Asklemmy

Well, analogy is not a sufficient method of argumentation by itself, but I suppose things I'll write would be even more visible in Chinese villages 100 years ago.

In Russia the peasant commune as an institution was created artificially (so all those Russian narodniks glorifying it as something perfect and wonderful untouched by bureaucratic machine coming from the depth of ages were just stupid ; it's one thing one can't argue with Lenin about - they didn't have a bloody idea of what that "people" they considered inherently virtuous was) somewhere around Peter the Great's time. So it's had enough time to mature.

That commune had enormous families living together, with the patriarch (the oldest man still able to work and do things) being basically a despot. It was literally not so rare for him to casually sleep with wives of his sons and nephews, for example (if not daughters and nieces). Nobody could refuse him.

Again, that whole family would live in one bloody place, together. No personal space or individuality at all.

In such an environment, first, you don't act differently (either you'll seem weak or you'll cause envy, both are worse than any gained efficiency justifies), second, your value is so low, that nobody cares if you make it, third, in a despotic system your own attempts at planning usually don't work, so you don't learn to do it, and planning is what's needed for more honest behavior to be advantageous.

So yes, you are right.