The Broken Promises of a Flawed Utopia and Consequences That Ensued

 

         Crux: Promised to rid the world of the inherent inequalities of capitalism, communism
was born without foreseeing the upcoming downfall of a flawed utopia, which led to
significant consequences.

 

Introduction:
 

         The Black Book of Communism estimates that about 94 million individuals were
killed due to the wars and poverty conducive to communism. Throughout the 20th
century, it was the cause for numerous wars such as the Korean War, the Chinese Civil
War, and many more. (1) The creator of this political system was not a power-hungry tyrant
or any person with malicious intentions; he was a thinker trying to prevent the
exploitation and inequalities that are a direct result of capitalism. Unbeknownst to him,
he created a monster. Karl Marx released it into the world with his book, “Communist
Manifesto” in 1847. (2) World leaders took note and created their own adaptation of the
concept. Promising to eliminate the inequalities of capitalism, communism instead
produced authoritarian rule and widespread suffering because its architects failed to
foresee how the pursuit of a utopian ideal would concentrate power and suppress
individual freedoms.

 

Section 1: Authoritarian Rule
 

         One of the biggest flaws of communism, which the original creators failed to
foresee, is the rise of authoritarian rule revolving around one singular central figure. The
state nationalizes land and resources, which makes the citizens essentially employees
of the country. There are no market prices to encourage efficiency, thus there would be
no incentive to improve productivity to seek greater profits. For instance, the Soviet
Union offered no purchasing power in return for their labor, creating no incentive to
produce more. Workers were highly inefficient, leading to Soviet grain farms employing 

five times as many workers as their American rivals.3 Central planners had to allocate
how resources like wheat harvest or steel from a mill should be used. For example, a
central planner is tasked with distributing steel. Ensuring visibility to the Soviet
population was their primary goal. If the population saw progress, then they would
believe in the system. Sending the steel to make grain silos to store their vital crop was
far more useful than providing it for tractors. The USSR had an abundance of tractors,
causing it to be a world leader in that industry, all the while, its food rotted.(4)
The pyramid structure ends with a dictator who may be unqualified due to the
general weakened meritocracy in communist countries. The North Korea regime is a
perfect example of a hereditary dictatorship wielding absolute control over its
population. Its top-down leadership dictates who has access to fundamental
requirements that most countries take for granted, mainly education and even medical
care. (5) Those in lower-class backgrounds and rural areas would have twelve years of
compulsory education, but beyond that, higher education is limited to the children from
“loyal” or “core” families. (6) Moreover, Pyongyang is home to much of the high-quality
education, leaving rural areas stuck in a cycle of endless poverty. Continuing with the
education system, it prides itself in doctoring the masses with state-led brainwashing,
portraying their leaders as divine while depicting South Koreans and Americans as
aggressive oppressors. (7) Authoritarian rule also brings state-sponsored hacking. North
Korea stole over half the total crypto hacks totaling $2.7 billion in 2025.8
Additionally, there is a systematic flaw, not limited to one leader. Communism
necessitates a high concentration of power in the government because they need to
abolish all private property and oppress opposition to avoid the formation of opposition. 

Essentially, the problem is that the government is basically one singular
individual. Once this individual has the reins to control all of a country, they are left with
almost infinite power in that area. Resulting in them being able to do everything they
want whenever they want, with no other opinions taken into account.

 

Section 2: (Suppress) Individual Freedoms
 

         Individual freedoms are suppressed under communism; Karl Marx would have
been baffled by the abolition of freedom. Marxism was a necessary step to move
humanity from a state of “unfreedom” under capitalism to a higher, true freedom(9). He
argued that under a capitalist system, employers are encouraged to exploit the worker
to maximize profit. “The liberty of capital freely to oppress the worker”(10). The industrial
revolution between 1760 and 1840 was known as a period of great innovation through
mass production, but on the backs of workers facing grueling conditions(11). Working
16-hour shifts 6 days a week, often without breaks, with minimal pay and working
environments that prioritized production over human life (12). Children could be paid ten to
twenty percent of an adult male’s wage for the same work (13). Children as young as five
used their small frames to crawl through moving machinery, leading to death,
deformities, and stunted growth (14). Pay barely covered the cost of living; they were stuck
in an endless loop of poverty. He even referred to laborers as “cogs” in a machine (15).

 

         Looking to resolve the flaws of freedom under a capitalist system, Karl Marx
believed Marxism offered the free development of each of the conditions. Individuals
would not have the pressure of survival, freeing them to pursue ‘innovation’. Focusing
on the “Realm of Necessity” and the “Realm of Freedom.\” by distributing all the
necessities for survival (16). Marxism unlocked what capitalism could not: the “Realm of
Freedom.” An example that Marx envisioned is a person being able to rotate through
different activities, and as he put it, “based on their own minds” rather than a market’s
demand. A talented artist spends his creative talent by chiseling statues to be proud of,
without the pressure of paying rent. At the same time, a carpenter under capitalism
would focus on profit by cutting corners to make as much as time allows, while Marx
visualized the worker making the furniture to last many generations by focusing on
quality without the pressure of the market (17). Where the citizens were free to innovate
without worrying about their personal welfare. For him, freedom was a social state, not
an individual inherent right.

