After the
Russian Revolution,
communist party rule was consolidated for the first time in
Soviet Russia (later the largest constituent republic of the Soviet Union, formed in December 1922) and criticized immediately domestically and internationally. During the first
Red Scare in the United States, the takeover of Russia by the communist
Bolsheviks was considered by many a threat to
free markets,
religious freedom and
liberal democracy. Meanwhile, under the tutelage of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the only party permitted by the
Soviet Union constitution, state institutions were intimately entwined with those of the party. By the late 1920s,
Joseph Stalin consolidated the regime's control over the country's economy and society through a system of
economic planning and
five-year plans. Between the Russian Revolution and the Second World War, Soviet-style communist rule only spread to one state that was not later incorporated into the Soviet Union. In 1924, communist rule was established in neighboring
Mongolia, a traditional outpost of Russian influence bordering the Siberian region. However, throughout much of Europe and the Americas criticism of the domestic and foreign policies of the Soviet regime among
anticommunists continued unabated. After the end of World War II, the Soviet Union took control over the territories reached by the
Red Army, establishing what later became known as the
Eastern Bloc. Following the
Chinese Communist Revolution, the People's Republic of China was
proclaimed in October 1949 by
Mao Zedong,
leader of the Chinese Communist Party. Between the
Chinese Communist Revolution and the last quarter of the 20th century, communist rule spread throughout East Asia and much of the
Third World and new
communist regimes became the subject of extensive local and international criticism. Criticism of the Soviet Union and Third World communist regimes have been strongly anchored in scholarship on
totalitarianism which asserts that communist parties maintain themselves in power without the
consent of the governed and rule by means of
political repression,
secret police,
propaganda disseminated through the state-controlled mass media, repression of free discussion and criticism,
mass surveillance and
state terror. These studies of totalitarianism influenced Western historiography on communism and Soviet history, particularly the work of
Robert Conquest and
Richard Pipes on
Stalinism, the
Great Purge, the
Gulag and the
Soviet famine of 1932–1933. Criticism of
communist regimes including their effects on the
economic development,
human rights,
foreign policy, scientific progress and
environmental degradation of the countries they rule. Political repression is a topic in many influential works critical of communist rule, including in
The Great Terror and the
Soviet famine of 1932–33 in
The Harvest of Sorrow;
Richard Pipes' account of the "
Red Terror" during the
Russian Civil War;
Rudolph Rummel's work on "
democide";
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's account of Stalin's forced labor camps in
The Gulag Archipelago; and
Stéphane Courtois' account of executions, forced labor camps and mass starvation in communist regimes as a general category, with particular attention to the Soviet Union under
Joseph Stalin and China under
Mao Zedong. Soviet-style central planning and state ownership has been another topic of criticism of communist rule. Works by economists such as
Friedrich Hayek and
Milton Friedman argue that the economic structures associated with communist rule resulted in economic stagnation. Other topics of criticism of communist rule include foreign policies of expansionism, environmental degradation and the suppression of free cultural expression.
Artistic, scientific and technological policies Criticism of communist rule has also centered on the censorship of the arts. In the case of the Soviet Union, these criticisms often deal with the preferential treatment afforded to
socialist realism. Other criticisms center on the large-scale cultural experiments of certain communist regimes. In Romania, the historical center of Bucharest was demolished and the whole city was redesigned between 1977 and 1989. In the Soviet Union, hundreds of churches were demolished or converted to secular purposes during the 1920s and 1930s. In China, the
Cultural Revolution sought to give all artistic expression a 'proletarian' content and destroyed much older material lacking this. Advocates of these policies promised to create a new culture that would be superior to the old while critics argue that such policies represented an unjustifiable destruction of the cultural heritage of humanity. There is a well-known literature focusing on the role of the falsification of images in the Soviet Union under Stalin. In ''The Commissar Vanishes: The Falsification of Photographs in Stalin's Russia'',
David King writes: "So much falsification took place during the Stalin years that it is possible to tell the story of the Soviet era through retouched photographs". Under Stalin, historical documents were often the subject of revisionism and forgery, intended to change public perception of certain important people and events. The pivotal role played by
Leon Trotsky in the Russian Revolution and Civil War was almost entirely erased from official historical records after Trotsky became the leader of a Communist faction that opposed Stalin's rule. The emphasis on the "
hard sciences" of the Soviet Union has been criticized. There were very few
Nobel Prize winners from Communist states. Soviet research in certain sciences was at times guided by political rather than scientific considerations.
Lysenkoism and
Japhetic theory were promoted for brief periods of time in
biology and
linguistics respectively, despite having no scientific merit. Research into
genetics was restricted because
Nazi use of
eugenics had prompted the Soviet Union to label genetics a "fascist science".
Suppressed research in the Soviet Union also included
cybernetics,
psychology,
psychiatry and
organic chemistry. Soviet technology in many sectors lagged Western technology. Exceptions include areas like the
Soviet space program and military technology where occasionally Communist technology was more advanced due to a massive concentration of research resources. According to the
Central Intelligence Agency, much of the technology in the Communist states consisted simply of copies of Western products that had been legally purchased or gained through a massive espionage program. Some even say that stricter Western control of the export of technology through the
Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls and providing defective technology to Communist agents after the discovery of the
Farewell Dossier contributed to the fall of Communism.
