Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page
]]]]]]]]]] COMMUNISM: MYTHS ON MORAL SUPERIORITY [[[[[[[[[
By Heather S. Richardson (12/10/88)
From The Wall Street Journal, 9 December 1988, p. A20:4
(Ms. Richardson is a portfolio manager at U.S. Trust Co.)
Review of ``The Poverty of Communism'' By Nick Eberstadt
[Kindly uploaded by Freeman 10602PANC]
Even staunch adherents of free markets often accept the
premise that, on a fundamental level, communist economies are
morally superior, providing a more thorough and equitable safety
nets for their populations. Marxist-Leninist governments fan
this contention by boasting of their literacy programs, basic
health care, and full employment. After all, their legitimacy
hinges on a self-proclaimed ability to end exploitation and
material want.
But what if that premise is wrong?
In his book, ``The Poverty of Communism'' (Transaction Books,
311 pages, 24.95), Nick Eberstadt examines the available data on
poverty in communist countries. He focuses on demographic
statistics, which are easily comparable, provide a solid
indication of the quality of life, and are independent of
ideology or social system. What he finds is fascinating.
Cuba, as we all have heard, is often cited as a model of
literacy and health. Castro, in fact, told a visiting U.S.
congressional delegation in 1977 that since the revolution,
Cuba's literacy rate had jumped from 25% to 99%. Yet the
literacy rate at the time of the revolution was already 79%.
Furthermore, Cuba subsequently changed its definition of literacy
to include only those age groups most likely to be literate. At
best, Cuba's likely literacy rate currently runs between 90% and
93%, which is equal to or below its socioeconomic peers in the
Western hemisphere, many of which 30 years ago had literacy rates
equal to or lower than Cuba's.
In the area of health, Cuba's statistics may be even more
suspect. The Cuban Ministry of Health (which is responsible for
producing and checking the numbers used to evaluate its own
effectiveness) has averred that between 1975 and 1985 infant
mortality declined 40%. Yet in the same period, the reported
incidence of acute diarrhea was up 52%, food poisoning increased
63%, acute respiratory infection was up 146%, German measles grew
at 220%, and chicken pox rose 406%. All have a high correlation
with infant mortality.
This paradox is heightened by the use of life tables (an
indirect and more accurate way to calculate, and check, life
expectancy statistics), which indicate that for certain periods
in the 1970s, Cuba's infant mortality rates were rising
substantially.
Cuba is not the only communist country experiencing health
problems, however. Based on its medical system, the Soviet Union
can no longer be considered a developed nation; Soviet life
expectancy, at 69, is not only back down to a level last seen in
the late 1950s, but is below that of such countries as Chile,
Guyana, Panama and Uruguay. The country suffers from increasing
infant mortality (children still suffer from influenza and
rickets, while the high abortion rate, which runs at six to eight
per woman, vs. 0.5 per woman in the U.S., damages the uterus and
affects the health of newborns). Mortality rates for all age and
sex groups are rising.
It is not surprising to find, therefore, that health care
spending, as a percent of Soviet gross national product, declined
from 9.8% in 1955 to 7.5% in 1977 (vs. an increase over the same
time period from 6.8% to 11% in the U.S.). What health care
there is focuses on quantity over quality, providing lots of
low-paid staff but lacking in drugs, anesthetics and disposable
bedding and needles. Nor is the Soviet Union alone; life
expectancy in the Warsaw Pact countries, which was comparable
with that of Western Europe in the early 1960s, now lags by three
to four years, having held constant or fallen while Western
Europe's has risen.
Even China is not exempt. Its overall health care statistics
have kept up with its peers. But these achievements seem to be
occurring at the cost of systematic discrimination against rural
areas, where life expectancies are three to four years shorter,
and where medical expenditures are one-ninth what they are in
cities, and food subsidies are one-tenth.
As Mr. Eberstadt notes, Marxist-Leninists claim special
insight, promise special results, and demand special powers and
authority to make concrete their vision of a better society.
Communist countries, after all, purport to be without crime,
without homelessness, without unemployment, and also claim to
provide adequate health care for all. Yet their record in
improving health is no better than that of comparable countries,
and may even be worse. Nor are they much more effective in
alleviating hunger or increasing literacy than their peers.
They have founded systems that produce one-time gains from the
initial redistribution of wealth, but in which wasted resources
and production inefficiencies lead to stagnant economies unable
to keep pace with the needs of their populations. Communist
governments rule the lives of one-third of the world's
population. Since they have set the terms of discourse on
poverty, communist countries now should be measured against their
promises.
* * *
Return to the ground floor of this tower
Return to the Main Courtyard
Return to Fort Freedom's home page