I agree with you totally

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.”

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.

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