Fall of Communism
In a society that strictly followed communism, the society was the one that owned the major resources and the means of production rather than an individual. With this, equal work opportunities and benefits are presumed to all; a concept that was not achievable in the real world. There rose socialist dictatorship that would eventually end individual ownership and quench any protest thereafter. These leaders were known to embezzle resources that came their way hence alarming citizens that socialism is not as good as it is presumed to be.
According to (Fukuyama, 1992), liberal democracy is still the only political aspiration that cut across different areas and cultures around the world. He believed that historical advancement was collectively believed in and that humanity would progress towards a more rational set of political institutions. He claimed that a triumph for communism would disgrace the idea of progress because it would mean a defeat of democracy and rationalism.
After the fall of communism the world has changed to the better. It has not yet manifested new evil trends that dictatorship and authoritarian regimes had. The world has transgressed to a liberal democracy, evidenced by the numerous democracies present today. There was an emergence of global capitalism whereby there is free trade activities based on private property and a free market.
Scientific knowledge has been significantly developed. Accumulation of knowledge of the external world has been made much better and that man has been able to control and master nature. With the advancement of natural science, there was development of military competition, where the nations that fully utilise their scientific advancement dominate those that do not, through the development, production and deployment of technology. Economic growth has produced certain informality in almost all the societies. With new technology, means of communication and transport have been improved allowing for the expansion of markets. This facilitated the realisation of economic of scale and specialisation became more possible which increased productivity. Modern bureaucratic forms of business replaced the traditional ways whereby people were employed on the basis of skills, ability and willingness to do the work.
According (Zizek, 2009), nothing has really changed. What used to happen during Communism regimes is still happening. He claims that we are not really in capitalism; we do not have true democracy but still in deceiving mask, the dark forces still pull the threads of power, a narrow sect of former communists disguised as new owners and managers. While the anti-communist were busy dreaming of how a society full of justice, honesty and solidarity would be, the ex-communist were busy filling without difficulty to the new capitalism rules and roles. While the ex-communists were for the utopian dream of a true democracy, the ex-communist stood for the cruel new world of market efficiency, with all its corruption and dirty tricks.
The last few decades have clearly shown that the market is not a kind mechanism that works best when left alone. It requires aggression to create the necessary condition for it to function. This is best shown by how the market fundamentalist react to the disorder that ensures their ideas are executed is typical utopian totalitarian whereby they blame their failure on too much state intervention on the market and demand an even more thorough execution of the market doctrine. This clearly shows the dominance of the market by the wealthy few who have personal gains.
According to (Fukuyama, 1992), liberal democracy is still the only political aspiration that cut across different areas and cultures around the world. He believed that historical advancement was collectively believed in and that humanity would progress towards a more rational set of political institutions. He claimed that a triumph for communism would disgrace the idea of progress because it would mean a defeat of democracy and rationalism.
After the fall of communism the world has changed to the better. It has not yet manifested new evil trends that dictatorship and authoritarian regimes had. The world has transgressed to a liberal democracy, evidenced by the numerous democracies present today. There was an emergence of global capitalism whereby there is free trade activities based on private property and a free market.
Scientific knowledge has been significantly developed. Accumulation of knowledge of the external world has been made much better and that man has been able to control and master nature. With the advancement of natural science, there was development of military competition, where the nations that fully utilise their scientific advancement dominate those that do not, through the development, production and deployment of technology. Economic growth has produced certain informality in almost all the societies. With new technology, means of communication and transport have been improved allowing for the expansion of markets. This facilitated the realisation of economic of scale and specialisation became more possible which increased productivity. Modern bureaucratic forms of business replaced the traditional ways whereby people were employed on the basis of skills, ability and willingness to do the work.
According (Zizek, 2009), nothing has really changed. What used to happen during Communism regimes is still happening. He claims that we are not really in capitalism; we do not have true democracy but still in deceiving mask, the dark forces still pull the threads of power, a narrow sect of former communists disguised as new owners and managers. While the anti-communist were busy dreaming of how a society full of justice, honesty and solidarity would be, the ex-communist were busy filling without difficulty to the new capitalism rules and roles. While the ex-communists were for the utopian dream of a true democracy, the ex-communist stood for the cruel new world of market efficiency, with all its corruption and dirty tricks.
The last few decades have clearly shown that the market is not a kind mechanism that works best when left alone. It requires aggression to create the necessary condition for it to function. This is best shown by how the market fundamentalist react to the disorder that ensures their ideas are executed is typical utopian totalitarian whereby they blame their failure on too much state intervention on the market and demand an even more thorough execution of the market doctrine. This clearly shows the dominance of the market by the wealthy few who have personal gains.
