33

It's May Day, while Communist regimes celebrated this day, others mourn. Specifically there are claims that communist governments have killed 80 to 100 million people in the last 100 years. Are communist governments directly responsible for over 80 million deaths? (directly means killed via execution, internment, work camps, etc. but would not count deaths theoretically due to a weakened economy)

Communism. In less than 100 years, Communism has claimed more than 100 million lives. Today, it continues to enslave one-fifth of the world's people.

adam.r
  • 1,411
  • 14
  • 19
Russell Steen
  • 12,872
  • 1
  • 64
  • 86
  • 12
    Would the deaths caused by the massive famine induced by Pol Pot's agricultural "reforms" count? – Lagerbaer May 01 '12 at 23:39
  • 32
    Can we find a better word than "directly"? No-one ever had a death certificate with "communism" as the cause of death. Even being executed by a government that happens to be communist isn't (alone) evidence that communism itself is involved in the death. – Oddthinking May 02 '12 at 00:06
  • @Oddthinking -- I think that once you reach the 80 million number, then perhaps yes, there's a trend. However I agree that I need a better work than directly. Also note I'm not saying that the trend does exist, just checking the claim. – Russell Steen May 02 '12 at 01:39
  • @Russell: Like you, I am neither denying or admitting a trend. However, to draw strong conclusions, one needs various controls to compare it against - was it the communism? the oppression of science? the lack of freedom of speech? high taxes? that they didn't let Jesus into their hearts? that they ate too many Brussels sprouts? That said, the question "Have Communist governments (directly) killed 80m?" seems a reasonable claim to check. – Oddthinking May 02 '12 at 02:28
  • I'm trying to think of a way of answering this that is better than [Wikipedia's take on _The Black Book of Communism_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism) – Oddthinking May 02 '12 at 02:51
  • Is it feasible to state what is or isn't a communist government? Is mainland China still communist? Is the DPRK communist or mainly drawing on Confucian ideals nowadays? – Andrew Grimm May 02 '12 at 06:50
  • 2
    If economic matters do not count as kills, there will be a problem accounting for kills due to famine. Accusations of intentional famine and/or famine brought on by the punishment of farmers for not adhering to (confiscatory/runious) communist economic policies or mismanagement of farms seem like a recurrent theme in racking up deaths from communism. Personally, I would count these as kills, but if the original post denies "deaths theoretically due to a weakened economy". See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1921 or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine – Paul May 02 '12 at 07:45
  • Do you exclude wars too? – Benjol May 02 '12 at 08:29
  • 1
    How would you count the Great Patriotic War, 26.6 millions Russians dead. Not killed by stalinists, but their disregard for human life sure did affect that number. – vartec May 02 '12 at 10:59
  • 17
    And just to add to the confusion: Is it that these people are being killed because the government is communist, or because there is a fascist cult of personality behind the communist government. I think that a lot of people who bring out this claim also attempt to conflate it with other agendas of laying blame at the feet of the ideology inherent in communism instead of looking at the whole picture. And why only communist governments? There are other totalitarian (almost opposite of the ideal of communism) that have killed a great number of people. – Larian LeQuella May 02 '12 at 11:00
  • 2
    @LarianLeQuella: communism, fascism and nazism are closely related. Don't forget that Stalin and Hitler were allies when they've attacked Poland. Also nowadays, won't find many people advocating fascism or nazism, while there are tons of young, clueless people supportive of communism. And cult of personality alone doesn't kill anyone (vide Mac users). – vartec May 02 '12 at 11:07
  • 10
    @vartec true, but also keep in mind that what Stalin and these "cult of personality" individuals were running was really not communism in the same way as some of these clueless young people may be supporting. You brought up WWII, keep in mind that Japan also had a total disregard for life, and they were not communist. Again, it's a many layers of nuance type of question that this questions seems to deal with. Very hard to nail down reliably, hence why the "simple" answer of 80 million is so widely accepted. Humans generally don't want to think too hard on unpleasantness like this. – Larian LeQuella May 02 '12 at 11:13
  • @LarianLeQuella: I think you're mistaking communism with radical socialism. Note, that communism is "**dictatorship** of the proletariat", which calls for "**purge** of class enemies". Main reason communism separated from socialist movements after First International was that communism by definition is militant, while socialist advocated operating within democratic bounds. – vartec May 02 '12 at 11:25
  • 2
