Sean McMeekin: Don't Whitewash the History of Communism
Historian Sean McMeekin dissects how communism has enduring and resurgent appeal in the West despite its history of violence and economic disaster.
The Soviet Union collapsed at the end of 1991, taking down with it the threat of international communism, right? Today's guest says no, writing that, "Far from dead, Communism as a governing template seems only to be getting started." Sean McMeekin is a historian at Bard College and the author of the mesmerizing book To Overthrow the World: The Rise and Fall and Rise of Communism. Reason's Nick Gillespie talks with him about the history of communism, how its focus on forced equality is inherently violent, and how Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and others each brought particular flourishes and horrors to its practice.
Gillespie and McMeekin talk about why communism has enduring and resurgent appeal in the West despite its history of violence and economic disaster. "We dodged a certain bullet" with the election of Trump, McMeekin says, but he argues that "whatever party is in power in Washington, I think we always have to jealously guard our civil liberties and we have to just constantly remind ourselves of what our values are and are supposed to be."
1:41 — The enduring appeal of communism
3:55 — The "whitewashing" of Karl Marx's appetite for violence
7:02 — How Vladimir Lenin changed communism
16:38 — American attitudes toward communism
23:44 — Leon Trotsky's idea of "permanent revolution" and Lenin's legacy
28:35 — Violence didn't deter communism's appeal to many
33:33 — The left's flip-flopping on interventionism in World War II
36:54 — Mao, Khmer Rouge, and communism in Asia
45:22 — Western radicals and Maoism
50:27 — Black intellectuals' engagement with communism
57:51 — Is communism making a comeback?
1:06:20 — Does communism still appeal to the young?
1:11:19 — How does Donald Trump map onto all this?
1:16:43 — The politicization of the means of communication
- Video Editor: Ian Keyser
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Hello my fellow kids, isn't this thing where young people find communism attractive just the worst?
We are all in this together!
It takes a (communist) village.
That is , logically, a point about the failure of education.
Second worst, after attractive Christian National Socialism looting, confiscating, robbing, committing arson, throwing bombs, barbecuing millions of Jews and nationalizing stuff for Jesus. The commies were the Allies FDR and Humphrey Bogart delivered supplies to in Action in the North Atlantic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1xmbnVO6gU
Communism still has appeal in the west because of deliberately lying leftist cunts, mostly in college faculty, and extremely gullible spoiled 20-somethings, mostly college students.
It’s because communist ideology has marched through our institutions and are indoctrinating kids with it. The “labor theory of value” nonsense is everywhere because they’re brought up on it.
Disagree. Not that the education systems aren't overrun, but that journalism is the egg and education is the chicken. If every other article in the news paper for six decades running were exposès about how taxation is theft, college lectures about how we need taxes to help our fellow men would be laughed out of existence. The only reason it resonates is because little Timmy grew up with his Mom reading news stories about how patriarchal CEOs were exploiting the wage gap to destroy the planet and that with more diverse leaders, more shared experiences, better plans, and more community funding/group effort these issues would be solved.
Communism will always have appeal to some people in any society built on capitalism, private ownership of property, meritocratic values, etc. This is because those societies create situations where some people have more than others (rightfully so). And those that don't have as much will want a system that says that won't happen, in part, because then they don't have to deal with their own failings about why they have so little. And a portion of those that have a lot will feel negative emotions (e.g., guilt, anger, shame, etc.) that other don't have as much and will want a system that says that won't happen.
Even worse are the people who loudly and publicly reject a desire and effort to attain personal wealth (again, most often in their 20s) but later on change their minds. At that point the stupid ones can't understand why most of their peers have more than them. And the evil ones know why, and decide to attain equality through organized, official theft.
Except communism has a special sppeal for the entitled, profligate children of relatively wealthy upper middle class families who resent having to produce things other people want in order to to earn a living. Marx himself was a prime example of that phenomenon .
People like the Kennedys the Clintons, even the Bidens take on the liberal persona so as to not be called on the carpet for their privilege. Bernie Sanders is better off than 95% of Americans and he hides it with his "i'm for the little guy" bullshit
But how did it start? There must have been some initial reason.
My answer is that as technology and wealth grew, and as democracy and the printing press made dissent possible, it was a lot easier to point the finger at fat cats earning "too much"; thus the robber barons. The disparity between peasants and nobles was much sharper, everyone knew it was not wise to protest, and it wasn't even possible to protest in any meaningful sense.
Thus socialism, in some vague sense. Marx was just another socialist theorist of no importance.