 

Section 3: Failed to Predict
 

         Marxism and its transition into communism were inherently flawed without an
understanding of its repercussions. Marx stated that human greed was simply the
product of capitalism and not the inherent trait of people. Believing that once the Realm
of Necessity was met, people would not seek more. Greed revealed itself in the hands
of the elite at the expense of the masses, causing the wealth of the nation to be
severely concentrated with them. For example, in the USSR, special privileges were for
“party elites”, the Nomenklatura, including restricted shops, better housing, and

exclusive healthcare. All this happened under the collective virtue of communism-
everyone is equal (18).

 

         Marxism was simply a pipe dream without national-scale testing. Marxism was
written with no empirical evidence, making his manifesto a risky endeavor to pursue.
The (1910) Russian Revolution suddenly put this unverified theory into practice.(19)
Immediately, private ownership was abolished, leading to little incentive to be 

productive. By 1921, a major famine killed millions, causing food rationing and total
state control of industry (20). A violent civil war ensued, fought against the whites who were
liberals and monarchists, while the Reds sought to solidify their power under a Soviet
nation with the underlying theories of Marxism (21). Under their flawed system, the
economy edged toward collapse.
 

         Communism lacked capitalism’s price signals. Whilst capitalism ensured that the
demand was indicated by the prices of a product, communism simply did not have that.
For instance, in South Korea, after the rise in demand for semiconductors, companies
like Samsung helped satisfy it (22). However, in a communist country, it is vice versa. It is
hard to distinguish and categorize what they have in abundance and what they lack. An
example is when the planners misjudged demand in the Soviet Union and produced too
many shoes while lacking essentials. By the 1970s, they had 800 million pairs of shoes
in storage, which were roughly 3 pairs per person. Factories were given targets by
social planners, such as producing 1 million pairs of shoes. They were not incentivized
to produce the correct sizes to satisfy demand or even consider comfort. This led to
chronic shortages of common sizes and surpluses of unusable shoes. Up to 10 to 20%
of shoes remained unsellable, while stores had long queues for common sizes (23).
 

         In comparison, a capitalist system would rely on price signals and sales data when
deciding how much of a certain item to manufacture. For example, Nike would realize if
a sneaker sells out quickly, demand is outpacing supply. Production is constantly
adjusted to reduce surplus for maximum profit.
 

         Factories were tasked with filling quotas by tonnage or units, and with profit not in
the equation, they manufactured solely with that goal in mind. Nail production is a
classic example of USSR production distortion. Quotas were set in tons, and factories
obliged by producing large, heavy nails. When planners asked for quotas to be in
numbers of units, small unusable nails were produced. In the 1970s, the Soviet Union
and the USA were in an intense rivalry in various areas, including steel production. By
the late 1970s, the USSR produced 150 million tons of steel annually, sometimes even 

exceeding the USA (24). To keep their tallies high, the Soviets resorted to producing
subpar, and types that were easily manufactured. As a result, industries reported a
shortage of specific steel they needed despite the state’s efforts to produce more. This
was one of the cases when the tonnage quotas were set for factories, and they met
them, but the functionality was lacking.
 

         In the early stages of communism and today, countries seem to have moved
away from absolute Marxism and shifted more to a capitalist market system. Most
notably, China as they are ruled by a single communist party called the Chinese
Communist Party (CCP). They have a market economy. This was one of the aspects
Marx failed to predict (25). Cuba and North Korea are the only holdouts to a sharing-based
political system, and still markets exist for those who have the means to live a more
lavish lifestyle (26). One of the historic events which took place and started this trend was
the retreat from pure Marxism, also known as the NEP (New Economic Policy) in 1921.
The pure Marxist system was failing in such a significant manner that Lenin introduced
this policy where communism and capitalism co-existed (27).

 

Conclusion:
 

         Believing he had found an answer for the perceived injustices of capitalism,
Marx’s Manifesto laid a path to a utopia free from inequalities, which found its way into
communism. They weren’t able to predict its unintended consequences. Marx’s beliefs
and criticisms of capitalism were valid, and his attempt to abolish the shortcomings of
the market system was commendable. Though his belief that human nature can be
tamed for the collective was shortsighted and led to 100 million deaths.28 However, the
work he produced and announced as Marxism was like a tall building built with ambition​

but established on top of unstable land. Marx’s thoughts on human nature were that
capitalism made humanity selfish and greedy, meaning these traits were not innate.
This was purely based on his assumptions with no testing or evidence. Political leaders
took his assumptions at face value and incorporated them into their versions of
communism. Death, fear, and poverty were the unintended consequences. Carl Marx
and later communist states only saw visions of a utopia, and being naive to human
traits, they enacted communism.

 

​