We also had "real" market economies (no trust busting or the like) in the early 20th and it was shitty for a huge part of the population
History is the biggest argument against all economic systems
We also had "real" market economies (no trust busting or the like) in the early 20th and it was shitty for a huge part of the population
History is the biggest argument against all economic systems
I also question your suggestion that "real market economies" were responsible for the dispair that certain communities felt in the early 20th century. "Real" market economies really didn't have much of a chance to exist in the 20th century because by 1913 the Federal Reserve was installed. That ended self-regulated capitalism in the United States, at least. Europe followed suit shortly thereafter.
Just prior to the early 20th century, enormous numbers of people were liberated from the misery of famine and early mortality thanks to the innovations derived from a loosely-regulated market economy. Back then, nobody knew how to deal with a world where the vast percentage of infants born would live beyond early adulthood. Most poor people would just die and there would be no government, nor economic system, around to help anyone. So when these people, born into the late 19th century system, grew into adults living in the early 20th century system, policymakers and citizens alike had no idea how to respond to the challenges that arose. We did some really stupid things as a result, and we are still paying for, and suffering from, some of those policy decisions.
No matter how bloody the communists were, my original point was that it was never done in an environment without active foreign involvement of undermining, destabilization, and outright warfare.