Economic policy Both critics and supporters of communist rule often make comparisons between the economic development of countries under communist rule and non-communist countries, with the intention of certain economic structures are superior to the other. All such comparisons are open to challenge, both on the comparability of the states involved and the statistics being used for comparison. No two countries are identical, which makes comparisons regarding later economic development difficult; Western Europe was more developed and industrialized than Eastern Europe long before the Cold War; World War II damaged the economies of some countries more than others; and East Germany had much of its industry dismantled and moved to the Soviet Union for war reparations. For example, virtually every
electrified and/or
double tracked railroad in East Germany was reduced to a single track non-electrified railroad by
Soviet demontage after World War II. Advocates of Soviet-style economic planning have claimed the system has in certain instances produced dramatic advances, including rapid industrialization of the Soviet Union, especially during the 1930s. Critics of Soviet economic planning, in response, assert that new research shows that the Soviet figures were partly fabricated, especially those showing extremely high growth in the Stalin era. Growth was high in the 1950s and 1960s, in some estimates much higher than during the 1930s, but later declined and according to some estimates became negative in the late 1980s. Before
collectivization, Russia had been the "breadbasket of Europe". Afterwards, the Soviet Union became a net importer of grain, unable to produce enough food to feed its own population. China and Vietnam achieved much higher rates of growth after introducing market reforms such as
socialism with Chinese characteristics starting in the late 1970s and 1980s, with higher growth rates being accompanied by declining poverty. The communist states do not compare favorably when looking at nations divided by the Cold War. North Korea versus South Korea; and East Germany versus West Germany. East German
productivity relative to West German productivity was around 90 percent in 1936 and around 60–65 percent in 1954. When compared to Western Europe, East German productivity declined from 67 percent in 1950 to 50 percent before the reunification in 1990. All the Eastern European national economies had productivity far below the Western European average. Some countries under communist rule with socialist economies maintained consistently higher rates of economic growth than industrialized Western countries with capitalist economies. From 1928 to 1985, the
economy of the Soviet Union grew by a factor of 10 and
GNP per capita grew more than fivefold. The Soviet economy started out at roughly 25 percent the size of the
economy of the United States. By 1955, it climbed to 40 percent. In 1965, the Soviet economy reached 50% of the contemporary United States economy and in 1977 it passed the 60 percent threshold. For the first half of the Cold War, most economists were asking when, not if, the Soviet economy would overtake the United States economy. Starting in the 1970s and continuing through the 1980s, growth rates slowed down in the Soviet Union and throughout the socialist bloc. The reasons for this downturn are still a matter of debate among economists, but one hypothesis is that the socialist planned economies had reached the limits of the
extensive growth model they were pursuing and the downturn was at least in part caused by their refusal or inability to switch to
intensive growth. Further, it could be argued that since the economies of countries such as Russia were pre-industrial before the socialist revolutions, the high economic growth rate could be attributed to
industrialization. Also while forms of economic growth associated with any economic structure produce some winners and losers, some point out that high growth rates under communist rule were associated with particularly intense suffering and even mass starvation of the peasant population. Unlike the slow market reforms in China and Vietnam where communist rule continues, the abrupt end to central planning was followed by a
depression in many of the states of the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe which chose to adopt the so-called
economic shock therapy. For example, in the Russian Federation GDP per capita decreased by one-third between 1989 and 1996. As of 2003, all of them have positive economic growth and almost all have a higher GDP/capita than before the transition. In general, critics of communist rule argue that socialist economies remained behind the industrialized West in terms of economic development for most of their existence while others assert that socialist economies had growth rates that were sometimes higher than many non-socialist economies, so they would have eventually caught up to the West if those growth rates had been maintained. Some reject all comparisons altogether, noting that the communist states started out with economies that were generally much less developed to begin with. Some see the aforementioned examples of environmental degradation are similar to what had occurred in Western capitalist countries during the height of their drive to industrialize in the 19th century. Others claim that Communist regimes did more damage than average, primarily due to the lack of any popular or political pressure to research environmentally friendly technologies. Some ecological problems continue unabated after the fall of the Soviet Union and are still major issues today, which has prompted supporters of former ruling Communist parties to accuse their opponents of holding a
double standard. Nonetheless, other environmental problems have improved in every studied former Communist state. However, some researchers argued that part of improvement was largely due to the severe economic downturns in the 1990s that caused many factories to close down.
Forced labour and deportations A number of communist states also used
forced labour as a legal form of punishment for certain periods of time and again, critics of these policies assert that many prisoners who were sentenced to serve terms of imprisonment in forced labor camps such as the
Gulag were sent there for political rather than criminal reasons. Some of the Gulag camps were located in very harsh environments, such as
Siberia, which resulted in the death of a significant fraction of inmates before they could complete their prison sentences. Officially, the Gulag was shut down in 1960, but it remained
de facto in action for some time afterward.
North Korea continues to maintain a network of
prison and labor camps that an estimated 200,000 people are imprisoned in. While the country does not regularly deport its citizens, it maintains a system of internal exile and banishment. Many deaths were also caused by involuntary
deportations of entire ethnic groups as part of the
population transfer in the Soviet Union. Many
Prisoners of War taken during World War II were not released as the war ended and died in the Gulags. Many German civilians died as a result of atrocities committed by the Soviet army during the
evacuation of East Prussia and due to the policy of
ethnic cleansing of Germans from the territories they lost due to the war during the
expulsion of Germans after World War II.
