I've been wanting to write a blog entry for a long time about some of the fundamental differences between the capitalist and communist systems, and the resulting differences that those systems have had upon the mindset of the people of America and Moldova.
But try as I might to explain these complex systems and relationships, it never seemed to come out too clearly. But, then I found my friend Greg's recent entry, which hits the nail on the head. So check it out.
The only thing I would add to Greg's musings is the difficulty in explaining this difference to someone who actually grew up under the communist system. In America, we have this idea that the communist system was nothing more than long lines for bread, misinformation, and lack of freedom. But it was also plenty of wonderful things - free summer camps for children, goods from all over the Soviet Union, health care, and a sense of being part of something bigger than oneself. To show someone who vividly remembers the "highs" (like we all tend to do by fantasizing the "good ol' days") of the communist system that this system had its flaws is difficult to say the least - especially when it comes out of the mouth of the former Cold War enemy who made their system collapse and now parade around the world like wealthy political cowboys. You can see why I usually don't talk about politics over here.
But try as I might to explain these complex systems and relationships, it never seemed to come out too clearly. But, then I found my friend Greg's recent entry, which hits the nail on the head. So check it out.
The only thing I would add to Greg's musings is the difficulty in explaining this difference to someone who actually grew up under the communist system. In America, we have this idea that the communist system was nothing more than long lines for bread, misinformation, and lack of freedom. But it was also plenty of wonderful things - free summer camps for children, goods from all over the Soviet Union, health care, and a sense of being part of something bigger than oneself. To show someone who vividly remembers the "highs" (like we all tend to do by fantasizing the "good ol' days") of the communist system that this system had its flaws is difficult to say the least - especially when it comes out of the mouth of the former Cold War enemy who made their system collapse and now parade around the world like wealthy political cowboys. You can see why I usually don't talk about politics over here.
3 comments:
Brad:
I’m from Moldova and have been following a few of the Peace Corps blogs for the past few months. Some of the comments have been very interesting and I was wondering if you could talk a little more about what you and your fellow PC volunteers think about the difference between communism and capitalism. Your short comments are confusing and I’d like to say a few words on them.
You say:
“In America, we have this idea that the communist system was nothing more than long lines for bread, misinformation, and lack of freedom. But it was also plenty of wonderful things - free summer camps for children, goods from all over the Soviet Union, health care, and a sense of being part of something bigger than oneself.”
First, “goods from all over the Soviet Union” and “health care” could have been available if one lived in a capitalist system. In a free market society one could have gotten those goods easily, assuming trade agreements were signed – so the argument that goods would have somehow been less accessible had Moldova not been in the Soviet Union would probably not hold. Also, you and many of your PC colleagues have seen the quality of the foods made in Moldova – that is what they were like in the entire Soviet Union – the consumer was but an afterthought.
As an aside, the effects of Soviet domination in Moldova perpetuated the development of the country as an agricultural province. As a result, the country is simply unable to survive by itself and is subject to the whims of its more powerful neighbors.
As far as health care, have you seen any of the hospitals in Moldova? Although the situation has become worse since communism fell, they are virtually similar in many respects: lack of proper technology, irrational advice based on folk medicine (the ever-famous ‘curent’), bad food (if any), uneducated and rude staff, bad doctors who have not read a professional journal in 10 years, long lines which in turn perpetuated corruption and a system of privileges, separate hospitals for the nomenklatura, lack of respect for privacy and the aesthetic of the body, discrimination and ill treatment of the disabled, etc., etc.
Also, this argument that health care is somehow better in socialist countries such as Cuba does not stand at all – it confuses breadth of access with quality. There certainly are problems in the U.S. health care system, as there are in the European. But the post-Soviet health care system is not comparable in terms of quality – it was/is much worse.
Second, I’m not sure what “a sense of being part of something bigger than oneself” means and if socialism is the best way in which one can satisfy that longing. In the Soviet Union this bigger-than-you project was a great mechanism for fostering mediocrity and individual initiative (which Greg mentions) has as a result become very feeble.
