Marxist Example Of Communism

The 1965-1989 reign of Nicolae Ceausescu was undoubtedly devastating for Romania, and similarly to other twentieth century communist leaders, Ceausescu abused communist principles for his own power and agenda. While alternate opinions of Ceausescu’s communist integrity exist, such as his intentions and communist use of violence, his abusive policies and exploitation of Marxist communism speaks otherwise. Through the partial economy and heightened role of the administration, Ceausescu betrayed the Marxist idea of equal money and the power of the community’s voice, while his use of violence contrastingly supports Marxist ideals. Therefore, the extent to which Ceausescu’s administration was aligned with Marxist ideals between his 1965-1989 years

Perhaps the most notable characteristic of communism is the equality of pay “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” where a classless society works for the greater good of the community, an aspect that Nicolae Ceausescu failed to achieve through the administration’s half-hearted attempts in establishing this Marxist concept. Yet in 1979, an average agriculture worker’s earnings was only 66% of industrial workers’, and rural households were void of basic technology. Contrastingly, the elite lived in opulence with large estates and a plethora of peasants at their disposal, despite the promise of equal wealth that Ceausescu made. Therefore, Ceausescu went against the idea of publicized wealth and this unwillingness to economically abolish classes demonstrated Ceausescu’s abusive use of Marxism for his own, and ruling elites’ wealth. Furthermore, Ceausescu placed a strong emphasis on international affairs that not only went against public desire, but was secured by compromising the lives of the Romanian. His need to eliminate the $10 billion of Romanian debt in 1982, for example, was detrimental to the extent where all manufactured goods were exported, leaving domestic goods to be rationalized. Economic growth diminished from 10% in 1970 to 3% in 1980, and as a consequence of the low emphasis on the domestic economy, the energy crisis of the early 1980’s left streets dark. Ceausescu therefore neglected his own people in his selfish search of international prestige. Hence, in his priorities, Ceausescu rather used communism as a pillar to support his international affairs, rendering the people subordinate to the country, and betraying his communist ideals. However, other historians, such as Jonathan Eyal, argue the actions of Ceausescu