    btw. the original claim is that communism is responsible for 80-100mln victims. That is different claim than "communist governments are responsible for 80-100mln victims". – vartec May 02 '12 at 11:32
  • 6
    @LarianLeQuella, I suspect that the subtext for questions like this is the (equally impossible-to-pin-down) similar claims about 'religion causing most wars'. – Benjol May 02 '12 at 12:36
  • 1
    @vartec: Re: different claim. The poor OP is getting it from both sides here. I complained that communism doesn't kill people, so he changed it to communist governments, which I supported. Now you are pointing out it doesn't match the claim. Tricky. – Oddthinking May 02 '12 at 14:14
  • @Oddthinking: my complain is, that if you have for example communist revolution killing people, that is not the government. – vartec May 02 '12 at 14:23
  • @vartec: You make a good point. So perhaps "government" should include "aspiring government"? – Oddthinking May 02 '12 at 14:28
  • @Oddthinking: I'd say just "communists", without specification. That will include governments, revolutionaries and terrorists. – vartec May 02 '12 at 14:33
  • When you all decide/concur on what the correct title is, please edit it :P – Russell Steen May 02 '12 at 14:40
  • @Benjol -- I'm not sure how the subtext could have anything to do with religion. The claim itself is rather drastic and seems worthy of the skepticism, but is not related to religious wars. – Russell Steen May 02 '12 at 14:46
  • 1
    @LarianLeQuella -- I see your point about "other groups are evil too", however I'm not sure that has any bearing. Japan killing millions does not mean that millions were not killed by China. And you are right that communism may just be a tool oft chosen by leaders with fascist personalities. That's also a tangent. However on that tangent, if leaders with a fascist personality tend to cluster in certain government types then we should look critically at why that occurs. – Russell Steen May 02 '12 at 14:49
  • 1
    @Russell Steen: well, that is kind of the definition of a totalitarianism... I, the Governement, rule, you are my slaves, if you don't do as I say you will pay for it. I don't see any left or right wing ideology in there, and if someone wants to put politics in it, it is just to use it as an excuse (same thing for religion obviously). – nico May 02 '12 at 16:16
  • @Benjol exactly! :) While it's often convenient to adhere to comments about communism, religion, evolution being the source of some great evil, I think the subtext of the assertions are probably more important than the assertions themselves. – Larian LeQuella May 03 '12 at 00:21
  • 2
    Do the victims of colonisation (which took place to reinforce Capitalist economies count)? – apoorv020 May 07 '12 at 09:55
  • 3
    @apoorv020 -- If you're talking European colonization, those were Mercantilist, not Capitalist economies. And no, those victims would not count, as the question is about communism, not Mercantilism, and not a comparison of Communism to any other system. – Russell Steen May 07 '12 at 11:53
  • @vartec: Communism as a form of society is actually classless. It is that the communist movement believed and accepted the necessityy of a dictatorship of the proletariat before this state emerges. – Michael Greinecker Jun 29 '12 at 06:56
  • 5
    -1: The question is hopelessly vague, and will inevitably devolve (ahem, *has predictably devolved*,) into gratuitous political arguments and disagreements about the definitions of "killed" and "communism." – Evan Harper Sep 06 '12 at 22:29
  • 1
    @RussellSteen, I was thinking of stuff like [this](http://theoatmeal.com/comics/atheism) (or what provoked it) :) – Benjol Sep 07 '12 at 13:55
  • 3
    @EvanHarper -- Both "Killed" and "Communism" have pretty clear definitions. They are only muddied by people's desire to redefine them so that the facts and results conform to their ideals. – Russell Steen Sep 07 '12 at 14:12
  • @Benjol -- Nice :) – Russell Steen Sep 07 '12 at 14:13
  • 3
    As long as we're talking about May Day (International Workers Day), it's worth noting that this holiday originated with the Haymarket affair of 1886. The people involved in that were anarchist communists, which is distinct from Marxist/statist communism. So right there is a huge schism between "may day" and the Stalinist regimes that are responsible for these killings. The rise of Stalinism created a second major schism in the communist movement. It's disingenuous and inflammatory to link today's may day celebrations to Stalinism. – adam.r Dec 20 '13 at 00:26
  • 2
    I think this is a borderline bad question.http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask. It combines many disparate events, involving many institutions that were not even allied. This conflation appears to be driven by an ideological/partisan agenda. It is only "borderline" bad because there is a clear ideological and institutional connection between the communist _governments_ (Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist theory) which applies less to communist lineages that rejected those theories. Still, I think it would be better to talk specifically about Mao, who is the worst and is still relevant. – adam.r Dec 20 '13 at 08:57
  • ...not *always* allied (Soviet-Chinese split)... – adam.r Dec 20 '13 at 09:03

