Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
i’m not sure there’s any metric by which the soviet union could be called a success but go off king
deleted by creator
Dang I didn’t know there were successful communist nations in developing countries.
Dang I didn’t know there were successful communist nations in developing countries.
Funnily enough, two started off as developing and ended up as world superpowers.
I’m assuming your talking about Russia and China I think it very fare to criticise them, considering they are both totalitarian nations which don’t respect the needs of there citizens.
The USSR (Soviet Union) and the PRC (China). The USSR is not Russia, and it doesn’t exist anymore.
And of course it’s fair, and in fact important to criticize them. We have the benefit of hindsight and can see how some of their decisions were serious mistakes. On the other hand, it’s also important to analyze what they did good and learn from that too. Neither was perfect, both were improvements, and the terrible fates of Russia and Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union is proof of how much good the SU was for its citizens.
which don’t respect the needs of there citizens.
They both inherited countries plagued with regular famine and have both eliminated it. In fact, in 1983 the CIA documented the SU as having a better typical diet than the USA. Clearly they respected the food security of their citizens.
The SU managed to rapidly build low-cost housing after repelling a HUGE invasion of extermination from Nazi Germany. The “commieblocks” were critical in housing people after war. China has also made huge strides in home ownership and elimination of poverty. Meanwhile, poverty and homelessness is increasing under capitalist countries, with them doing little to resolve their housing crises. Clearly they respected the need for shelter of their citizens.
Keep in mind, that both these countries were devastated by world wars and civil wars. Their countries started off in serious crisis and had already had revolutions. If they didn’t respect the needs of their citizens, they would have ended up failed states overthrown by their desperate population or quickly collapsing to invasions.
As for China, the government, despite censorship and political repression, still remains popular among its citizens, according to censorship-resistant US studies[1]. It’s largely avoided war, hugely reduced poverty, and has become a world leader in technology.
There are many valid reasons to criticize these countries and it’s important we do that. But they clearly respected the basic needs of their citizens. There are few other countries which have done more to reduce poverty and homelessness than them.
Thank you for telling me that. I never really thought that communist nations have done good things in the past, I suppose I already knew that about china. But I did not know that about the USSR. There is no education about any good thing communist nations have done well, at least in the curriculum I grew up with. And communism is therefore ingrained in people essentially as a synonym for bad.
Yeah that’s so true there are only 2 politics forever and when one lose the other gain that is so true not
There are two classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. There’s myriad bourgeois ideologies and myriad proletarian ideologies. When the proletarians come to power, the bourgeoisie oppose their ideology and their state. That’s true of third world communist projects.
Nope, there are as many people and they are different. The buregoise are a plague a systematic plague and you help them by having a class war that they become desperate to win. We can have beneficial policy and support each other while dismantling the oligarchy without being feral assholes ourselves
What are you talking about? The “peaceful” status quo is already a class war. Capitalism is devouring the planet by creating conditions that will inevitably displace hundreds of millions of people as ecosystems collapse over the next ~20 years. I don’t even want to imagine how many people are going to die of starvation, heat stroke, or gunned down at the borders by the fascist stormtroopers. That is a level of violence that no socialist state has ever unleashed on the world, not even in WW2. There is no “beneficial policy.” Capital only responds to profit, that’s why workers strike instead of appealing to the good nature of their employers. Don’t you think the same applies to the whole system? The capitalists, executives of energy companies for example, have known they were destroying the world for decades. In the early 2000s they were writing letters to the Bush admin asking the government to put stronger regulations on them, because capital is entirely incapable of stopping itself from the race to the bottom, to make the most profit possible out of the exploitation of labor and natural resources. You should seriously consider how possible it is to stop these processes without revolution.
Why should I consider that when I haven’t expressed that standpoint? What do you mean there exists no “beneficial policy”? There is a class war yes and I aim to win it. You seem to want to attack random people with facts you absorbed about how bad capitalism is. Rage bait consumer is just another hook in capitalism you eat greedily. You give nothing to improve or develop an actual communist uprising except hatred. Why should I be lashed you imagine as if I am a pig of the greediest cunts? You have zero interest in actually growing political movements and culture, and an intense fire at breaking society down. It is symptomatic of capitalism and you will most likely not be freed from it by dismantling anything but will carry this hate your life out and point it to new things until it kills you. Your hate is manufactured and consumed just like any capitalist product
The buregoise are a plague a systematic plague and you help them by having a class war that they become desperate to win.
