Communists want the working classes to control and direct society
This never happened in the USSR though did it? The USSR was a dictatorship that brutalised the working classes. They are not some beacon of righteousness that we need to be referring back to, Soviet style “communism” is not what anyone seeking a more just world should be aspiring to.
There are other ways of delivering more horizontal power structures that would make society a better place for all. We do not need to be looking to a guy who lived 200 years ago for solutions today, anyone who critically looks at Marx’s ideas who isn’t a teenage boy in a Che Guevara t shirt knows his math and ideas do not stand up to scrutiny. Just as ridiculous as those who look to Adam Smith for guidance today. At least Marx fucked though, I never trust a man who doesn’t.
I also don’t get what you mean by “Russia’s loss,” it’s a war of attrition
I don’t know how you can’t see how this statement you made is an embarrassing loss for Russia. How the mighty have fallen.
they are facing immense population collapse and crisis and an unstable government. Russia doesn’t have the same problems.
This tells me you have never seen Russia’s population pyramid or understand the trajectory of Russia’s population. Demographics is destiny, worrying you can’t see that but then lying to themselves is a Russian national sport at this stage. At least you are the best in the world at something!
In terms of government stability, power in Ukraine has changed power peacefully several times now since Maidan. I have no concerns that they can do it again. Russia on the other hand has an aging dictator who has been at the helm for almost 30 years with no successor or succession plan in place. Putin currently exerts near total control over Russia, the power struggle following his exit, which will be in the next decade, will be enormous. Bend over and prepare for Balkanisation my submissive friend.
The soviet union was a dictatorship of the proletariat. The Soviets brutalized the capitalists, tsarists, fascists, landlords, and kulaks, while liberating the workers and peasants. The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.
The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.
The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.
Death rates spiked:
And wealth disparity skyrocketed alongside the newly impoverished majority:
Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism and reintroduction of capitalism, and this is why the large majority of post-soviet citizens regret its fall. A return to socialism is the only path forward for the post-soviet countries. A lot of Eastern European countries were swarmed with western capital during the destruction of socialism, which is what temporarily caused the rise of the far-right in these countries, but in time their problems will no longer be able to be ignored.
I do agree that we should not merely emulate soviet socialism, but not in the way you are making the point. Each country has its own unique circumstances, and thus each country will have its own socialist construction process. Dogmatically emulating the Soviet Union is not what we should do, we should learn from their successes and problems while applying Marxist-Leninist thought to our own conditions.
I also have no idea what you mean when you say Marx’s numbers and theories do not stand up to critical scrutiny. This is a throwaway line you never justified, but treat as a complete point. I also have no idea why you believe me to be Russian (I’m not), nor why you call me “friend” while wishing for Balkanization of Russia. It’s clear that you’re more of an enemy of the working classes than a supporter, and again ignored that the population crisis facing Ukraine is far more devastating than Russia. It’s best for the war to end swiftly, for both parties, and it’s clear that Ukraine does not hold the cards.
No, my comment is not confusing correlation with causation. You never explained this point, you just stated it as though it counters all of the hard evidence I brought supporting how well socialism works and how poorly capitalism has done in its place. Further, I never said prostitution did not exist in the Soviet Union, I said it skyrocketed after socialism was dissolved, which is uncontestably true.
As for Marx and numbers not adding up, he made minor mistakes here and there. Engels and other Marxists have corrected the figures and they do not change the points Marx made, nor do they disprove Marxist economics. That’s like suggesting that if a scientist makes a mistake in calculating gravity, that the law of gravity is wrong.
It’s also telling that, again, you never give examples, and entirely ignore the part where Marx debunked Henry George. You’re incapable of actually countering anything I say, so instead you make a thesis statement and confuse that for an argument itself. You aren’t going to convince any onlookers that way, and you sure as hell aren’t going to convince me, so why even try?
As for Putin being an enemy of the working classes, this is partially true. He is, after all, a nationalist leader and a billionaire. However, nationalist Russia still plays an internationally progressive role in undermining imperialism, which is positive.
Your latter comment is just racism, assuming hordes of Asians are going to conquest Russian land if Russia cannot defend itself from China and India. This was already true a decade ago, and yet no Chinese invasion of Russia seems plausible.
What a great summing up of an entire school of thought. Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature. Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman. He just claimed what communists want. You didnt adress that bcause he clearly was right there
To be fair, the USSR was the best thing to happen to Eastern Europe. Their points on the Soviets were terrible, but I do think the Soviets were better than modern capitalism in Eastern Europe.