Then came the Bolshevik revolution. A country which still had virtual slaves, who spoke an impenetrable language which you couldn't even make a stab at pronouncing by reading, and whose culture was limited to Tchaikovsky and Dostoevsky. Hard to travel, and the reports were fabulous. They were lifting a powerful backwards nation out of poverty and slavery and injustice!
So of course Communism looked good, and Marx was its prophet. Duranty just confirmed it; he was not the cause, just confirmation of the obvious.
Compare that to Hitler. He took an enlightened wealthy advance nation with tons and tons of culture, relatively free access by tourists, foreign businessmen, and the foreign press. Charles Lindbergh visited and got a medal from Goering, a WW I ace!
The contrast was clear. Communism good, Nazis bad. Never mind that Communist invasion of the Baltics and Poland, their collaboration with Hitler that started the third German war in 70 years. That was self-defense of Socialism! And then two years later, Hitler stabbed brave Stalin in the back. And four years later, Stalin defeated Hitler.
So of course Communism was good, Nazism and Fascism were bad, notwithstanding that all were socialism.
You make some decent points but after 45 years of studying this question I would say the central question is FREEDOM OF RELIGION. THe state will be GOD unless there is Freedom of Religion.
Two things have setled into convictions for me
1) Lincoln's view of Civil Religion, the Catholic/Jewish natural law basis of our Country (which Islam hates)
2) and the common soul of almost all tyrannies as this article details
"The Abusive Exploitation of the Human Religious Sentiment": Michael Burleigh as Historian of "Political Religion"
Everything I've read and thought over 45 years comes down to those two highlights
Communism appeals to the naive, the control freaks and bullies of the world.
Communist regimes have killed over 100 million people since 1917 which appeals to the closet blood thirsty sadistic murderers among us.
On college campuses, the leftist professors fail to report the oppression, terror, failed economies and mass murders the communists engaged in, and the naive students believe "true communism" hasn't been tried yet.
Yes, communism is appealing...but only among the worst of us.
We all start out communists. The 5 year old says "Why don't we give everybody a million dollars"
Hillary Clinton's ceaseless putting forward of the utopian is just a case of never growing up. Sure, everybody in the US esp children should have shoes that fit but to argue as she does is to ensure that those kids will have shoes maybe and homosexuals will invade the schools, Trans in every neighborhood, more and more abortion mills.
I have been college faculty for 29 years and hsve yet to meet a communist professor. I have met an anarchist though.
Liar.
I have been in college teaching for 10 years and they are all over the place. but they are unschooled (see below) and they often don't know that they are what they are
2 of 3 Americans Wouldn’t Pass U.S. Citizenship Test
A survey found that people aged 65 and older were more likely to pass the test than those aged 45 and younger.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2018-10-12/2-of-3-americans-wouldnt-pass-us-citizenship-test
So... hsve ya discovered a difference between arnychists and communists? How d'ya tell them looters apart?
Still your filthy mouth serves the purposes of Communism: to break down morals, to start infighting, to make religous and moral folk look outdated.
Clean up your mouth and work for the right side.
Recently looked up some stats on this subject; during the 20th century it is estimated that some 38 million people died as a result of war; some 110 million are attributed to the practice of communism, primarily as a result of man made starvation [Holodomor], deportations, forced labor, and of course executions.
And yet, as we say with that Pulitzer prize winning liar [Walter Duranty] for the NYT, the ideology continues to appeal. Egalitarianism, equity, share and share alike, though every time it has been done "some animals are just more equal than others."
There is nothing wrong with idealism with respect to goals and desirable outcomes. What's wrong with The People is that they cannot tell the difference amongst aspirations, likely outcomes and actual outcomes. Cause and effect are ALWAYS difficult to prove and people who do not start out with great skepticism concerning promises - especially the campaign promises of politicians - are at much greater risk for concluding that "there oughta be a law!"
Idealism has no need to be attached to reality; that is what makes it so dangerous. You can literally pave the road to hell with the greatest of intentions, and justify it all the way.
"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it makes a better soup." -- Henry Louis Mencken
Under communism, there are no roses. Often no soup, either.
I've always thought CS Lewis' quote was accurate:
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
It still is but the older I get the more I realize Dietrich Bonhoeffer's observation about the stupid is far more common and more dangerous
Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed – in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack.
But again this is a world where to have or do one thing is necessarily to not have or do another. Our problem is how to use best what is inherently limited. The only real resource is PEOPLE hence abortion, trans, gay, strike at the very existence of what is good.
http://www.juliansimon.com/writings/Ultimate_Resource/
As to family, religion, sexual morality -- the FOUNDERS never spoke more strongly
A New Birth of Marriage
Love, Politics, and the Vision of the Founders
by Brandon Dabling
"A New Birth of Marriage argues that the American Founders placed marriage as the cornerstone of republican liberty. The Founders' vision of marriage relied on a liberalized form of marital unity that honored human equality, rights, and the beauty of intimate marital love. This vision of marriage remained largely healthy in the culture until the Progressive Era and persisted in law until the 1960s. A New Birth of Marriage vindicates the Founders' understanding of marriage and argues that a prudential return toward this understanding is vital to America's political health and Americans' private happiness.