Socialism may have been beneficial to some people, but the question is not about the presence of benefit but the amount of it. Did socialism reduce the degree to which people could have lived better? Had socialism not been imposed upon Moldova and a great chunk of Europe, would these countries have done better in a capitalist system? It is likely that the end of World War II stopped the movement of Central and Eastern Europe toward becoming consolidated liberal democracies, which set them back many years and has probably had intellectual and cultural effects that will exhibit themselves for many years to come.
Yes, of course, the Soviets built roads, hospitals, and schools. But could somebody else – like an elected government protected from the threat of the Red Army – have done better? I think so, and living proof that the people did too were elections in Eastern Europe right after WWII, when the communists won very few votes but eventually were able to manipulate their way into power – see Tony Judt’s Postwar and Vladimir Tismaneanu’s Stalinism for all Seasons for examples.
Just because one can offer health care, it does not mean it’s good or that anybody else cannot do it better. Unfortunately, by the mid-1950s, the interwar elites who could have done a better job were almost entirely excluded from the political process, either by physical extermination or isolation, with, by the way, the tacit and explicit support of many intellectual elites in the West at the time.
Sure, it is frustrating to try to explain to a group of peasants that life could have been better under a different regime – not to even speak of the fact that they somehow fail to realize that had the Soviets not occupied Eastern Europe their relatives would not have been sent to Siberia and Solzhenitsyn would not have had a Moldovan character in his One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.
Urbanization in Moldova was mostly done by the communists and this is what most people quote as one of the biggest merits of the system. Such an evaluation, however, is a mistake, because anybody can have a project for urbanization – the question is whether it is actually well-done and if it is actually worth it.
I’d like to hear what your thoughts are on this.
Chris,
You certainly get the award for longest and most eloquent comment on my blog thus far! Thanks for posting - I agree with everything you wrote. I think either my initial posting wasn't written clearly enough or it has been misinterpreted. I was NOT arguing that times under the Soviet Union were better than they might have been under a capitalist system, nor was my point that socialism was a fantastic system in its own right. My point - and this draws largely from my experience in America - is that your average American thinks that communism under the Soviet Union was COMPLETELY bad for everyone, save a very few elite. This is wrong. There were bright points under that regime and its these that many people here in Moldova (or at least in my village) remember (with a somewhat selective memory - only recalling the good things and forgetting the bad). I posted about this because I think it's important for Americans to understand why many in this part of the world long for the "good old days" of the Soviet Union, and maybe to a lesser degree admire what they see as a resurgence of "Soviet" power by the growing strength of Russia under Putin. As to whether Putin's actions are helping or hurting, that's a whole different discussion...
Well, Chris:
You also must be very careful in thinking that Capitalism is all good and "blessed" things. A lot of the Western-style Capitalism has survived due mostly to the Industrial-Military complex. Also, corporate personhood has been the driving force behind Capitalism's so-called success, but the question is "whose success?"
The amount of deception and manipulation through media (under the pretence of marketing and advertising) that takes place in Western culture is astounding. I mean, you have millions of Americans who did not even know that Monsanto (a large agri-business corporate conglommerate) was injecting chemicals into cows that made them produce more milk, but with the side-effects of carcenogens that could be passed on to humans.
Now, I'm not saying that a lot of manipulation and misconceptions did not take place under Communism as well because it did, but a lot of people are under this pretense that, "Oh, I live in a free, Capitalist society, so therefore, I'm free." Now, that might be true, but it depends on one's definition of freedom. For example, many American/Canadian communities are having difficulty keeping the "box marts", such as Wal-Mart, and so on out of their neighborhoods, even with tough resistance and a clear message that they're not wanted.
Finally, the problem with Capitalism, particularly the way it is being practised lately, is that it has become too pervasive and corporate-driven.
In conclusion, I believe it can work, but corporate personhood needs to be done away with. I believe that businesses should be heavily monitored by government agencies and that there should be many of them (businesses), but they should be kept small to medium-sized.
Post a Comment