Freedom of movement was constructed in 1961 to stop emigration from
East Berlin to
West Berlin and in the last phase of the wall's development the "death strip" between fence and concrete wall gave guards a clear shot at would-be escapees from the East In the literature on communist rule, many anticommunists have asserted that communist regimes tend to impose harsh restrictions on the
freedom of movement. These restrictions, they argue, are meant to stem the possibility of mass emigration, which threatens to offer evidence pointing to widespread popular dissatisfaction with their rule. Between 1950 and 1961, 2.75 million East Germans moved to West Germany. During the
Hungarian Revolution of 1956 around 200,000 people moved to Austria as the Hungarian-Austrian border temporarily opened. From 1948 to 1953 hundreds of thousands of North Koreans moved to the South, stopped only when emigration was clamped down after the
Korean War. In
Cuba, 50,000 middle-class Cubans left between 1959 and 1961 after the
Cuban Revolution and the breakdown of Cuban-American relations. Following a period of repressive measures by the Cuban government in the late 1960s and 1970s, Cuba allowed for mass emigration of dissatisfied citizens, a policy that resulted in the
Mariel Boatlift of 1980, which led to a drop in emigration rates during the later months. In the 1990s, the economic crisis known as the
Special Period coupled with the United States' tightening of the
embargo led to desperate attempts to leave the island on
balsas (rafts, tires and makeshift vessels). Many Cubans currently continue attempts to emigrate to the United States In total, according to some estimates, more than 1 million people have left Cuba, around 10% of the population. Since 1966, immigration to the United States was governed by the 1966
Cuban Adjustment Act, a United States law that applies solely to Cubans. The ruling allows any Cuban national, no matter the means of the entry into the United States, to receive a
green card after being in the country a year. Havana has long argued that the policy has encouraged the illegal exodus, deliberately ignoring and undervaluing the life-threatening hardships endured by refugees. After the victory of the communist North in the
Vietnam War, over 2 million people in former South Vietnamese territory left the country (see
Vietnamese boat people) in the 1970s and 1980s. Another large group of refugees left Cambodia and Laos. Restrictions on emigration from states ruled by communist parties received extensive publicity. In the West, the
Berlin Wall emerged as a symbol of such restrictions. During the Berlin Wall's existence, sixty thousand people unsuccessfully attempted to emigrate illegally from East Germany and received jail terms for such actions; there were around five thousand successful escapes into West Berlin; and 239 people were killed trying to cross.
Albania and
North Korea perhaps imposed the most extreme restrictions on emigration. From most other communist regimes, legal emigration was always possible, though often so difficult that attempted emigrants would risk their lives in order to emigrate. Some of these states relaxed emigration laws significantly from the 1960s onwards. Tens of thousands of Soviet citizens emigrated legally every year during the 1970s.
Refuseniks were individuals—mostly, but not exclusively,
Soviet Jews—who were
denied permission to emigrate, primarily to
Israel, by the authorities of the
Soviet Union and other countries of the
Soviet Bloc.
Ideology by
Friedrich Engels of
Karl Marx's journal
Neue Rheinische Zeitung from 19 May 1849, printed in red ink, is cited by some such as literary historian
George Watson as evidence that communist party rule's actions were linked to ideology, although this analysis has been subject to criticism by other scholars According to
Klas-Göran Karlsson, "[i]deologies are systems of ideas, which cannot commit crimes independently. However, individuals, collectives and states that have defined themselves as communist have committed crimes in the name of communist ideology, or without naming communism as the direct source of motivation for their crimes." Authors such as
Daniel Goldhagen,
John Gray,
Richard Pipes and
Rudolph Rummel consider the ideology of
communism to be a significant, or at least partial, causative factor in the events under communist party rule.
The Black Book of Communism claims an association between communism and
criminality, arguing that "Communist regimes [...] turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government" while adding that this criminality lies at the level of ideology rather than state practice. On the other hand,
Benjamin Valentino does not see a link between communism and
mass killing, arguing that killings occur when power is in the hands of one person or a small number of people, when "powerful groups come to believe it is the best available means to accomplish certain radical goals, counter specific types of threats, or solve difficult military problem", or there is a "revolutionary desire to bring about the rapid and radical transformation of society." Christopher J. Finlay argues that
Marxism legitimates violence without any clear limiting principle because it rejects moral and ethical norms as constructs of the dominant class and states that "it would be conceivable for revolutionaries to commit atrocious crimes in bringing about a socialist system, with the belief that their crimes will be retroactively absolved by the new system of ethics put in place by the
proletariat." According to
Rustam Singh,
Karl Marx alluded to the possibility of peaceful revolution, but he emphasized the need for violent revolution and "revolutionary terror" after the failed
Revolutions of 1848.
Daniel Chirot and
Clark McCauley write that, especially in Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China and Pol Pot's Cambodia, a fanatical certainty that socialism could be made to work motivated communist leaders in "the ruthless
dehumanization of their enemies, who could be suppressed because they were 'objectively' and 'historically' wrong. Furthermore, if events did not work out as they were supposed to, then that was because
class enemies, foreign spies and
saboteurs, or worst of all, internal traitors were wrecking the plan. Under no circumstances could it be admitted that the vision itself might be unworkable, because that meant capitulation to the forces of reaction."