2 Answers2

26

The Black Book of Communism has communist government death totals at:

  • U.S.S.R.: 20 million deaths
  • China: 65 million deaths
  • Vietnam: 1 million deaths
  • North Korea: 2 million deaths
  • Cambodia: 2 million deaths
  • Eastern Europe: 1 million deaths
  • Latin America: 150,000 deaths
  • Africa: 1.7 million deaths
  • Afghanistan: 1.5 million deaths

This totals just over 94 million. These are the deaths committed by government agents against citizens of their own country.

This source estimates the Chinese number between 50 and 78 million deaths and the Soviet number at 23 million which is similar in magnitude to the source above.

Russell Steen
  • 12,872
  • 1
  • 64
  • 86
Muro
  • 669
  • 5
  • 6
  • 8
    The question isn't "Is capitalism better than communism", it's "are these numbers correct" – Russell Steen May 04 '12 at 11:49
  • What does capitalism have to do with anything? Maybe you meant to say "Is democracy better than communism?" – Muro May 04 '12 at 12:35
  • 3
    "Although communist governments have a sordid history of piling up bodies, the US government ... " – Russell Steen May 04 '12 at 12:38
  • 10
    The bit about the US is disingenuous; in many of those wars, both sides were aided and abetted by foreign powers - in most cases, US and USSR. By this same logic, perhaps these 20-30m people should also be on communist's body count. The source also comes across as clearly biased: "The U.S. is responsible for between 1 and 1.8 million deaths during the war between the Soviet Union and Afghanistan, by luring the Soviet Union into invading that nation." - so, the Russians did the killing, but the victims end up on the US body count ? – Mihai Rotaru May 07 '12 at 09:36
  • 8
    @Muro, sources (Black book, for example) include famine victims into the total of USSR death count. I think OP pointed out that he wouldn't count deaths caused by weakened economy. Anyway, it's hard to analyze those numbers without the list of causes of death. Personally, I wouldn't count famine and civil war victims as kills. – default locale May 08 '12 at 05:23
  • 4
    +1 for including the US - even if the OP did not ask specifically about it, putting things into perspective is good. Blinders are dangerous. – Dr. Hans-Peter Störr May 08 '12 at 06:59
  • 4
    @Muro Democraty is usually part of communism. See for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_centralism – valodzka Jan 28 '13 at 17:16
  • 20
    I don't think that the Black Book of Communism can be considered a reliable source, since it clearly has an agenda. Furthermore, these stats seem to include all the indirect deaths that can be attributed to communist governments (famines, "collateral damage" from wars). Famines are clearly included in the USSR and Chinese totals, and I found estimates of 100,000 killed by the gov't in Afghanistan (http://www.afghanistan-analysts.org/death-list-published-families-of-disappeared-end-a-30-year-wait-for-news). – adam.r Dec 20 '13 at 07:38
  • 10
    The inclusion of indirect deaths requires that we ask "what was the alternative"; consequently, it relies on ideological interpretations and opens the door for partisan grandstanding. For instance, socialists would blame the US gov't for homeless people dying of hypothermia or others dying for lack of access to medical care. Ultimately, this entire line of questioning reeks of partisan grandstanding... gloating over a defeated enemy as a way to distract attention from the failings of our own society (as Muro apparently understands). – adam.r Dec 20 '13 at 07:42
  • 2
    This book doesn't seem to be too accurate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Book_of_Communism#Criticism – user1721135 May 31 '15 at 21:40
  • @defaultlocale If the famine is due to the communist mishandling then why not count the deaths as due to communism? Most of those Chinese deaths are due to the food supply tanking. Mao didn't go around killing people in job lots, he just messed things up very badly. – Loren Pechtel Aug 10 '16 at 23:08
