Does more communism result in less fiscal stability?

I was about to reply that this is wrong but LOL I noticed something

All of the fiscally ****ed countries in Europe elect or have elected in the near past Communist parties. All of those who are doing very well haven't.

BAD:
Greece: 16% of vote, 52/300 seats IN GOVERNMENT
Spain: 9% of vote, 8/350 seats - Second biggest Spanish party is Socialist 11% OF VOTE in 1996
Belgium: 4% ov vote, 2/150
Bulgaria: 18% of vote, 40/240 seats
Cyprus: 33% of vote, 19/56 seats
France: 7% of vote, 10/577 seats 22% OF VOTE IN 1967
Italy: 2% of vote, 0/630 seats 41 SEATS IN 2006
Portugal: 12% of vote, 14/230 seats

GOOD:
Austria: <1% of vote, 0/183 seats
Croatia: <1% of vote, 0/300 seats
Czech Republic EXCEPTION: 15% of vote, 33/200 seats
Denmark: <1% of vote, 0 seats
Estonia: <1% of vote, 0/101 seats
Finland: <1% of vote, 0/200 seats
Germany: <1% of vote, 0/299 seats
Hungary: <1% of vote, 0/90 seats
Ireland: NO COMMUNIST PARTIES
Lithuania: COMMUNIST PARTIES BANNED
Latvia: COMMUNIST PARTIES BANNED
Luxembourg: <1% of vote, 0/60 seats
[arguable] Netherlands: <1% of vote, 0 seats
Poland: <1% of vote, 0/460 seats MAY BE BANNED NEXT YEAR
Romania: <1% of vote, 0/412 seats
Slovakia: <1% of vote, 0/150 seats
Sweden: <1% of vote, 0/349 seats
Switzerland: <1% of vote, 1 seat
United Kingdom: <1% of vote, 0/650 seats
Monaco: NO COMMUNIST PARTIES
Slovenia: NO COMMUNIST PARTIES

COUNTRIES WHERE TWO BIGGEST PARTIES ARE RIGHT WING
Estonia
Germany
Poland
Hungary
Ireland
Romania
Switzerland
Finland
Monaco
Slovenia
[arguably] United Kingdom

^{* In Norway, Sweden, Poland, Lithuania, Austria, Germany, Croatia and UK, the biggest fascist party is bigger than the biggest communist party.}

Almost as if the amount of Communist sympathisers in your country correlate with your country's fiscal success and stability

As above

Note that the reverse ^{(people vote communist because their country is doing bad)} is unlikely, as all of those (BAD) countries had communist parties in parliament before the most recent election, even when they were booming at 6 - 10% growth rates.

[arguable] - Whether the Netherlands are doing well or not well is up for discussion. They had a triple dip recession that ended last year but unemployment has been falling consistently since exactly a year ago. Dutch deficit has been falling for 3 years straight and it now stands at 2 billion, with Netherlands predicted to have a budget surplus next year. But growth is extraordinarily weak.

[arguably] - Whether Miliband's policies drove Labour from marginally right-wing to marginally left-wing is up for discussion.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 1

anarchism101

OK, a few you've opted to ignore in your "good" list:

- Denmark has the far-left Red-Green Alliance, 8% of the vote, 14/179 seats.
- Finland has the Left Alliance, 7% of the vote, 12/200 seats. In the 1990s they generally won more than 10% of the vote.
- Germany has Die Linke, descended from the old German Communist Party (yes, the ones who ran East Germany), 9% of the vote, 64/631 seats, 12% in 2009, the second largest party in several states, including leading the government in Thuringia.
- Ireland has a collection of far-left parties who formed the United Left Alliance at the last election, which won 3% of the vote and 5/166 seats in the last election. Sinn Fein (10%, 14/166, but currently polling at 20% or higher) also are part of the far-left group in the European Parliament.
- Latvia's Socialist Party is still an explicitly far-left Communist (with a capital C) party. Generally contests elections as part of broad left-wing coalitions rather than individually, but has 3/100 seats.
- Luxembourg has The Left party, 5% of the vote, 2/60 seats.
- Netherlands has the Socialist Party, but I would accept the argument that they've moved a bit to the right in recent years, but they still are part of the European far-left bloc. 10% of the vote, 15/150 seats (17% in 2006)
- Sweden has the Left Party, 6% of the vote, 21/349 seats.
- Slovenia has the United Left party, 6% of the vote, 6/90 seats.