Michael Mann writes that
communist party members were "ideologically driven, believing that in order to create a new socialist society, they must lead in socialist zeal. Killings were often popular, the rank-and-file as keen to exceed killing quotas as production quotas." According to Rummel, the killings committed by communist regimes can best be explained as the result of the marriage between absolute power and the absolutist ideology of Marxism. Rummel states that "communism was like a fanatical religion. It had its revealed text and its chief interpreters. It had its priests and their ritualistic prose with all the answers. It had a heaven, and the proper behavior to reach it. It had its appeal to faith. And it had its crusades against nonbelievers. What made this secular religion so utterly lethal was its seizure of all the state's instruments of force and coercion and their immediate use to destroy or control all independent sources of power, such as the church, the professions, private businesses, schools, and the family." Rummels writes that Marxist communists saw the construction of their
utopia as "though a war on poverty, exploitation, imperialism and inequality. And for the greater good, as in a real war, people are killed. And, thus, this war for the communist utopia had its necessary enemy casualties, the clergy, bourgeoisie, capitalists, wreckers, counterrevolutionaries, rightists, tyrants, rich, landlords, and noncombatants that unfortunately got caught in the battle. In a war millions may die, but the cause may be well justified, as in the defeat of Hitler and an utterly racist Nazism. And to many communists, the cause of a communist utopia was such as to justify all the deaths." Benjamin Valentino writes the following "apparently high levels of political support for murderous regimes and leaders should not automatically be equated with support for mass killing itself. Individuals are capable of supporting violent regimes or leaders while remaining indifferent or even opposed to specific policies that these regimes and carried out." Valentino quotes Vladimir Brovkin as saying that "a vote for the Bolsheviks in 1917 was not a vote for Red Terror or even a vote for a dictatorship of the proletariat." According to Valentino, such strategies were so violent because they economically dispossess large numbers of people, commenting: "Social transformations of this speed and magnitude have been associated with mass killing for two primary reasons. First, the massive social dislocations produced by such changes have often led to
economic collapse,
epidemics, and, most important, widespread famines. ... The second reason that communist regimes bent on the radical transformation of society have been linked to mass killing is that the revolutionary changes they have pursued have clashed inexorably with the fundamental interests of large segments of their populations. Few people have proved willing to accept such far-reaching sacrifices without intense levels of coercion."
International politics and relations Imperialism As an ideology,
Marxism–Leninism stresses militant opposition to
imperialism. Lenin considered imperialism "the highest stage of capitalism" and in 1917 made declarations of the unconditional right of
self-determination and
secession for the national minorities of Russia. During the Cold War, communist states have been accused of, or criticized for, exercising imperialism by giving military assistance and in some cases intervening directly on behalf of Communist movements that were fighting for control, particularly in Asia and Africa. Western critics accused the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China of practicing imperialism themselves, and communist condemnations of Western imperialism hypocritical. The attack on and restoration of Moscow's control of countries that had been under the rule of the tsarist empire, but briefly formed newly independent states in the aftermath of the Russian Civil War (including Armenia,
Georgia and
Azerbaijan), have been condemned as examples of Soviet imperialism. Similarly, Stalin's forced reassertion of Moscow's rule of the
Baltic states in World War II has been condemned as Soviet imperialism. Western critics accused Stalin of creating
satellite states in Eastern Europe after the end of World War II. Western critics also condemned the intervention of Soviet forces during the
1956 Hungarian Revolution, the
Prague Spring and the
war in Afghanistan as aggression against popular uprisings. Maoists argued that the Soviet Union had itself become an imperialist power while maintaining a socialist façade (
social imperialism). China's reassertion of central control over territories on the frontiers of the
Qing dynasty, particularly Tibet, has also been condemned as imperialistic by some critics.
Support of terrorism Some states under communist rule have been criticized for directly supporting
terrorist groups such as the
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the
Red Army Faction and the
Japanese Red Army. North Korea has been implicated in terrorist acts such as
Korean Air Flight 858.
World War II According to Richard Pipes, the Soviet Union shares some responsibility for
World War II. Pipes argues that both
Adolf Hitler and
Benito Mussolini used the Soviet Union as a model for their own regimes and that Hitler privately considered Stalin a "genius". According to Pipes, Stalin privately hoped that another world war would weaken his foreign enemies and allow him to assert Soviet power internationally. Before Hitler took power, Stalin allowed the testing and production of German weapons that were forbidden by the
Versailles Treaty to occur on Soviet territory. Stalin is also accused of weakening German opposition to the Nazis before Hitler's rule began in 1933. During the 1932 German elections, for instance, he forbade the German Communists from collaborating with the Social Democrats. These parties together gained more votes than Hitler and some have later surmised could have prevented him from becoming Chancellor.
