Where have Marxist policies worked?

Marxism influences and suggests a range of policies, and a wide range of Marxist thinkers and politicians have put forward numerous policies. It's too simplistic to call Marxism a single "policy".

I will answer your question, however. You have previously characterised state-funded healthcare as a "Marxist" policy. The UKs National Health Service (NHS) works very well and provides very good care, free at the point of use, at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer.

Man a lot of stuff works. It's totally amazing that food, goods, and services find their way into my possession at all, considering I can't really farm or craft much by myself.

I'm not Marxist by any definition, but Jamiet99uk is right that it is not, strictly speaking, a "policy." Marxism is a way of adapting the ideas presented in an obsolete economics textbook to every facet of life and knowledge, from literary criticism to geography. It can be anything you want it to be, provided you use the right shibboleths.

Having said all that, Marxian economics is a perfectly good school of economic thought. Not one I agree with, but not worthless either.

Almost everyone is a Marxist to the degree that almost everyone believes that economic production has an important influence on the development of society.

Asking "where has Marxism worked" is an inherently Marxist question.

Tell us what you define Marxism as, and we might be able to address you.

I'm fairly certain you've constructed a strawman "Marxism", which you can beat and feel like you're a winner, when your internal idea is fundamentally nothing like actual Marxist thought (be that Marxism-Leninism, Trotskites, Maoism, et al).

No, Marxism is an ideology, but certain policies come with an ideology, namely: Higher taxes, More spending, bigger government, etc. What I am asking is what Marxist country has been successful, where Marxism had played out in its fullest extent.

Define what you think Marxism is if it was implemented.

Then we'll laugh at you, and tell you how you're insane. (Calling it now).

Because I seriously doubt you have anywhere close to a coherent idea of what any flavor of Marxism is.

"....where Marxism had played out in its fullest extent...."

This has not happened anywhere, yet.

I did however provide an example that answers your initial question. Do you agree that the UK's NHS represents a successful "Marxist policy" under your definition of "Marxism" ?

Let us go by your definition of Marxism: Leninism, Maoism, Trotskyism, etc. By that definition, these countries have been Marxist as some point or another:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Socialist_states_by_duration.png

Also, what Jack Klein said.

I don't think its working:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-receives-3000-complaints-every-week--with-nearly-half-against-medical-professionals-8789300.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23831802

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23795384

You're the one bringing up the discussion. Define Marxism as a political policy.

You have full Marxism, and then you have Marxist policies. Only the countries on the map have been full Marxist, with a Marxist government and constitution.

I said it is an ideology. Now answer the question. Tell me which one of those countries has been successful because of Marxism.

Define what makes a country "full Marxist" versus just "Marxist policies"

What makes a policy Marxist?

What makes a government Marxist?

What makes a country Marxist?

One that is compatible with Marxist ideology.

One which has constitutionally declared themselves to be "socialist", under any definition of the term, at some point in their history.

^

Now answer the question.

Define Marxist ideology.

You're avoiding defining your terms.

Which just demonstrates you have no idea what you're talking about, except to use "Marxism" and "Communism" as stand in for "Bad"..

"The doctrines developed from the political, economie, and social theories of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and their followers: dialectical materialism, a labor-based theory of wealth, an economie class struggle leading to revolution, the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the eventual development of a classless society."

"Marxism is a particular political philosophy, economic and sociological worldview based upon a materialist interpretation of history, a Marxist analysis of capitalism, a theory of social change, and a view of human liberation derived from the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels"

"In a socialist society private property in the means of production would be superseded by co-operative ownership."

"a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs."

Ok, we've proved you can copy and paste.

Now give us an example of a policy you consider Marxist. Be specific.

Now tell me where this ideology, played out in the countries that have declared themselves, in their constitution, to be Marxist-Leninist, or socialist.

I think somebody already answered you. the British NHS.

I'd call it socialist medicine. Pretty successful.

Ok, based on the Countries on the wikipedia map you provided, Sybil, I would make a few comments:

Vietnam: Vietnam's economic growth has consistently been one of the highest in the world for the past decade.

Yugoslavia: The only time in the last 200 years that the country/region formerly knowns as "Yugoslavia" has been prosperous and peaceful for any length of time was during the 40 years of socialist government after WWII.

