Why are socialist and communist countries usually considered more authoritarian than capitalist countries?

Just as capitalist states are "authoritarian" against working class interests, socialist states are "authoritarian" against capitalist interests.

The state is a tool for one class to oppress another. The goal of (most) communists is to transition from capitalism — where the capitalist class is in power — to a stateless, classless communist society via socialism — where the working class is in power.

Public perception of which is more "authoritarian" therefore depends on which class is currently in power and is able to manufacture consent, and that is the capitalist class in the vast majority of the world right now since the USSR's overthrow.

• What is "Authoritarianism"?

Because we live in a capitalist society where capitalists control our media and education. Back in the fifties, you’d be jailed or even killed for being a communist (or gay) in the United States of America. Why do we view this as any less authoritarian than the USSR? Because it’s our past.

With the USSR overthrown, virtually all mainstream media now is capitalist propaganda. And the capitalist class obviously would not want the working class to prefer a system where workers are in power.

They aren't?

Americans live in an authoritarian plutocracy, but refuse to believe it

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B

Isn't that generally said by countries that oppose them?

The land of the less authoritarian had race discrimination until half a century ago, right? Seeing the BLM, it seems to have a prominent role even now. So are they any better?

Because mass media, manufactured consent, and regulatory capture are the “good” kind of coercion.

Because of who controls the presses in capitalist countries.

I see a lot of comments saying they aren't. I'd disagree, but I agree they don't have to be. The issue is most of the major powers in the world have opposed leftist governments anytime they show up. The ones that didn't have a strong central power and cultural hegymony collapsed under the pressure. Any nation that had a weaker central power was either destroyed, couped, or undermined by the west.

There is nothing intrinsically authoritarian about leftism (really, I'd say it's less authoritarian in it's ideals), but authoritarianism is easier to hold together when outside pressures are trying to destroy you.

From Losurdo - A critique of the category of totalitarianism:

Nowadays we constantly hear denunciations, directed toward Islam, of ‘religious totalitarianism’ or of the ‘new totalitarian enemy that is terrorism’. The language of the Cold War has reappeared with renewed vitality, as confirmed by the warning that American Senator Joseph Lieberman has issued to Saudi Arabia: beware the seduction of Islamic totalitarianism, and do not let a ‘theological iron curtain’ separate you from the Western world.

Even though the target has changed, the denunciation of totalitarianism continues to function with perfect efficiency as an ideology of war against the enemies of the Western world. And this ideology justifies the violation of the Geneva Convention, the inhuman treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, the embargo and collective punishment inflicted upon the Iraqis and other peoples, and the further torment perpetrated against the Palestinians. The struggle against totalitarianism serves to legitimate and transfigure the total war against the ‘barbarians’ who are alien to the Western world.

Marketing

Socialist countries are not, the entire Scandinavian block are super socialist, and not authoritarian.

As for Communist countries, no one has actually implemented communism, only in name. Communism means the workers, not the state, control the means of production. The state controlling them allows for bad actors to seize control.

Authoritarianism has nothing to do with economic systems and everything to do with government structure. The Soviet bloc/China and other communist countries were authoritarian because the populous allowed their governments too much power. China is ultra capitalist now and they're as authoritarian if not more so.

People remember communist countries as more authoritarian because they're the more taught examples. Pinochet was a turbo capitalist and he was one of the most authoritarian rulers in history.

some people have to be forced into being a part of a social system.

IE, there are people who would rather let others die in the streets than have their taxes raised. some people are just terrible human beings who believe 'i got mine, fuck everyone else' which is antithetical to socialism, and requires a heavy hand via regulation.

Because our bourgeois state propaganda and corporate media tell us that they are, because it’s in their best interest that we believe it.

"single party state"

mccarthyism, red scare, American and western Europe propaganda. listen to Blow Back podcast it explains a lot of political meddling and how capitalism is working in its best interest in crippling socialism

We haven’t had a “communist” country yet. Communism is a spontaneous, free market for voluntarily donated goods and services.

Communism is basically how groups of people under about 100 behave naturally. Any group of friends on a road trip is inherently communist, as is any tribe of people, as is any family.

At larger scale, this kind of “just pay attention and do what needs doing” approach to economic distribution breaks down. Marx believed that with enough material abundance, humans would naturally behave communistically at larger scales as well. I think he’s wrong, but it remains to be seen.

So far we’ve never had communism at the scale of a county. We’ve had socialism, which is where the government forcibly redistributes wealth.

The reason that socialist countries are more authoritarian is that socialism is by definition the non-free-market version of that process.

Under capitalism, if you have an acre of farmland, that’s your acre of farmland until you decide to sell it. Under socialism, whether it’s your acre of farmland is the decision of the central economic planning committee, and in order for that committee to be able to decide whether you keep your farm or not, it needs to have the authority and power to take it from you. And the policy to do so.