Leadership Professor Matthew Krain states that many scholars have pointed to
revolutions and
civil wars as providing the opportunity for radical leaders and ideologies to gain power and the preconditions for mass killing by the state. Professor Nam Kyu Kim writes that exclusionary ideologies are critical to explaining mass killing, but the organizational capabilities and individual characteristics of revolutionary leaders, including their attitudes towards risk and violence, are also important. Besides opening up political opportunities for new leaders to eliminate their political opponents, revolutions bring to power leaders who are more apt to commit large-scale violence against civilians in order to legitimize and strengthen their own power. Genocide scholar
Adam Jones states that the
Russian Civil War was very influential on the emergence of leaders like Stalin and accustomed people to "harshness, cruelty, terror."
Martin Malia called the "brutal conditioning" of the two World Wars important to understanding communist violence, although not its source. Historian
Helen Rappaport describes
Nikolay Yezhov, the bureaucrat in charge of the NKVD during the
Great Purge, as a physically diminutive figure of "limited intelligence" and "narrow political understanding. [...] Like other instigators of mass murder throughout history, [he] compensated for his lack of physical stature with a pathological cruelty and the use of brute terror."
Russian and
world history scholar John M. Thompson places personal responsibility directly on Stalin. According to Thompson, "much of what occurred only makes sense if it stemmed in part from the disturbed mentality, pathological cruelty, and extreme paranoia of Stalin himself. Insecure, despite having established a dictatorship over the party and country, hostile and defensive when confronted with criticism of the excesses of collectivization and the sacrifices required by high-tempo industrialization, and deeply suspicious that past, present, and even yet unknown future opponents were plotting against him, Stalin began to act as a person beleaguered. He soon struck back at enemies, real or imaginary." Professors Pablo Montagnes and Stephane Wolton argue that the purges in the Soviet Union and China can be attributed to the "personalist" leadership of Stalin and Mao, who were incentivized by having both control of the security apparatus used to carry out the purges and control of the appointment of replacements for those purged. Slovenian philosopher
Slavoj Žižek attributes Mao allegedly viewing human life as disposable to Mao's "cosmic perspective" on humanity.
Mass killings Many
mass killings occurred under 20th-century communist regimes. Death estimates vary widely, depending on the definitions of deaths included. The higher estimates of mass killings account for crimes against civilians by governments, including executions, destruction of population through man-made hunger and deaths during forced deportations, imprisonment and through forced labor. Terms used to define these killings include "mass killing", "
democide", "
politicide", "
classicide", a broad definition of "
genocide", "
crimes against humanity", "
holocaust", and "
repression". Scholars such as
Stéphane Courtois,
Steven Rosefielde,
Rudolph Rummel and Benjamin Valentino have argued that communist regimes were responsible for tens or even hundreds of millions of deaths. These deaths mostly occurred under the rule of Stalin and Mao, therefore these particular periods of communist rule in Soviet Russia and China receive considerable attention in
The Black Book of Communism, although other communist regimes have also caused high number of deaths, not least the
Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, which is often claimed to have killed more of its citizens than any other in history. Critics also argue that many of the convicted prisoners executed by authorities under communist rule were not criminals but political dissidents. Stalin's
Great Purge in the late 1930s (from roughly 1936–1938) is given as the most prominent example of the hypothesis. With regard to deaths not caused directly by state or party authorities,
The Black Book of Communism points to famine and war as the indirect causes of what they see as deaths for which communist regimes were responsible. In this sense, the
Soviet famine of 1932–33 and the
Great Leap Forward are often described as man-made famines. These two events alone killed a majority of the people seen as victims of communist states by estimates such as Courtois'. Courtois also blames
Mengistu Haile Mariam's regime for having exacerbated the
1983–1985 famine in Ethiopia by imposing unreasonable political and economic burdens on the population.
Estimates The authors of
The Black Book of Communism,
Norman Davies, Rummel and others have attempted to give estimates of the total number of deaths for which communist rule of a particular state in a particular period was responsible, or the total for all states under communist rule. The question is complicated by the lack of hard data and by biases inherent in any estimation. The number of people killed under Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union by 1939 has been estimated as 3.5–8 million by Geoffrey Ponton, 6.6 million by V. V. Tsaplin and 10–11 million by
Alexander Nove. The number of people killed under Stalin's rule by the time of his death in 1953 has been estimated as 1–3 million by
Stephen G. Wheatcroft, 6–9 million by
Timothy D. Snyder, 13–20 million by Rosefielde, 20 million by Courtois and
Martin Malia, 20 to 25 million by
Alexander Yakovlev 43 million by Rummel and 50 million by Davies. The number of people killed under Mao's rule in the People's Republic of China has been estimated at 19.5 million by Wang Weizhi, 27 million by John Heidenrich, between 38 and 67 million by Kurt Glaser and Stephan Possony, between 32 and 59 million by Robert L. Walker, over 50 million by Rosefielde, illuminated and few lights in Communist North Korea The authors of
The Black Book of Communism have also estimated that 9.3 million people were killed under communist rule in other states: 2 million in North Korea, 2 million in Cambodia, 1.7 million in Africa, 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 1 million in Vietnam, 1 million in Eastern Europe and 150,000 in Latin America. Rummel has estimated that 1.7 million were killed by the government of Vietnam, 1.6 million in North Korea (not counting the 1990s famine), 2 million in Cambodia and 2.5 million in Poland and Yugoslavia. Valentino estimates that 1 to 2 million were killed in Cambodia, 50,000 to 100,000 in Bulgaria, 80,000 to 100,000 in East Germany, 60,000 to 300,000 in Romania, 400,000 to 1,500,000 in North Korea, and 80,000 to 200,000 in North and South Vietnam. Between the authors Wiezhi, Heidenrich, Glaser, Possony, Ponton, Tsaplin and Nove, Stalin's Soviet Union and Mao's China have an estimated total death rate ranging from 23 million to 109 million.