  • 1
    @LorenPechtel I absolutely agree with you that communist government is responsible for deaths caused by famine. What I was trying to say is that this question is specifically about people killed directly (`via execution, internment, work camps, etc.`) – default locale Aug 11 '16 at 03:03
  • 2
    @defaultlocale the famines in among other places Ukraine were deliberately orcherstrated by the government to kill off the local (malcontent) population and later replace them with "proper communists". This was done by destroying the local economy and massive overtaxation and confiscation of food, so in at least part of the cases economic hardship can be directly blamed on deliberate actions by the communist governments. – jwenting Aug 12 '16 at 21:20
  • @jwenting yes, I agree with most of your comment. What's your point again? – default locale Aug 13 '16 at 12:01
  • @defaultlocale quite simply that just not counting famine victims because they're the result of economic conditions isn't valid as famines are often deliberately caused (and even if not, the economic conditions can very well be a result of political decisions taken by the communists). – jwenting Aug 16 '16 at 14:53
  • @jwenting Fair enough. Still I think it'd be useful to estimate the number of people executed or killed in labour camps. Original question asked exactly for that (`... would not count deaths theoretically due to a weakened economy`), but it was four years ago and now discussion is pretty much over. – default locale Aug 16 '16 at 17:17
  • 2
    If someone were trying to make an assessment of evil or good of ideologies, China and Russia, being hugely populated, greatly skew those numbers. Too bad there isn't some sort of "per capita slaughtered" metric that would allow one to assess the relative evil vs., say, right-wing anti-Communist dictators in smaller nations with similar track records of brutality. – PoloHoleSet Sep 15 '16 at 15:12
13

It highly depends how to count. Black Book of Communism is good example. Should you count famines, civil war deaths, second world war deportations deaths? Should be this considered as killed by communist governments? Should you consider tens millions died in British India as victims of constitutional monarchy? Should you consider lifes saved by communist governments? Life expectancy on Cuba, for example, is still one of the highest in Latin America.

For example if we take numbers for USSR from Black Book as true and remove deaths related to wars, revolutions, famine remain number will be in order of magnitude lower.

So if by killed by communist governments you mean actually killed civil people - no, it's not true.

If you mean died in wars, famines, revolutions - it's close to true (see @Muro answer for details). For comparison - i doesn't have accurate sources, but I'm pretty sure that if you counts victims of other types of governments (like parliamentary democracy or monarchy) in that way you will got also very big numbers.

valodzka
  • 1,305
  • 1
  • 12
  • 15
  • I'd certainly argue for including famine deaths, but it would indeed be useful to include context. The British caused a significant number of Indian deaths from famine during WW2 (perhaps by incompetence) for example. Even with context, though, we might see that communists make bigger mistakes. – matt_black Jan 28 '13 at 19:19
  • 5
    The numbers in the "Black book" are absurd fabrications, inflated beyond any limits of sanity. The famine deaths in the USSR in the famine year 1932 are about 3 million, the demographic drop is 6-7 million, and this includes postponed births. Likewise in China during the great leap, the 60 million is demographic, mostly babies not born, but the famines lasted 3 years. The distribution situation was better as there was no armed conflict, and the government acknowledged the famine, so the number of actual deaths indeterminate, but probably on the order of 10 million (China is big). – Ron Maimon Aug 08 '16 at 17:30