These were your words from the previous comment. Are you against class war or not?
And when I say there’s no beneficial policy I mean you won’t ever get lasting reforms by electing better politicians, you’ll just get temporary concessions that will be taken away the next time there’s a crisis. I think looking at the fall of European social democracy since the dissolution of the USSR should prove my point: European workers opted for just getting “beneficial policy” instead of revolution, and now the benefits are gone.
In the case of capitalism that is literally true. Capital will try to destroy any country, culture, ecosystem or set of beliefs that can’t be exploited, or that threaten it’s ability to exploit. It literally is a case of “you have to pick one, and only one can win.” Liveable planet, or capitalism. No other options, no way to avoid the choice. Not choosing is choosing.
If it wasn’t clear, I abhor this doomer mindset that benefits nobody except the class war leaders and weapons manufacturers. Not a single mention of improvement, only destructive hate and the naive intent that any of that leads to actual community in any participants. Hate binds a war like cult that has utterly forgotten about how humans can help each other and prosper from it. Choosing is choosing. Choosing a hateful side or the other hateful side and never thinking about your own ideas, needs of many, morals and ethics, or your own belief is utter disgrace and folly
That doomer mindset that benefits nobody except the oligarchs, the mindset of…pointing out that the oligarchs are oligarchs? Genuinely confused here. You seem to be interpreting physical observations are some kind of provocative personal statement. Slug and salt physically cannot coexist. Flame and gunpowder physically cannot coexist. Capitalism and a healthy, peaceful living world physically cannot coexist. Pointing this out is no more “hateful” than pointing out that 6 times 7 is 42.
Choosing a hateful side or the other hateful side and never thinking about your own ideas, needs of many, morals and ethics, or your own belief is utter disgrace and folly
The needs of the many is actually our whole thing here, and the thing about the needs of the many is that if you actually take it seriously, what usually happens is that the sideliners who have spent much less time examining the facts will call you hateful for pointing out that the hell empire built on mass-subjugation is unsurprisingly the primary obstacle to the world we want. And that a house with a rotten foundation stands no hope of reconstruction.
While bewildered, I really am trying to approach this openly, which is why ive gone back and softened a couple embarassing redditisms in the edit. So genuinely, and in a spirit of understanding: what is your critique of my assessment?
I have a cold and clear hate towards capitalism. It cuts surgically and makes a difference. Your screaming flailing buckshot is a good product for rage bait and political pundits to consume. Learn to not be an extreme capitalist creation that rolls around bouncing against it’s playground fence. The only game that wins is to not play and climb out. You afford no energy toward actual revolution or change or demand or function or policy or anything in this rant, and nobody that reads it is inspired to do it either. You benefit the status quo which is hyper capitalist. If your focus is destructive and nothing else, in an actual uprising you will not help and even hinder it’s progression. Nobody wants to dismantle only for dismantling, all persons need cause and just inspiration for the actual replacement that will stand in its place. 60% debating philosophy, 20% condemning 20% war cry. Take a small piece of policy and put it in there, and watch the change it makes. Then, swap out your statements incrementally until they are 100% policy. Replacement policy. This is a real path should you tire of trudging in this insane climate
Got it, content of critque=
Okay okay, for real. You seem to think that because I recognize the necessity of uprooting capitalism, I have nothing positive to replace it with? Cause brother lemme introduce a concept you may have heard of before;
How can you possibly read what amounts to “consider the context of your beliefs” and decide to leave this sarcastic, nonsense comment?
My beliefs is that capitalism is an abhorrent apocalyptic cult. The text says I should consider so I considered. I realised I don’t care about fucking bickering about “the other side” because it’s childish. I want to only talk about benefits of policy that is fully opposing capitalism
So what does any of this have to do with the OP? You’re the one bickering and being childish here. You’ve not said anything of substance and simply left a sarcastic comment.
Nope, I am engaged in political debate. Only you have chosen to bicker and that shit you care to focus on instead. Want to answer or is this just another walk over?
Lmao your very first comment ended in “not” like a teenager in 1992, are you sure you haven’t chosen to bicker? Also answer what? That’s the first question you’ve asked me in this grand political debate you are engaged in.