The Black Book of Communism asserts that roughly 94 million died under all communist regimes while Rummel believed around 144.7 million died under six communist regimes. Valentino claims that between 21 and 70 million deaths are attributable to the Communist regimes in the Soviet Union, the People's Republic of China and
Democratic Kampuchea alone.
Jasper Becker, author of
Hungry Ghosts, claims that if the death tolls from the famines caused by communist regimes in China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, North Korea, Ethiopia and Mozambique are added together, the figure could be close to 90 million. These estimates are the three highest numbers of victims blamed on communism by any notable study. However, the totals that include research by Wiezhi, Heidenrich, Glasser, Possony, Ponton, Tsaplin and Nove do not include other periods of time beyond Stalin or Mao's rule, thus it may be possible when including other communist states to reach higher totals. In a 25 January 2006
resolution condemning the crimes of communist regimes, the
Council of Europe cited the 94 million total reached by the authors of the
Black Book of Communism. Explanations have been offered for the discrepancies in the number of estimated victims of communist regimes: • Finally, this is a highly politically charged field, with nearly all researchers having been accused of a pro-communist or anti-communist bias at one time or another.
Stéphane Courtois posits that many communist regimes caused famines in their efforts to forcibly collectivize agriculture and systematically used it as a weapon by controlling the food supply and distributing food on a political basis. Courtois states that "in the period after 1918, only Communist countries experienced such famines, which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of people. And again in the 1980s, two African countries that claimed to be
Marxist–Leninist,
Ethiopia and
Mozambique, were the only such countries to suffer these deadly famines." Scholars
Stephen G. Wheatcroft,
R. W. Davies and Mark Tauger reject the idea that the
Ukrainian famine was an act of genocide that was intentionally inflicted by the Soviet government. Getty posits that the "overwhelming weight of opinion among scholars working in the new archives is that the terrible famine of the 1930s was the result of Stalinist bungling and rigidity rather than some genocidal plan." Wheatcroft argued that the Soviet government's policies during the famine were criminal acts of fraud and manslaughter, though not outright murder or genocide. In contrast according to
Simon Payaslian, the scholarly consensus classifies the Holodomor as a genocide. Russian novelist and historian
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn opined on 2 April 2008 in
Izvestia that the 1930s famine in Ukraine was no different from the
Russian famine of 1921 as both were caused by the ruthless robbery of peasants by Bolshevik grain procurements.
Pankaj Mishra questions Mao's direct responsibility for the
Great Chinese Famine, noting that "[a] great many premature deaths also occurred in newly independent nations not ruled by erratic tyrants." Mishra cites Nobel laureate
Amartya Sen's research demonstrating that democratic India suffered more
excess mortality from starvation and disease in the second half of the 20th century than China did. Sen wrote that "India seems to manage to fill its cupboard with more skeletons every eight years than China put there in its years of shame." Benjamin Valentino writes: "Although not all the deaths due to famine in these cases were intentional, communist leaders directed the worst effects of famine against their suspected enemies and used hunger as a weapon to force millions of people to conform to the directives of the state."
Daniel Goldhagen says that in some cases deaths from famine should not be distinguished from mass murder, commenting: "Whenever governments have not alleviated famine conditions, political leaders decided not to say no to mass death – in other words, they said yes." Goldhagen says that instances of this occurred in the
Mau Mau Rebellion, the
Great Leap Forward, the
Nigerian Civil War, the
Eritrean War of Independence, and the
War in Darfur.
Martin Shaw posits that if a leader knew the ultimate result of their policies would be mass death by famine, and they continue to enact them anyway, these deaths can be understood as
intentional. Historians and journalists, such as
Seumas Milne and
Jon Wiener, have criticized the emphasis on
communism when assigning blame for famines. In a 2002 article for
The Guardian, Milne mentions "the moral blindness displayed towards the record of
colonialism", and he writes: "If Lenin and Stalin are regarded as having killed those who died of hunger in the famines of the 1920s and 1930s, then Churchill is certainly responsible for the 4 million deaths in the avoidable
Bengal famine of 1943." Milne laments that while "there is a much-lauded
Black Book of Communism, [there exists] no such comprehensive indictment of the colonial record." Historian
Mike Davis, author of
Late Victorian Holocausts, draws comparisons between the
Great Chinese Famine and the
Indian famines of the late 19th century, arguing that in both instances the governments which oversaw the response to the famines deliberately chose not to alleviate conditions and as such bear responsibility for the scale of deaths in said famines. Historian
Michael Ellman is critical of the fixation on a "uniquely Stalinist evil" when it comes to excess deaths from famines. Ellman posits that mass deaths from famines are not a "uniquely Stalinist evil", commenting that throughout
Russian history, famines, and droughts have been a
common occurrence, including the
Russian famine of 1921–1922, which occurred before Stalin came to power. He also states that famines were widespread throughout the world in the 19th and 20th centuries in countries such as India, Ireland, Russia and China. According to Ellman, the
G8 "are guilty of mass manslaughter or mass deaths from criminal negligence because of their not taking obvious measures to reduce mass deaths" and Stalin's "behaviour was no worse than that of many rulers in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries."