Do you see why this requires a more authoritarian society?

Let’s look at it another way. Under capitalism, ie under what we call the “free market”, you own the farm. That means you have authority over it. You have authority over yourself. There’s just as much authority; it’s just that the authority is broken into little bits and distributed to people who own capital.

Under socialism, the people own the farm. Except “the people” can’t effectively operate with anything like a will, due to a lack of borg hive mind telepathy mechanics unifying their will into a single instrument, and so “the people’s” authority is wielded by the Central Committee.

When authority is centralized in this way, taken away from individuals and given instead to the state, we call this an “authoritarian” state.

Authoritarian therefore doesn’t refer to more authority; it refers to the authority being concentrated in the center.

And the authority over economic decisions being concentrated in the center is, by definition, “socialism”.

Under communism, sovereign authority is attributable. If you ask the US president, they'll say they have little power. If you ask senators, or congresspeople, or local representatives, the media, the bourgeoisie, neither do any of they wield power. Where authoritarianism occurs under capitalism, apparently no one is responsible for it. Under communism, it's directly attributable to communists.

Both are often authoritarian, but the argument that communists are more authoritarian is simply an easier one to make.

From a Swedish standpoint, this is just nonsense. The Nordic countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Island and Denmark) are all in the top six most democratic countries in the world (according to The economist, England). These are were much socialist countries and most definitely democratic.

Then you have china, soviet and alike. Those are countries that call(ed) themself communist. I will argue that that's however mostly used as a label to legitimate the government and to obscure what they really are, in the same manner north Korea is formaly named the democratic people's republic of Korea (DPRK). Those countries does/did not operate as communist states the way that Marx and other political theorists imaginend them.

I believe it's inherent to the system. The whole point of a communist system is a centrally planned, and controlled, economy. This gives the state immense control and as inherent to every form of government, self preservation at any cost.

As discussed in "rules for rulers" by cgp grey, there is no such thing as a benevolent or kind dictator. All politicians and leaders will use any means available to themselves to further their own ambitions.

Politically they have ended up authoritarian in many instances. However, capitalism has as much "authoritarianism", just economically. Try whatever -ism you like, enough percentage of population is psychopathic and will climb to a position of power in some form or another. It's in our collective nature.

from my own experience observing people migrating from the soviet union, they're considered more authoritarian for the efforts to keep the workers in the worker's paradise, the moment you have to put up walls and border checkpoints to keep people in, it's over. you're an authoritarian state, no longer actually socialist imho.

Because countries that call themselves communist are just dictators lying about it...

I mean, you're asking about two separate political axis: economy, and control.

Look at the Nordic countries and even most Western Europeans and you'll see socialist countries that aren't authoritarian.

Theres not a single communist country tho. So when you talk like there are, people assume you have no clue what you're talking about about.

Like, what countries do you think are communist?

Well, us socialists have free health care and education. Most of us socialist states have female bodily autonomy. Were not big on banning books either. Most importantly we recognise a false dichotomy. Also we actually know what socialism is. Try visiting Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most of Europe. You'll notice that they're are not authoritarian at all. You might just be an American, but that's not your fault.

https://medium.com/international-workers-press/misconceptions-about-communism-2e366f1ef51f

It's masquerading.

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others"

Because authoritarians took over the Soviet Union and proceeded to try to run every other revolution.

Their governments have more or full control

Im not sure what you mean by socialist countries. But communists countries are more oppresive:

• They have leaders that stay in power for decades. Opposition is often punished.
• There is nor freedom of speech, speaking against the government gets you in jail or worse.
• In some of those countries, people are not allowed to leave the country.

And for the record, I agree that poverty is extremely oppressive as well and we need more socialist reforms in capitalist countries, tax harder the rich, break monopolies, foster more unions and so on, I just dont agree that communism is the magical land you all think it is and the solution to all the problems. Nobody seems to want immigrate to North Korea for a reason.

For communist countries, because they are.

Because the communism is a convenient ideology for totalitarian states to exploit and control the population.

It's exactly like the middle-ages Christianity, with the Bible promoting humanitarian ideology, and the church exploiting the hell out of the population.

That's also why communists banned all religions, they don't want any competition.

Because communism doesn't work for large, heterogenous groups, so increasing amounts of coercion are used to keep the system running.

And new forms of government such as socialism are generally more succeptible to corruption as people find the new loopholes; as a government gets more corrupt, those who corrupted it seek to consolidate their power.

I think socialism can be made workable, as we examine and correct the problems with previous attempts. I don't think communism works well for human societies, as it requires people to act better than we know they do.

Because the rulers under communism are still the political class and not the working man. And instead of being able to uplift yourself via entrepreneurship you have the state controlling every aspect of your life, your career, and your ability to own property