Reply 2

SotonianOne

Original post by anarchism101

The difference between those which you have listed and those on my list is that the ones I had are explicitly Communist in the form of Marxism in the form of no state at all or Marxism-Leninism in the form of mass nationalisation. Some of those that you listed like Luxembourg's dei Lenk are hardly "communist", as they advocate the redistribution of empty properties into ownership of those who do not have any and strengthening of the welfare state. That's a whole world away compared to those other Leftist parties above.

I missed Ireland's one, sorry. Others are pretty "moderate" in terms of revolutionary marxism though

Germany's Die Linke have overcome a huge reform and are now a democratic socialist party, advocating Keynesianism and higher minimum wages as well as a mixed economy. In some ways, Germany's Die Linke are the reincarnation of 1950s and 60s Democratic Party / Christlich Demokratische Union

Polish Democratic Left Alliance is also the successor party of the former Communist Polish United Workers' Party with a name change, like German die Linke, but seriously neither can be described as communist in any other way than their history and roots. After all, the Polish Communist Party of 2001 - 2005 when in government gave Poland the biggest privatisation period in their history.

(edited 8 years ago)

China, hello?

Original post by Катя

China, hello?

China is not communist and is moving ever further right. Right now China is somewhere between where the UK was in the 1970's and 1980's so somewhere between socialism and state capitalism can best describe it. I believe that China's eventual position will be akin to Germany and Japan who are both broadly capitalist but not to the extent of the UK or US.

Reply 5

Rakas21

With regards to the thread title i actually agree somewhat. I've often wondered if there's a correlation between unemployment and the performance of fringe parties.

Reply 6

Катя

Original post by Rakas21

I meant that China is quite protectionist, but yeah.

Reply 7

Rakas21

Original post by Катя

I meant that China is quite protectionist, but yeah.

It's opened up significantly under this and the last president i'd say (based on its plans anyway).

Reply 8

username878267

Original post by Rakas21

But no doubt you and all other Tories on here will be accusing China of being communist when you want to argue about how immoral left wing politics are or whatnot.

Reply 9

Rakas21

Original post by Bornblue

But no doubt you and all other Tories on here will be accusing China of being communist when you want to argue about how immoral left wing politics are or whatnot.

Most Tories seem to rave about China.

Reply 10

username878267

Original post by Rakas21

Most Tories seem to rave about China.

I've found most use it to show the dangers of communism.

Reply 11

Rakas21

Original post by Bornblue

I've found most use it to show the dangers of communism.

Think their probably referring to Mao's China.

Reply 12

username878267

Original post by Rakas21

Think their probably referring to Mao's China.

Which wasn't really communist either. More so state-capitalist.

Reply 13

Rakas21

Original post by Bornblue

Which wasn't really communist either. More so state-capitalist.

Nope.

Mao's China was a proper command economy, not an ounce of capitalism in China until they saw the glory that was Hong Kong.

Reply 14

username878267

Original post by Rakas21

Nope.

Mao's China was a proper command economy, not an ounce of capitalism in China until they saw the glory that was Hong Kong.

The state controlled all the means of production - not the workers.
Thus it was state capitalist. not communist
The existence of a monetary 'economy' by nature suggests it was not communist.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 15

Rakas21

Original post by Bornblue

The state controlled all the means of production - not the workers.
Thus it was state capitalist. not communist
The existence of a monetary 'economy' by nature suggests it was not communist.

It was socialism rather than communism. Command economies are not capitalist.

State capitalism is what China has now whereby it has a market economy but the government significantly intervenes in terms of building mass infrastructure and intervening in firms.

Reply 16

SotonianOne

Original post by Катя

I meant that China is quite protectionist, but yeah.

China is quite open. Tariffs are not that high to the point that calling them protectionist is a bit awkward, not that they would need tariffs anyway as they are an exporter economy with cheap labour. On the other hand China does have huge protection on their financial and construction sectors so I see why you would call them protectionist, their corporate welfare is quite high and their barriers to entry are huge.

But outsourcing to China is easier than to any other country in the world, including some capitalist ones like Switzerland and Hong Kong, so in that respect it isn't protectionist.