Personality cults Both anti-communists and communists have criticized the
personality cults of many communist rulers, especially the cults of Stalin, Mao,
Fidel Castro and
Kim Il Sung. In the case of North Korea, the
personality cult of Kim Il-sung was associated with inherited leadership, with the succession of Kim's son
Kim Jong Il in 1994 and grandson
Kim Jong Un in 2011. Cuban communists have also been criticized for planning an inherited leadership, with the succession of
Raúl Castro following his brother's illness in mid-2006.
Political repression Large-scale political repression under communist rule has been the subject of extensive historical research by scholars and activists from a diverse range of perspectives. A number of researchers on this subject are former Eastern bloc communists who become disillusioned with their ruling parties, such as
Alexander Yakovlev and
Dmitri Volkogonov. Similarly,
Jung Chang, one of the authors of
Mao: The Unknown Story, was a
Red Guard in her youth. Others are disillusioned former Western communists, including several of the authors of
The Black Book of Communism.
Robert Conquest, another former communist, became one of the best-known writers on the Soviet Union following the publication of his influential account of the Great Purge in
The Great Terror, which at first was not well received in some left-leaning circles of Western intellectuals. Following the end of the Cold War, much of the research on this topic has focused on state archives previously classified under communist rule. The level of political repression experienced in states under communist rule varied widely between different countries and historical periods. The most rigid censorship was practiced by the Soviet Union under Stalin (1922–1953), China under Mao during the
Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) and the communist regime in
North Korea throughout its rule (1948–present). Under Stalin's rule, political repression in the Soviet Union included executions of Great Purge victims and peasants deemed "
kulaks" by state authorities; the
Gulag system of forced labor camps; deportations of ethnic minorities; and mass starvations during the Soviet famine of 1932–1933, caused by either government mismanagement, or by some accounts, caused deliberately.
The Black Book of Communism also details the mass starvations resulting from
Great Leap Forward in China and the
Killing Fields in
Cambodia. Although political repression in the Soviet Union was far more extensive and severe in its methods under Stalin's rule than in any other period, authors such as
Richard Pipes,
Orlando Figes and works such as the
Black Book of Communism argue that a reign of terror began within Russia under the leadership of
Vladimir Lenin immediately after the
October Revolution, and continued by the
Red Army and the
Cheka over the country during the
Russian Civil War. It included
summary executions of hundreds of thousands of "class enemies" by Cheka; the development of the system of labor camps, which would later lay the foundation for the Gulags; and a policy of food requisitioning during the civil war, which was partially responsible for a famine causing three to ten million deaths.
Alexander Yakovlev's critique of political repression under communist rule focus on the treatment of children, which he numbers in the millions, of alleged political opponents. His accounts stress cases in which children of former imperial officers and peasants were held as hostages and sometimes shot during the civil war. His account of the Second World War highlights cases in which the children of soldiers who had surrendered were the victims of state reprisal. Some children, Yakovlev notes, followed their parents to the Gulags, suffering an especially high mortality rate. According to Yakovlev, in 1954 there were 884,057 "specially resettled" children under the age of sixteen. Others were placed in special orphanages run by the secret police in order to be reeducated, often losing even their names, and were considered socially dangerous as adults. Other accounts focus on extensive networks of civilian
informants, consisting of either volunteers, or those forcibly recruited. These networks were used to collect intelligence for the government and report cases of dissent. Many accounts of political repression in the Soviet Union highlight cases in which internal critics were classified as mentally ill (diagnosed with disorders such as
sluggishly progressing schizophrenia) and incarcerated in
mental hospitals). The fact that workers in the Soviet Union were not allowed to organize independent, non-state
trade union has also been presented as a case of political repression in the Soviet Union. Various accounts stressing a relationship between political repression and communist rule focus on the suppression of internal uprisings by military force such as the
Tambov rebellion and the
Kronstadt rebellion during the Russian Civil War as well as the
1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre in China. Ex-communist dissident
Milovan Đilas, among others, focused on the relationship between political repression and the rise of a powerful
new class of party bureaucrats, called the
nomenklatura, that had emerged under communist rule and exploited the rest of the population. Lenin is quoted as saying to his colleagues in the Bolshevik government: "If we are not ready to shoot a saboteur and
White Guardist, what sort of revolution is that?" Historian
Robert Conquest stressed that events such as Stalin's purges were not contrary to the principles of Leninism, but rather a natural consequence of the system established by Lenin, who personally ordered the killing of local groups of class enemy hostages.