Brandon Dabling argues that Founders at the state and national level shaped marriage law to reflect five vital components of marital unity: the equality and complementarity of the sexes, consent and permanence in marriage, exclusivity in marriage, marital love, and a union oriented toward procreation and childrearing."
Want to be radical as hell ( radicalis, from Latin radix, radic- ‘root’.)
return to the root of the greatest advance in modern history, the American Founding
Some clarification
Whatever Orwell was he was very conservative in social values, mores, and even down to politeness and manners.
Simply put , for any of that to have happened , the 3 tenest of our founding were what was violated
all men created equal
all endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights
government exists to protect those rights.
REASON has made almost all respondents into attacker insteda of defenders. Most seem to have stronger hates than they have loves.
It's been getting whitewashed for 100 years. History teachers are more than happy to spend weeks talking about Nazi Germany, but tend to avoid any discussion of the brutality of Soviet and CCP history, other than the typical "mistakes were made, we've moved on" deflections.
I mean, they started immediately by trying to paint them as left/right, and now morons like Tony and shrike parrot that shit.
Altruist looters who love Jesus are Christian National Socialists. Altruist looters who don't love Jesus are godless commie atheists. Take it from a pro: “In the socialism of the future, on the other hand, what counts is the whole, the community of the Volk. The individual and his life play only a subsidiary role. He can be sacrificed—he is prepared to sacrifice himself should the whole demand it, should the commonweal call for it." p.16 Wagener 1985
Real communism has never been tried on a nation state level.
No matter how brutal the faux communist regime, it has never had the guts to wipe out every last human who wants to stand on his own two feet without leave of the rest of his community.
Just as REAL Christian National Socialism has never been tried on a nation state level either.
Communism has been spreading rapidly in America, especially since 2020 when far left wing Trump hating politicians and propagandists (posing as journalists) mandated totalitarian lockdowns, mask wearing and social distancing, then violated all of their own mandates to mobilize protests and race riots in hundreds of cities, while censoring anyone who dared tell the truth about their unconstitutional, unscientific and deceitful left wing totalitarian lies and actions.
Nonsense. Even more draconian public health measures were imposed by George Washington.
And masks do reduce transmission of respiratory diseases. The best masks also reduce exposure to air pollution.
You are wrong but if you didn't need mask restrictions because "masks do reduce transmission of respiratory diseases. The best masks also reduce exposure to air pollution: why the need for any force at all ??????????????.
"
THen join your local Catholic Church and put some muscle in that grunting
Jordan Peterson says Catholicism is most sane
https://catholicweekly.com.au/jordan-peterson-says-catholicism-is-most-sane/
Michael Burleigh has spent years on the horrors of the 20th Century and he said
"The Church’s teaching about the dignity of human life, at every stage of its existence; its insistence on objective truth and the four last things–death, judgment, heaven and hell; its opposition to militarism yet rejection of outright pacifism in a dangerous world; its belief in the compatibility of faith and reason-all of these facts, said Burleigh, place the Roman Catholic Church in a unique and pivotal position to make a real difference. Despite the recent scandals in the Church, and what he calls a “pathological anti-Catholicism” attempting to exploit them, the time is right for the Church of Rome to act: “No other religious body has the strength, the respect and the authority to influence the world for the better.”"
Don't like the Pope in particular then join and do something. Don't be another Martin Luther "My family is having problems , think I"ll get a divorce"
The term communism, like the term leftist, has lost all original meaning and is now nothing but a catchall for disagreement with Trump.
If you support free trade then you’re a leftist. If you support the free movement of people then you are a communist.
The terms mean nothing now. They’re just words that Trump and his defenders throw at people who aren’t tribalist morons in order to shut down discussion by attacking people instead of refuting their arguments.
Disagree. The term communism is still a dirty word in political conversations. It is still possible to elicit angry denials by calling progressivist socialism agenda programs implemented by the Democratic Party over the decades "communism." Even the socialist idealists almost all refuse to call themselves communists and try to con us into thinking that socialism is not communism. Technically they are partially correct as the fundamental difference is that communism seeks to eliminate all formal private property, while socialist systems own and operate all of the major means of production while allowing private ownership of personal property and sometimes operation of small family businesses. Communism and National Socialism are still "socialist" in every other respect, while the current state of Our Democracy (TM) is National Socialist in almost every respect, with private ownership of the major means of production still in "private" (i.e. "corporate") hands, licensed by and under extreme regulation and even central governmental direction from the national socialist government.
