Introduction

Communism, as an ideology and governance system, has often been associated with authoritarianism and the suppression of individual freedoms. This article seeks to explore the historical and philosophical roots of communism, particularly in the context of monasticism, and analyze why it frequently leads to authoritarian practices. Through a deep dive into the core principles and dynamics of communist governance, we aim to provide clarity on the relationship between communism and authoritarianism.

Monasticism as an Early Form of Communism

The origins of communism can be traced back to early monastic societies, such as those formed by the Benedictine monks in the fifth century. The Benedictine Rule, established by Saint Benedict, provided the framework for communal living and shared resources. Monasticism, in its earliest incarnations, was a form of communism where resources and labor were collectively managed and shared.

During the thirteenth century, the Franciscan and Dominican orders further developed the concept of communal living, although with a more adaptable structure. First-order Franciscans, for instance, were not required to remain in one convent for life, mirroring the varied roles and responsibilities within a community. Even within the Society of Female Oswin (SFO), an adaptation of monastic principles, the principles of communal living remain voluntary and flexible.

The Demise of Optimistic Socialism

The history of communism is marked by a profound transition from optimistic visions of a classless society to the brutal realities of authoritarian regimes. The rapid decline of early socialist ideals in the 19th century into the state violence and corruption of the 20th century is a stark reminder of the difficulties in maintaining a voluntary and cooperative society at a larger scale.

The inherent dangers in antinomianism, or the willingness to completely disregard established norms in pursuit of an absolute cause, are often exploited by power-hungry individuals. When a movement shifts from a class-oriented perspective to a police-oriented one, the nature of governance transforms from one of shared responsibility to one of force and coercion. Contemporary communist movements often fail to account for human nature and the inherent desire for autonomy and control, which can lead to the emergence of autocratic leaders.

The Core Problem of Redistribution

The fundamental issue with communism is the necessity of redistribution, which inherently requires the removal of resources from current owners. This process facilitates the centralization of power and the formation of a totalitarian state. The desire for personal gain and the natural human tendency towards greed often undermines the ideal of communal sharing and cooperation. As resources are redistributed, the potential for conflict and conflict of interest increases, leading to the concentration of power in the hands of those who are most ruthless when it comes to maintaining control.

The success of communism, if ever achieved, would require a high level of altruism and a complete absence of selfishness. However, this ideal state is seldom realized, leading to a perpetual tension between ideological principles and practical reality. The inevitable outcome is the emergence of authoritarian leaders who prioritize their own power and resources over the ideal of communal sharing.

Conclusion

Communism, whether practiced in a voluntary or state-controlled manner, inherently faces challenges in maintaining the ideal of shared resources and equal distribution. The historical and philosophical analysis reveals that the transition from optimistic socialism to authoritarianism is a common pattern. Understanding this dynamic is crucial for any discussion on governance and social organization, highlighting the complex interplay between ideology and reality.