1

I've heard of things not going very well for many socialist countries in the 20th and 21st centuries with problems such as famine, civil war and genocide. However in contrast to states like the USSR or China, San Marino had a democratically elected communist government and is one of the smallest countries in the world. So what were the policies of the Sammarinese communist party and how well did San Marino do in general relative to before and after its communist government?

I have consulted Wikipedia, the article for the communist party only goes into detail about its history. The article for the history of San Marino only mentions universal suffrage being achieved. I was going to write implemented but I'm more interested in how the country did in general relative to how well it did before or after the communist government.

  • 2
    You supposition that policies are linked to "doing well," is generally dubious and doubly so for a micro state. – Samuel Russell Oct 14 '18 at 7:42
1

The phrasing of the question omits several pertinent facts, chief among which is:

The PCS returned to membership in a governing parliamentary coalition in 1978, with its adherents remaining as part of the leadership group until 1992. In 1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union, the PCS formally renounced communism and relaunched itself Sammarinese Democratic Progressive Party (PPDS). Wikipedia

The party was founded in 1921, was underground until the 1940's, governed in coalition with the socialist party for 10 years, then attempted a coup against the government and then renounced communism. Given that their only time in power was in a parliamentary coalition, it will be very murky what their policies were.

The policy conclusions I would draw from that are that (a) communists are more interested in power than legitimacy, attempting a coup when democratically removed from power, and (b) even the communists recognize that communism is a failure.

  1. Serious note - determining the "policies" of a member of a coalition government in a parliamentary system is non-trivial. Many actions are driven by the policies of other parties, including those outside the coalition - it may be worth it for a party to yield on important principles just to prevent the opponent from gaining. This is, in my opinion, plausible when the socialists and communists are in coalition against fascists. (strangely, they're all statists.....)

  2. In response to OP request for clarification: I'm not drawing a distinction between communists and the PCS. I realize that diminishes the value of this answer for your purposes, but nothing I found in my brief research justified drawing the distinction.

  • 1
    When you describe "communists" and "the communists" are you referring to the PCS members in government, PCS voters, or including others? – Aaron Brick Oct 14 '18 at 20:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.