Thread: How Viable is the Leninist Centralist Economy

Jose Maria Sison argued that if we are going to apply hardline socialism or communism it needs the complete withering of the state. Presumably, the Chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines (Maoist) meant that he is going to destroy all institutions including Congress, the judiciary and even the adopt Leninist centralist economic principles. How valid are the arguments leading to its defense? Is the so-called Command economy or the centrally planned economy still workable given that we now know the lessons of the past? Argue otherwise or favourably, or argue both sides!! Good training experiment for debaters clubs.

been there, done that...didn't work.

ВВП на душу населения в России в % к США, 1885-2006

Where did u find this expression? Never heard of such a thing. You should change the header of your post.

The phenomenon you are probably referring to is called planned economy, and that was NOT invented by Lenin, so why do you call it Leninist? This was part of National Economics when I was at uni.

Whether planned economies are efficient depends on what planned economy you are referring to, what time period and in what area of production you are going to do the comparison.

Everything is relative!

If it is managed by very competent, highly motivated and completely honest people it could probably be both efficient and fair....

I think the general consensus is that planned economies are not very good at satisfying peoples appetite for consumerism though, at least not compared with Western capitalism. And it is more geared towards providing the basics for everyone, than top edge fashion, luxury goods or temporary trends.

Planned economies don't have quite the same self-repair mechanism that exists in capitalism, so there is a bigger risk of spectacular mistakes.

But planned economies were quite efficient at quickly kicking off industries and building infrastructure in post-war era. Which is probably why it spooked certain countries so much.

Ultimately it seems that those who lived in countries that used this system largely preferred capitalism over a planned economy, so that should answer your question.

--------------------------------
PS -- I don't understand the graph from BappaBa. What does it show?

Originally Posted by Hanna

PS -- I don't understand the graph from BappaBa. What does it show?

Ratio of Russia's GDP per capita to US one (horizontal axis is a time scale in years, vertical axis - percentage ratio). I want to mention just some points: first, GDP is a very subjective feature, second, it can be counted in different ways, and third - I strongly doubt that this graph is correct at all.

Since all of you former residents of the Union of Soviet Socialist Russia answered in the negative , then Sison's "hardline" approach of adopting this so-called planned economy and "encircling the city from the countryside" must be incredible and hardly workable. I am not a Phd. Like Sison. You are well-educated professors who have the same educational attainment. Who am I to question him when I am only a school dropout. Since it came from you, maybe it would cause him to cast away his delusional beliefs. I too believe it not workable. There are hundreds of millions of workers to direct. And only a handful of planners who are not all-knowing. Leave the management to enterpreneurs. Tax them if you think the state deserves some of their profits. Invest them in social progams. Don't give doles out to the lazy bums and drunkards. And accept this as truth: even in the old USSR, there is rich, there is poor. The rich has dachas. The poor has none....

Planned economy is not all that bad, moreover, to some degree, some hybrid economic models (planning/free market) are employed by nearly all countries. Government can't just let the economy fly uncontrolled. There are taxes, custom duties, etc. There are subsidies, there are many things that every government in the world uses to control the economy. And there is some planning too. How do you expect to balance an annual budget without knowing who produces what, who buys what and who sells what. Of course, total planning is a very difficult thing, it requires very disciplined and obedient subjects to work, but if there are such subjects a planned economy will have tremendous advantage over the normal capitalistic system.
Unfortunately, like nearly all ideas of communists, this simply does not work with ordinary people who are not disciplined and obedient at all. Planned economy and socialism (or ultimately communism) requires devotion and inspiration. When we have robots to work for us then maybe we could attempt that again. )))

There is a valid economic theory which puts centrally planned economy in a disadvantageous situation when compared with free enterprise:

"FREE ENTERPRISE IS NOT AFFECTED BY HURRICAN KATRINA"- PhD.Political Science professor.

Look at communist countries nowadays. Look at the difficulty they face when confronting earthquakes and floods. Compare them with the stable economy Russia has inspite of the deluge or forest fires...Distribution system is affected if the whole industry is socialized, nationalized. When industries are left to private enterpreneurs, the economy can still survive...Look at when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. In a few weeks time, everything turned into normal. Let the REGULATED invisible hand control our economic activities...

Originally Posted by heartfelty

Let the REGULATED corrupt invisible hand control our economic activities...

How idle is the service sector under the Leninist centralist economy. How unproductive are they such that if there is not work to be done all they do is drink.
Capitalism absorbs a service sector, an industry which is composed of 70 percent of the labor force. Accountants, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, beauticians, chefs, cooks, secretaries, photographers..etc. If not for the service sector under capitalism,, these people would end up in the collective farm the same way as beaurucrats of South Vietnam ended up in labour camps. C[mon sperk...Smarten up..Leninist centralist or the command economy does not work..

Besides if the whole of the service sector most of which practice mental labour of Russia which comprise 60 percent of the labour force, would be mass deported to collective farms, the person per acre ratio would increase to 10 : 1. If capitalist and the 60 percent are in the cities, the ratio would be 1:10 or I person per 10 acres instead of 10 people per acre..Use your coconut( brains), sperk..Hardline communism turns the subjects into beasts with its presumption that man cannot exist by himself and must need direction and guidance from an "all-knowing Communist Party" with its slogan "The Party knows best". See the disastrous results....