Most of the politicians in the US who call themselves socialists aren't. The only thing they want the government to expropriate is health insurance companies -- a really easy target.
But this is ostensibly arguing for the truth of X by attacking the falsity of Y. Soicalism/Communism/Fascism WHO CARES. Argue for the American Biblical Founding and the whole game is over
All men created equal
All endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights
Government exists to protect those rights.
Kill every enemy of what is good and you still have not established the GOOD
You'd best learn to distinguish by capitalization. Big-C Communism is whatever the political parties call it. Little-c communism has been around for centuries, with people calling the Amish and Mormons communists in one way or another.
And if you want to get picky, Nazism is Hitler's ideology only; Fascism is Mussolini's ideology only. The lower case versions are whatever suits the phrase, such as grammar nazis and fast lane speed nazis.
Stop being a pedant only when Trump is involved. Your lack of Biden pedancy is well-known.
Not true. Fascism is well-defined as government control of the major means of production, ostensibly for the benefit of society, while leaving the ownership and day-to-day operation and profits in private hands. It is still a form of socialism much to the chagrin of western progressive socialists.
No it isn't. Mussolini invented Fascism. He invented the Fascist party. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else want to use the name for, any more than what other people want to redefine Marxism as.
You too need to differentiate the upper and lower case versions.
Jesse gives this comment a thumbs up.
Right, like he told you that. An idiot you have been, an idiot you shall remain.
You attacked a known Trump detractor who understands economics. So of course Jesse approves.
Sadly that’s all you want. Jesse’s approval that is. Was your daddy a proud economic ignoramus who attacked anyone who wasn’t stupid? That would explain a lot.
You’re such an angry drunk bitch. You lost, and America won. And you hate Jesse for rubbing your nose in that.
You are 100 percent correct. Mussolini would be shocked at what people call Fascist today.
Here's an example of your hypocrisy:
No mention of Democrats calling Trump worse than Hitler, a literal Nazi? No mention of calling Musk a Nazi for using the same arm gesture that they themselves, along with a zillion other politicians and ordinary civilians and even Superman have been using before little baby Hitler was even a gleam in his parents' eyes?
Your hypocrisy is yours. You own it. It was not invented by Jesse or your other tormentors.
Any hypocrisy surrounding abuse of the various definitions of socialism lie in attempts by the socialists to distance themselves from the real-world consequences of real-world attempts to implement socialism at various times and places.
??? The hypocrisy is sarc blaming Trump while never blaming Biden.
I’ve criticized all of Biden’s policies from his tariffs to student loan forgiveness.
So again, pretty please, with sugar on top, go fuck yourself. Your pathetic attempts to gain favor by attacking me are pathetic.
Fact is that you will never be popular in these comments until you erase all understanding of economics from your mind. Which you will do because you value popularity over principle.
Bullshit. I can't recall a single time you criticized Biden.
Go ride someone else's coattails. I don't have any. You'll just be left sitting in your own pile of shit and urine.
Jesse approves of this comment.
If you weren’t so desperate to gain the approval of him and the other Trump defenders you’d find that we agree on most things economics and politics.
But you can’t see that because you want to be popular soooo badly.
Stop lying. You loved Biden and always defended him, along with all democrats.
You defended and excused Biden constantly over the secret documents. "He cooperated!".
In time, after becoming the brunt of lies thanks to your understanding of economics and failure to support everything Trump, you’ll find people arguing against things you never said, that they know to be true, because the narrative says so. And you’ll still be kissing Jesse’s ass and defending him in hopes of gaining his favor.. You’re pathetic. Fuck off and grow a pair.
Nice. You continue opposing Trump only and pretending Biden did no harm.
I’ve criticized Biden’s policies from the beginning and never defended any of them. You’re just a pathetic loser who is embracing the narrative and attacking the unpopular person in the vain hope of becoming popular. Just like middle school. Grow up.
Good thing you don’t spend much time here.
I've muted both of those trolls, but I can only imagine the dialogue between them.
More proof that deliberate ignorance of economics is a political virtue.
Yes, you are proof of that. And that Jesse basically owns you.
No, you idiot. Any change in meaning comes from the radical left, who have indulged such tactics since, well, their beginnings. If Trump and friends call somebody a commie, they almost certainly deserve it. But to deflect THEY are the ones who want you to think "communist" does not mean anything.
YOu do the very thing you criticize and you do it most of the time.