I agree for the early ussr. Later starting from khruschev and especially brezhnev i think the leadership got weak and larded. If not for them it never had to fall. Also i dont cede any such ground. Better then capitalists? They were the firsr sucessful leftist revolutionaries. I totally respect them, and was many times amazed by their history. I think its uniquely priviledged position to criticize the liberator for his missteps.
my personal favorite is Einsteins quote about his view of lenin: “I honor Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realization of social justice. I do not consider his methods practical, but one thing is certain: men of his type are the guardians and restorers of the conscience of humanity.”
I definitely agree that latter administration was weaker, but it was still socialist up until it was dissolved, and still a better system than capitalism. That was my real point. As for the dissolution of the USSR, it’s more complicated than that, but not in a way that dooms socialism.
Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with
I assume you are referring to Das Kapital? It is essential college reading for any third level student. Marx should be everybody’s starting point in politics, when it is also your end point, as it is with most of your crowd, you run into serious problems.
Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature
I’m a much bigger fan of Henry George, Progress and Poverty is a much better book in both writing and content.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman
It was not a straw man, our entire conversation is about Russia and the article we are commenting on is also about Russia, in the context of our conversation how is it not relevant? Should I have referred to some other random successful communist state that actually followed the teaching of Marx perfectly? The point was what communists want and what happens in reality are two very different things. This clearly went over your head, don’t worry about it though buddy, I am used to it from your crowd.
Yes it clearly did. When you respond to something, and just ignore the point, that kidna defeats the purpose of the response. What is this “your crowd”? I dont know what that is, lets define what you mean by that.
Ok honestly didnt expect you read marx, it typically serves as filter, and from your response i assumed it impossible. Are you much into econ? Bcs some parts of capital arent too simple. Do you like structuralism?
Regarding the point about russia. Well the point about what happens could be relevant. Thats why your claim about ussr was so derailed. Who said ussr? There are many communists whod argue for it, and many whod argue for some other form. Its exactly a strawman to pick a battle, which was nowhere in the original claim. Proximity from previous context doesnt change this, he said communists, you assumed soviets.
Ah, you’re a Georgist! Makes sense, that’s why you keep claiming Marx has been “debunked,” Marx already debunked Henry George long ago. It seems to be more of a vendetta of yours. Either way, what communists want and what happens in reality are far closer than you allude, you maintain a bourgeois line on existing socialism and make unbacked claims of Marx being “debunked.”
This never happened in the USSR though did it? The USSR was a dictatorship that brutalised the working classes. They are not some beacon of righteousness that we need to be referring back to, Soviet style “communism” is not what anyone seeking a more just world should be aspiring to.
There are other ways of delivering more horizontal power structures that would make society a better place for all. We do not need to be looking to a guy who lived 200 years ago for solutions today, anyone who critically looks at Marx’s ideas who isn’t a teenage boy in a Che Guevara t shirt knows his math and ideas do not stand up to scrutiny. Just as ridiculous as those who look to Adam Smith for guidance today. At least Marx fucked though, I never trust a man who doesn’t.
I don’t know how you can’t see how this statement you made is an embarrassing loss for Russia. How the mighty have fallen.
This tells me you have never seen Russia’s population pyramid or understand the trajectory of Russia’s population. Demographics is destiny, worrying you can’t see that but then lying to themselves is a Russian national sport at this stage. At least you are the best in the world at something!
In terms of government stability, power in Ukraine has changed power peacefully several times now since Maidan. I have no concerns that they can do it again. Russia on the other hand has an aging dictator who has been at the helm for almost 30 years with no successor or succession plan in place. Putin currently exerts near total control over Russia, the power struggle following his exit, which will be in the next decade, will be enormous. Bend over and prepare for Balkanisation my submissive friend.
The soviet union was a dictatorship of the proletariat. The Soviets brutalized the capitalists, tsarists, fascists, landlords, and kulaks, while liberating the workers and peasants. The USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning that still lasts to this day despite capitalism neglecting it. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more. Living in the 1930s famine would not have been good, but it was the last major famine outside of wartime because the soviets ended famine in their countries.
Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more are good sources for these claims.
The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.
When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.
The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.
Death rates spiked:
And wealth disparity skyrocketed alongside the newly impoverished majority:
Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism and reintroduction of capitalism, and this is why the large majority of post-soviet citizens regret its fall. A return to socialism is the only path forward for the post-soviet countries. A lot of Eastern European countries were swarmed with western capital during the destruction of socialism, which is what temporarily caused the rise of the far-right in these countries, but in time their problems will no longer be able to be ignored.
I do agree that we should not merely emulate soviet socialism, but not in the way you are making the point. Each country has its own unique circumstances, and thus each country will have its own socialist construction process. Dogmatically emulating the Soviet Union is not what we should do, we should learn from their successes and problems while applying Marxist-Leninist thought to our own conditions.
