the slogan of May Day is not half-bad either:

Peace. Labour. May.

I'm certainly not celebrating this disgusting and irrational ideology of misery and death. There are no individual rights under this system. People exist for the benefit of the state and are expendable to the nth degree.

Then you completely misunderstand May Day. Or are you the one planning to celebrate Capitalism and exploitation of workforce for the minimal wage possible (and no wage at all, if they could get away with it)? A system, where people exist for the benefit of the capitalist and are expendable to the nth degree.

PS: And Soviet Union was never Communist. It never came as far as implementing Communism, and was hardly Socialist despite being called Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. One can even argue that Sweden and Norway managed to come closer to the Socialist model than Soviet Union did.

[u9y42]

It's kind of a pretty deceptive reminder though.

First, it's questionable to what degree those really are Communist countries, and not simply Authoritarian State Capitalist or State Socialist countries. Then, the article should probably point out that the first famine in China it mentions occurred during its Republic, in a phase of civil war, and with World War Two going on in the background. But even if you don't want to bother with those details, then what about, for example, Amartya Sen's work, that studied mortality rates from 1949 to 1979, in India and China? His work not only shows China had a drastic reduction in mortality rates, starting in 1949 (due to its "communist" reforms, when the People's Republic of China was created), but goes further to state India could have saved something like 3.8 million people a year if it had the same mortality rates as China - that is, Communist China probably saved over 100 million lives when compared to Democratic Capitalist India. Is that anywhere in the comparison the article is making? Or the studies that show the increase in China's mortality rate starting in 1979 (when its "capitalist" reforms started)?

It's fine if you don't like Communism (there's certainly a lot of valid critics to be made), but that article is just silly.

I guess I'll have to take your word as divine truthfulness. I wish I could know more about those communist reforms that saved 100 million lives though...

 

I appreciate you holding me in such "high" regard, and would like to refer you to the work of Jean Drèze and the aforementioned Amartya Sen; particularly the work they present in their book "Hunger and Public Action", starting at page 204. The reforms they put forth as likely having the largest responsibility for the decline in mortality in China (pre-1979) when compared to India, were related to health services ("cooperative medical systems, commune clinics, barefoot doctors, and wide-spread public health measures"), food distribution systems, and social security programs.

Here's a link to a .pdf with that chapter of the book: http://www.polsci.ucsb.edu/faculty/glasgow/ps15/DrezeSen.pdf.

And here are a couple of pages with the most relevant information highlighted in red, though I'd advise you to read at least the full chapter, as it is interesting for the context and further information it provides - I would transcribe the relevant parts here, but I'm too lazy for that.






Also, don't take this to be a "defense of communism" (again, despite nothing here having much to do with Communism in the first place) - I'm just pointing out that deceptive and facile arguments, like those in the article you posted, are not very useful, unless you want to fall into the easy camp of "communism is evil, capitalism is good". Both the excesses and improvements of those systems are important, and must be understood, if we want the chance of living in a better world.

[Wilikon]

I am holding everyone in such "high" regard, no matter who  I haven't pushed any capitalism VS communism really. First the term "capitalism" was not defined by free market lovers like myself. Secondly,  of course no system is perfect. You simply have economical poles that attract a lot of people and other poles needing walls and machine guns to keep people from running away from them. Strangely enough people seem to love the feeling of being free. Of course is it really freedom? U.S. Police states, etc, etc...
Still the nostalgia of communism is rarely felt from the people waiting hours in the snow for a loaf of bread "back in the good old days..."

The main theme is : was communism responsible for, at least, 94 million deaths. Some here believe 94 millions is a low number. Replying "capitalism killed too" is a way of saying "Yes!"

Thank you for all that reading material.


 

[practicaldreamer]

Still the nostalgia of communism is rarely felt from the people waiting hours in the snow for a loaf of bread "back in the good old days..."

I wish the world were as black and white for me as it is for you Winkicon 

A question here for you now, a genuine question - why are your lot kissing Cuba's arse just now ?

[u9y42]

I am holding everyone in such "high" regard, no matter who  I haven't pushed any capitalism VS communism really. First the term "capitalism" was not defined by free market lovers like myself. Secondly,  of course no system is perfect. You simply have economical poles that attract a lot of people and other poles needing walls and machine guns to keep people from running away from them. Strangely enough people seem to love the feeling of being free. Of course is it really freedom? U.S. Police states, etc, etc...
Still the nostalgia of communism is rarely felt from the people waiting hours in the snow for a loaf of bread "back in the good old days..."

