"The collapse can be attributed to the financial incompetence which followed a political dogma that suppressed individual initiative and enterprise."
On the contrary; The Soviet Union collapse was aimed at by outside nations who feared 'The Domino effect) from the day it wa established
The "financial incompetence" transformed the former Russian Empire semi-feudal group of countries into a contender on the world stage in four decades, industrialising the State and even throwing missiles into Space, being the first nation to do so (which probably had more to do with their downfall than "industrial incompetence had) - all this, despite massive losses in two world wars and a Civil War which drew in 14 invading foreign armies fighting on the side of the opponents.
The Soviet Union was set up to develop the "initiative" of all its people to the full - one of the rights written into its constitution was "homes for all", rather than our situation which is "homes for those who can afford them"
The downfall of the S.U was due in part to bad, ruthless leadership, but given their starting point, they didn't do to badlly on the world stage, and they did so with the overwhelming support of the people - even in the most oppressive times of Stalin's rule
The same goes for China, who was worse than Tsarist Russia when they started out - overwhelmingly semi-feudal -t a world leader in less than thirty years.
No entrepreneur or fortune seeking enterprise wold ever have started on that path - no profit in it
Jim Carroll