Alexander Yakovlev, architect of
perestroika and
glasnost and later head of the Presidential Commission for the Victims of Political Repression, elaborates on this point, stating: "The truth is that in punitive operations Stalin did not think up anything that was not there under Lenin: executions, hostage taking, concentration camps, and all the rest." Historian
Robert Gellately concurs, arguing that "[t]o put it another way, Stalin initiated very little that Lenin had not already introduced or previewed." Philosopher
Stephen Hicks of
Rockford College ascribes the violence characteristic of 20th-century communist party rule to these collectivist regimes' abandonment of protections of
civil rights and rejection of the values of
civil society. Hicks writes that whereas "in practice every liberal capitalist country has a solid record for being humane, for by and large respecting rights and freedoms, and for making it possible for people to put together fruitful and meaningful lives", in communist party rule "practice has time and again proved itself more brutal than the worst dictatorships prior to the twentieth century. Each socialist regime has collapsed into dictatorship and begun killing people on a huge scale." Author
Eric D. Weitz says that events such as mass killing in communist states are a natural consequence of the failure of the rule of law, seen commonly during periods of social upheaval in the 20th century. For both communist and non-communist mass killings, "genocides occurred at moments of extreme social crisis, often generated by the very policies of the regimes." According to this view, mass killings are not inevitable but are political decisions.
Soviet and Communist studies scholar
Steven Rosefielde writes that communist rulers had to choose between changing course and "terror-command" and more often than not chose the latter. Sociologist
Michael Mann argues that a lack of institutionalized authority structures meant that a chaotic mix of both centralized control and party factionalism were factors to the events.
Social development Starting with the
first five-year plan in the Soviet Union in the late 1920s and early 1930s, Soviet leaders pursued a strategy of economic development concentrating the country's economic resources on
heavy industry and
defense rather than on
consumer goods. This strategy was later adopted in varying degrees by communist leaders in Eastern Europe and the Third World. For many Western critics of communist strategies of economic development, the unavailability of consumer goods common in the West in the Soviet Union was a case in point of how communist rule resulted in lower
standards of living. The allegation that communist rule resulted in lower standards of living sharply contrasted with communist arguments boasting of the achievements of the social and cultural programs of the Soviet Union and other communist states. For instance, Soviet leaders boasted of guaranteed employment, subsidized food and clothing, free health care, free child care and free education. Soviet leaders also touted early advances in women's equality, particularly in
Islamic areas of Soviet Central Asia. Eastern European communists often touted high levels of literacy in comparison with many parts of the developing world. A phenomenon called
Ostalgie, nostalgia for life under Soviet rule, has been noted amongst former members of Communist countries, now living in Western capitalist states, particularly those who lived in the former East Germany. The effects of communist rule on living standards have been harshly criticized. Jung Chang stresses that millions died in famines in communist China and North Korea. Some studies conclude that East Germans were shorter than West Germans probably due to differences in factors such as nutrition and medical services. According to some researchers, life satisfaction increased in East Germany after the reunification. Critics of Soviet rule charge that the Soviet education system was full of
propaganda and of low quality. United States government researchers pointed out the fact that the Soviet Union spent far less on health care than Western nations and noted that the quality of Soviet health care was deteriorating in the 1970s and 1980s. In addition, the failure of Soviet pension and welfare programs to provide adequate protection was noted in the West. After 1965,
life expectancy began to plateau or even decrease, especially for males, in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe while it continued to increase in Western Europe. This divergence between two parts of Europe continued over the course of three decades, leading to a profound gap in the mid-1990s. Life expectancy sharply declined after the change to market economy in most of the states of the former Soviet Union, but may now have started to increase in the
Baltic states. In several Eastern European nations, life expectancy started to increase immediately after the fall of communism. The previous decline for males continued for a time in some Eastern European nations, like Romania, before starting to increase. In
The Politics of Bad Faith,
conservative writer
David Horowitz painted a picture of horrendous living standards in the Soviet Union. Horowitz claimed that in the 1980s rationing of meat and sugar was common in the Soviet Union. Horowitz cited studies suggesting the average intake of
red meat for a Soviet citizen was half of what it had been for a subject of the tsar in 1913, that blacks under
apartheid in South Africa owned more cars per capita and that the average welfare mother in the United States received more income in a month than the average Soviet worker could earn in a year. According to Horowitz, the only area of consumption in which the Soviets excelled was the ingestion of
hard liquor. Horowitz also noted that two-thirds of the households had no hot water and a third had no running water at all. Horowitz cited the government newspaper
Izvestia, noting a typical working-class family of four was forced to live for eight years in a single eight by eight foot room before marginally better accommodation became available. In his discussion of the Soviet housing shortage, Horowitz stated that the shortage was so acute that at all times 17 percent of Soviet families had to be physically separated for want of adequate space. A third of the hospitals had no running water and the bribery of doctors and nurses to get decent medical attention and even amenities like blankets in Soviet hospitals was not only common, but routine. In his discussion of Soviet education, Horowitz stated that only 15 percent of Soviet youth were able to attend institutions of higher learning compared to 34 percent in the United States. with majorities of citizens in the former East Germany and Romania were polled as saying that life was better under Communism. By 2019, 61 percent of citizens of former Communist states said that standards of living were now higher than they had been under Communism, while only 31 percent said that they were worse, with the remaining 8 percent saying that they did not know or that standards of living had not changed. In terms of living standards, economist
Michael Ellman asserts that in international comparisons state socialist nations compared favorably with capitalist nations in health indicators such as infant mortality and life expectancy.
Amartya Sen's own analysis of international comparisons of life expectancy found that several communist countries made significant gains and commented "one thought that is bound to occur is that communism is good for poverty removal". Poverty exploded following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, tripling to more than one-third of Russia's population in just three years. By 1999, around 191 million people in former Eastern Bloc countries and Soviet republics were living on less than $5.50 a day. == Left-wing criticism ==