He has been indoctrinated into communist thought which has blinded him to the effects that communism has on human creativity and invention.
It is one thing to build an economy and companies on the technology developed by others, even to advance that technology a bit by theft of intellectual property and reverse engineering. But it is another thing altogether for a communist system (i.e., a central planning/authoritarian system as opposed to pure free market competition) to create, invent, and implement from scratch.
I have worked in companies in the U.S. that employed central planning and central authority and I have worked in companies at the opposite end of the spectrum that encouraged creativity and pushed decision-making down to the lowest effective level.
You can imagine the difference between the two in terms of adaptability to change and creativity.
The German military employed such a "decentralized/pushed-down decision making" strategy in WWII to great effect. Their term for this is "auftragstaktik." It generally means that
"the military commander gives subordinate leaders a clearly defined goal (the objective)..."Here is a good article on the subject from RealClearDefense: Auftragstaktik: Decentralization in Military Command"The subordinate leaders then implement the order independently. The subordinate leader is given, to a large extent, the planning initiative and a freedom in execution which allows a high degree of flexibility at the operational and tactical levels of command." Source
This kind of system doesn't work in communism because without central control, the leader loses power and the system breaks down.
Communism is control/power based. The goal of the system is the maintenance of power and control. In such a system, productivity is the result of the exertion of power and control.
The goal of free market systems is the increase in productivity by creative means. Power is diffused and control (i.e., decision making authority) is pushed down to the individual or group closest to the "front line" or problem.
“The goal of free market systems is the increase in productivity by creative means. Power is diffused and control (i.e., decision making authority) is pushed down to the individual or group closest to the “front line” or problem.”
Stated another way; in a free enterprise system, individuals only enter into a transaction when the terms are mutually acceptable. An economy built exclusively on individual and consensual trades is thus imbued with perfect demand information at the micro level and is therefore highly stable, responsive and self-correcting. Capital flows naturally to its most useful application.
Conversely, a government regulated economy picks winners and losers based on non-market considerations, and must therefore by definition be coercive, go astray of that which is consensual, drift out of balance with true demand - creating bubbles, crashes, monopolies, inefficiencies, undercapitalization, shortages, surpluses, unemployment, poverty, pronounced wealth disparities and overall market dissatisfaction.
Government regulated economies are also powerful magnets for all sorts of corruption, since legislators and enforcement agencies are ultimately bought and paid for by wealthy lobbyists. A wealthy corporation or cartel need not puzzle for very long regarding where to find the right person to bribe - just go to K street in Washington DC - it’s not even illegal!
My question of socialists is this: Why would anyone agree to be forced into a transaction?