I also have no idea what you mean when you say Marx’s numbers and theories do not stand up to critical scrutiny. This is a throwaway line you never justified, but treat as a complete point. I also have no idea why you believe me to be Russian (I’m not), nor why you call me “friend” while wishing for Balkanization of Russia. It’s clear that you’re more of an enemy of the working classes than a supporter, and again ignored that the population crisis facing Ukraine is far more devastating than Russia. It’s best for the war to end swiftly, for both parties, and it’s clear that Ukraine does not hold the cards.
Removed by mod
No, my comment is not confusing correlation with causation. You never explained this point, you just stated it as though it counters all of the hard evidence I brought supporting how well socialism works and how poorly capitalism has done in its place. Further, I never said prostitution did not exist in the Soviet Union, I said it skyrocketed after socialism was dissolved, which is uncontestably true.
As for Marx and numbers not adding up, he made minor mistakes here and there. Engels and other Marxists have corrected the figures and they do not change the points Marx made, nor do they disprove Marxist economics. That’s like suggesting that if a scientist makes a mistake in calculating gravity, that the law of gravity is wrong.
It’s also telling that, again, you never give examples, and entirely ignore the part where Marx debunked Henry George. You’re incapable of actually countering anything I say, so instead you make a thesis statement and confuse that for an argument itself. You aren’t going to convince any onlookers that way, and you sure as hell aren’t going to convince me, so why even try?
As for Putin being an enemy of the working classes, this is partially true. He is, after all, a nationalist leader and a billionaire. However, nationalist Russia still plays an internationally progressive role in undermining imperialism, which is positive.
Your latter comment is just racism, assuming hordes of Asians are going to conquest Russian land if Russia cannot defend itself from China and India. This was already true a decade ago, and yet no Chinese invasion of Russia seems plausible.
What a great summing up of an entire school of thought. Im sure you read most of marxist/communist literature. Damn Ill be surprised if you even opened capital to begin with.
also notice how you had to completely derail his point to USSR for a strawman. He just claimed what communists want. You didnt adress that bcause he clearly was right there
To be fair, the USSR was the best thing to happen to Eastern Europe. Their points on the Soviets were terrible, but I do think the Soviets were better than modern capitalism in Eastern Europe.
I agree for the early ussr. Later starting from khruschev and especially brezhnev i think the leadership got weak and larded. If not for them it never had to fall. Also i dont cede any such ground. Better then capitalists? They were the firsr sucessful leftist revolutionaries. I totally respect them, and was many times amazed by their history. I think its uniquely priviledged position to criticize the liberator for his missteps.
my personal favorite is Einsteins quote about his view of lenin: “I honor Lenin as a man who completely sacrificed himself and devoted all his energy to the realization of social justice. I do not consider his methods practical, but one thing is certain: men of his type are the guardians and restorers of the conscience of humanity.”
I definitely agree that latter administration was weaker, but it was still socialist up until it was dissolved, and still a better system than capitalism. That was my real point. As for the dissolution of the USSR, it’s more complicated than that, but not in a way that dooms socialism.
I agree with you totally
I assume you are referring to Das Kapital? It is essential college reading for any third level student. Marx should be everybody’s starting point in politics, when it is also your end point, as it is with most of your crowd, you run into serious problems.
I’m a much bigger fan of Henry George, Progress and Poverty is a much better book in both writing and content.
It was not a straw man, our entire conversation is about Russia and the article we are commenting on is also about Russia, in the context of our conversation how is it not relevant? Should I have referred to some other random successful communist state that actually followed the teaching of Marx perfectly? The point was what communists want and what happens in reality are two very different things. This clearly went over your head, don’t worry about it though buddy, I am used to it from your crowd.
Yes it clearly did. When you respond to something, and just ignore the point, that kidna defeats the purpose of the response. What is this “your crowd”? I dont know what that is, lets define what you mean by that.
Ok honestly didnt expect you read marx, it typically serves as filter, and from your response i assumed it impossible. Are you much into econ? Bcs some parts of capital arent too simple. Do you like structuralism?
Regarding the point about russia. Well the point about what happens could be relevant. Thats why your claim about ussr was so derailed. Who said ussr? There are many communists whod argue for it, and many whod argue for some other form. Its exactly a strawman to pick a battle, which was nowhere in the original claim. Proximity from previous context doesnt change this, he said communists, you assumed soviets.
Ah, you’re a Georgist! Makes sense, that’s why you keep claiming Marx has been “debunked,” Marx already debunked Henry George long ago. It seems to be more of a vendetta of yours. Either way, what communists want and what happens in reality are far closer than you allude, you maintain a bourgeois line on existing socialism and make unbacked claims of Marx being “debunked.”
G