China: Would you claim that China is an unsuccessful nation?

Cuba: Under socialism Cuba has gone from an impoverished US gambling den to one of the most successful nations in Central and Southern America. Average life expectancy in Cuba is 78 years, the same as in the USA. Cuba has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. Cuba's literacy rate stands at 99.8% compared to 85% in the USA. Cuba is the *only* nation in the world that meets the UN and WWF definition of a sustainable economy.


Oh, and as for the NHS, have you ever been to a hospital in the UK? I have. I have received superb care every time, and all funded by my taxes, which I consider wholly reasonable.

Sbyvl, you literally do not understand what Marxism is.

@JK: I gave you a dictionary definition.

The ObamaCare bill, particularly the mandate.

The New Deal, specifically Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.

Any redistribution of wealth whatsoever.



And the Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto, which are:

1. Abolition of private property.

2. Progressive Income tax. (16th Amendment)

3. Abolition of rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit, with a national bank (i.e. The Federal Reserve)

6. Centralization of communication and transportation (i.e. The FCC)

7. Factories owned by the state.

8. Creation of Industrial Armies (SSA and the DoL)

9. Equable distribution of population within the nation (Planning Reorganization Act of 1949 )

10. Free Education (DoE)

Hey sbyvl, do yourself a favor and read this:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/ie

Learn the difference between i.e. and e.g. please.

"6. Centralization of communication and transportation (i.e. The FCC)"

So the FCC regulates highways now...interesting.

Those are two different things... all countries and economies are compatible with Marxist thought, in fact Capitalism is crucially important to Marxism in its role to create an industrial base to allow mass production and urbanization at the cost of generating a proletarian class out of the once agrarian workers.

However states that describe themselves as Socialist in their constitutions have made some good policies, your question permits me to list ANY working policy in those countries, not just the economic ones.

There are lots of good policies, but it depends on what your viewpoint is, from their perspective and knowledge I would say that the USSR's instatement of Puppet Regimes in Eastern Europe was a good policy from their POV (mainly the history of having few allies, being invaded by the west, and having little say in international affairs), but not a good policy from the Western POV. From even a Western POV, I would give good grades to most of the Asian Officially Socialist Countries for trying to increase the rights of women where historically there has been few.

In terms of Economics, that is more difficult to pin down, because Economics is the study of scarcity and the resolvement of the issue of scarcity, and failing solving it, explaining the rules behind it and making the system of trade of goods sensible and efficient. So a good economic policy is heavily open-ended, and wide to interpretation on the qualitative value of it.

If I suggest that their focus on industrialization was a good policy for allowing a larger output of goods, increasing urbanization, and increasing the Human Capital by a more educated society, one could suggest that with the larger output of goods it just lowered the quality of the individual good, the increased urbanization did little because it drew workers away from the production of food, and the increased education was counter-beneficial because it took funds from the government to invest in projects like making sure every home had electricity even in the most rural areas.

@Jamiet:

Vietnam: I wouldn't say that http://www.vietnamonline.com/js/ckfinder/userfiles/images/GDP%20Growth%20Vietnam(1).jpg

Yugoslavia: It may have been successful at first, but its ridiculous monetary policies (under the Communist Party) led to hyperinflation:
http://www.caseyresearch.com/images/Yugo.jpg
http://www.studium.com/graphics/coins/lg50bildinara.jpg

China: Yes I would.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/gordon-g-chang/chinas-failing-economy-triggers-social-unrest
http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/chinas-farms-failing/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-29/china-failure-to-grow-with-1-trillion-credit-seen-as-li-warning.html
http://www.benzinga.com/media/cnbc/13/06/3699472/forbes-columnist-gordon-chang-predicts-chinese-economys-catastrophic-failur

Cuba:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/sep/09/fidel-castro-cuba-economic-model
http://www.questia.com/library/1G1-103614075/socialist-paradise-lost-cuba-s-failing-special
http://ashbrook.org/publications/onprin-v7n5-sheller/


The only reason why it is growing now is because the government is backing out the economy a bit: http://skift.com/2013/08/27/cuban-state-begins-to-move-out-of-the-restaurant-business/