That’s not a feature of communism, it’s a compromise based on the recognition that private ownership produces more efficient outcomes at scale. According to the collective farming wiki: A Soviet article in March 1975 found that 27% of the total value of Soviet agricultural produce was produced by private farms despite the fact that they only consisted of less than 1% of arable land (approximately 20 million acres), making them roughly 40 times more efficient than collective farms.

No one wants to recreate the Great Famine (The most deadly famine in human history - caused entirely by communism and specifically collectivized farms).

There’s also Holomodor in the USSR which lead to similarly deadly outcomes.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

Fun fact for you: The famines were largely caused by Stalin appointing a guy to do agriculture policy who knew less than nothing about agriculture. He forced farmers to plant crops too densely because "communist crops will not compete for nutrients" causing the crops to just die. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko

Most dictators are absolute troglodytes and Stalin was no exception.

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

One point in time does not constitute a robust conclusion. Consider any time before and how collectivism did yield considerable agriculture gains for the USSR. Like do we really think they fought WW2 with the same or less agricultural efficiency they had before their revolution?

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This.

"A fledgling Nation failed after the most powerful nations on earth collectively conspired to hold it back and ideally topple it so every similar nation most also fail." And these people were paranoid for some reason, could you imagine?

[–] Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Y'all just in here doing good work, absolutely wrecking these guys.