The main theme is : was communism responsible for, at least, 94 million deaths. Some here believe 94 millions is a low number. Replying "capitalism killed too" is a way of saying "Yes!"

Thank you for all that reading material.

 

No one here is denying "communism" was responsible for those deaths Wilikon. However, my point wasn't "capitalism killed too, so the article is silly"; the point was "communism saved lives too, so don't throw the baby out with the bath water" and "that article is silly".

Also, you can argue you didn't wittingly push a "capitalism Vs communism" debate, but the article you quoted and which I was criticizing, and the poll it was partly based on, certainly did (although, I agree that, as with "communism", it's also questionable to what extent the current system resembles "capitalism" in any significant way):

[...] communism was the leading ideological cause of death [...] Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this country’s needs than our current system. [...]

Questions - Communism - March 12-13, 2011

1* Is the United States system of politics and economics morally superior to communism or is communism morally superior to the United States system of politics and economics?
2* In practical economic terms, do free market economies work better than communist economies or do communist economies work better than free market economies?
3* What system is better for middle class workers-- the United States system of politics and economics or communism?
4* Is communism a failed ideology?
5* In terms of world history, how important was the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe? 

[Wilikon]

Still the nostalgia of communism is rarely felt from the people waiting hours in the snow for a loaf of bread "back in the good old days..."

I wish the world were as black and white for me as it is for you Winkicon 

A question here for you now, a genuine question - why are your lot kissing Cuba's arse just now ?

"Wink icon". Hey! Not bad!

'My lot'? Cuba is a beautiful island. Too bad about about Raul, his brother, that woman who killed a cop and ran away over there... Why should I be a fan of an island with political prisoners?

Those lips belong to 0bama...

 

[Wilikon]

I am holding everyone in such "high" regard, no matter who  I haven't pushed any capitalism VS communism really. First the term "capitalism" was not defined by free market lovers like myself. Secondly,  of course no system is perfect. You simply have economical poles that attract a lot of people and other poles needing walls and machine guns to keep people from running away from them. Strangely enough people seem to love the feeling of being free. Of course is it really freedom? U.S. Police states, etc, etc...
Still the nostalgia of communism is rarely felt from the people waiting hours in the snow for a loaf of bread "back in the good old days..."

The main theme is : was communism responsible for, at least, 94 million deaths. Some here believe 94 millions is a low number. Replying "capitalism killed too" is a way of saying "Yes!"

Thank you for all that reading material.

 

No one here is denying "communism" was responsible for those deaths Wilikon. However, my point wasn't "capitalism killed too, so the article is silly"; the point was "communism saved lives too, so don't throw the baby out with the bath water" and "that article is silly".

Also, you can argue you didn't wittingly push a "capitalism Vs communism" debate, but the article you quoted and which I was criticizing, and the poll it was partly based on, certainly did (although, I agree that, as with "communism", it's also questionable to what extent the current system resembles "capitalism" in any significant way):

[...] communism was the leading ideological cause of death [...] Communism is a killer. And yet some still say they support the idea: According to a 2011 Rasmussen poll, 11% of Americans think that communism would better serve this country’s needs than our current system. [...]

Questions - Communism - March 12-13, 2011

1* Is the United States system of politics and economics morally superior to communism or is communism morally superior to the United States system of politics and economics?
2* In practical economic terms, do free market economies work better than communist economies or do communist economies work better than free market economies?
3* What system is better for middle class workers-- the United States system of politics and economics or communism?
4* Is communism a failed ideology?
5* In terms of world history, how important was the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe? 

I am not saying I did not want a tiny debate "capitalism Vs communism" in this thread  I already posted many threads with the same topic more or less in the past. If we are led to believe in the concept of natural selection and evolution, a free market system is closer to nature than a communist system. That is why systems that proclaim to be communist based, socialist based, or any system with a very strong centralization, end up collapsing with millions upon millions of dead humans. We all have our own mind and aspiration, unlike ants or bees, that is why any model based on a very strong centralization for millions of people never work. Maybe a network of smaller 'socialistic societies' in charge of smaller group of people could work, that is if each micro society was 'organically grown', not forced... Could work?

94 millions.