Let's have some Philosophia Perennis, some moral principles, some right and wrong. your posts are always : If I were king of the world this nonsense would stop
So... which kind of mind is it that talks about other people instead of ideas?
Colonialism is far more likely to be whitewashed in the West today. Not just as an old dead thing of history (eg how many people did the Brits kill via famine in Ireland, India, why is Haiti still such a shithole, etc). But as the reason why BRICS (excluding Russia which has its own reasons to be a perpetual asshole) is the challenge to the 'Western rules-based order' - all based on colonial structures.
But hey - you keep on pretending that communism is the threat. It's like the Duracell bunny rabbit of threats
Communism isn't a threat?
Tell that to those 100 million people communism murdered.
Haitian slaves had their rebellion 200 years ago. They won. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
India's been independent for 77 years now. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
Ireland's been independent for 100 years now. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
Haitian slaves had their rebellion 200 years ago. They won. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
They were forced (by the French military) to pay crushing debt to France from 1825 until that loan (or rather the central bank holding that loan as its only asset) was sold to Citibank in 1910 or so (using US govt funds). Citibank then got the US to invade and occupy Haiti in 1914 - and force Haiti to pay 40% of its GDP (that's the equivalent of $10 trillion/year - just in interest) until maybe the late 1940's. From which point, the US has manipulated 'elections' (while training paramilitaries and terrorist organizations like the TonTon Macoute) to ensure that Haiti remains - supine.
How does that compare to communism globally over the last century? And why are you deflecting?
Excess deaths in India range from 50 to 160 million over the century from direct rule to independence as the Brits deliberately deindustrialized the country, exported food during famine, reduced life expectancy, etc. The low number is more evidence based rather than estimate/projection based - but there's a whole bunch of countries - and a whole bunch of colonizers - who all followed the same path. Much of which is also imposed today by IMF and Paris Club type debt talks and forcing countries to produce cash crops at the expense of feeding themselves.
Yeah - that is very comparable in scale to communism. And far more meaningful in most of the world where 'communism' was merely a Cold War prop between the US/USSR.
And Irelsnd still has fewer people today than it did in 1841.
That is an illogical argument even accepting your premises.
Communism gains no luster from India's non-communist failures.
Kinda like the DEA bleeds Mexico, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama, Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, all 3 Guyanas, Brazil and then some? How altruistic are their motives?
India's been independent for 77 years now. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
Me? I don't matter one bit. It's India that is and remains basically hostile to the West. India that is joining BRICS and is working to undermine everything 'the West' stands for.
Ireland's been independent for 100 years now. Why are you still blaming colonialism?
Again - what's with this me kimmosabe? Ask Ireland why they are not in NATO - why they didn't fight WW2 - why they see their own colonial history in the whole Israel-Palestine stuff. Despite now having a higher GDP per capita than the US or Switzerland or Norway (and more than double that of the UK).
Do you just not want to understand? Or do you just want to follow the Energizer bunny?
You? You’re making an issue out of it. Not us.
Ireland would have been a liability had it joined the belligerents in WW2. It was the poorest country in Europe, barely had an army, its air force had just 29 mostly obsolete aircraft, and didn't have a Navy at all. The Nazis could hsve overrun it in hours. Eamon de Valera liked Jews and secretly helped the allies, and he also suppressed Irish fascists and Nazi sympathizers.
The only ones who approve of, support or is attracted to communism are those who never lived in a communist state.
And who don't want to go live in them. Communism for thee, not for me.
"Idealism increases in direct proportion to one's distance from the problem."
– John Galsworthy
What can possibly go wrong with a totalitarian and brutal system of oppression, when you are sitting, well fed, in a comfortable classroom and basking in your self-righteous sense of virtue? In your dreams the ice man never comes for you.
Or driving down a special center lane in a government limo, on your way to your dacha after shopping at the special inner party store.
but htat is Biden more than most Communists. Putin is reportedly worth $200 Billion but Biden has money, prestige, power, 50 years of very poor public service and now he gets signed to a publicity agency.
For dacha without worry , it's BIDEN not Putin
a silly sillyl comment from someone who doesn't know the realigy of the classroom. As Ellul said 60 years ago
Technological society leads to increasing numbers of people who cannot adapt to the inhuman rhythm of modern life with its emphasis on specialization. A class of people is growing up who are unexploitable because they are not worth employing even for the minimum wage. Technological progress makes whole categories of people useless without making it possible to support them with the wealth produced by the progress.
Jacques Ellul
THey cannot read or write or do math.
They CAN"T !@!!!!
Altruist initiation of deadly force increases as the square of the distance from measurable facts of reality.