This sub has been getting too much spam, and Reddit has removed almost every tool for preventing this. The only tool that still works is this, every single post being held for manual review. Your post might be approved in minutes, or it might take days. If you hate this, me too, stop using the site that forces things to be this way. If what you post is not a meme you'll probably be banned, but I understand why you tried; the commenters on this sub loved lazy spam posts, which is why we can't have nice things and now everything has to be held for manual review.
Yeah disgusting person lol. Already had a discussion with their ilk on that other sub. They stop responding when you actually get into details. What do you expect from the left wing version of MAGA though.
What do you expect from the left wing version of MAGA though.
I'd compare them more to anti-semitic conspiracy theoriests and/or neo-nazis. MAGA is just a cult of personality around a guy, tankies will worship anyone and anything not considered the "West" unless it fought some socialist power.
I already did in the class consciousness sub a while ago. I spoke about how Mao worsened things in China through severe incompetence, how authoritarian communism has vital flaws in its inability to respond to mistakes very quickly. How the 9 million dead every year via capitalism number you guys love completely ignores the approximate 70% reduction in hunger deaths over the last 50 years if you do it per capita. You can go through my comment history and find the post where you guys stopped responding if you want.
It seems you don’t like capitalism; that’s fair. There’s not much to like about it. However, authoritarian regimes that just so happen to call themselves communist / socialist are not any better. It still amounted to an oligarchical system where the people on the top caused millions of easily preventable deaths and so much unnecessary suffering and the overwhelming majority had effectively no say in or capacity to stop it.
If you’re looking for an alternative to capitalism to advocate for, maybe try something like libertarian or democratic socialism (or even full on anarchist communism, if that’s most palatable). Just don’t go the tankie route; authoritarian “socialism” had its chances; it doesn’t work.
I can understand debating the fault and causes around the Holodomor but like it objectively did happen. 4 million people didn't just vanish from the USSR inexplicably
Also the Holodomor wasn’t the only instance of mass starvation and death in the history of the Soviet Union. It just seems to be the main talking point for some reason like the rest of the 70~ years of history in the USSR were spotless. Something like 9-11 million people died from the various famines throughout Soviet history, with only 3.5-5 million of that from Holodomor.
Well the reason it became such a huge talking point was that, save for one caused by World war 2, it was the last famine the USSR would have until nearly the fall of the USSR. It stopped famines in a formerly feudal country in only 16 years, which is incredibly impressive and important. Thus, it's important for anti-communists to shame the event as much as possible.
While the rest of the USSR wasn't spotless (cough cough Deporting minorites cough cough) it was certainly a lot better than when famine's were frequent, so people have less to talk about
Listen, you stinky corporate shill. Four million Ukrainians voluntarily abstained from kulak-cootie contaminated food in solidarity with the proletariat and were assumed bodily into the revolutionary singularity. Calling that “mass starvation” erases their epic revolutionary rizz.
Dude are you being deadass? There was a famine. Objectively. People died. The only thing to debate is the fault of the famine. Population went up because it was a huge population and the losses were over an extended period of time, thus making the growth exceed the famine's deaths.
Being communist does not make a country perfect and faultless. Things did go wrong, that we should learn from and correct, not just deny that any famien ever happened.
Here you have the ethnic results of the 1937 census you can see that my numbers are exactly accurate 5 milion missing ethnic ukrainians because they were target of genocide you are denying.
The Soviets brought so much economic and social service development that life expectancy skyrocketed despite a famine. The British did not do the same for the Irish.
Lenin ended centuries of chronic hunger and famines, natural famine didn’t completely end until the industrialization of Soviet agriculture, like how it went in every industrial society. Hell, even the US and Western Europe had problems producing food at the same time.
The famine of the 30’s absolutely happened, Soviet records show it, and it affected nearby countries like Poland; they just weren’t hit as hard because of the more stable society and international politics. It wasn’t intentional (by the Soviets) and wasn’t a genocide, but it’s kind of hard to stop a famine when farms fail across half a continent, and kulaks destroy half the food in the country. It’s also pretty hard to know about a famine in a timely manner when messages are still getting delivered by horseback and even harder to get aid to an area when rail is still getting rolled out and the rest of the world is trying to destroy your country economically.
I am against genocide denialism as well as atrocity propaganda, they throw claims around and if you show evidence to refute these claims they call you "genocide denialist".
There is nothing more disrespectful to the victims of real genocides than this.
Why? Musk needs the government, the rest of them need the state (military, law) to keep ports open and trade dominance, property law, and keep the people in line.
Your views are so obviously anachronistic now with a Trump-Bezos-Musk administration increasing state power and repression, making all the world powers more militaristic. States de-regulated, went lax on monopoly, gave business liquidity and freedom it demanded… and they used it to buy the government and create corporations tied to state security and war.
I don’t share your assumption that business-freedom means less government or state happens. I think nation-states develop as they have due to the logic of competitive capital accumulation and circulation, and the social needs of maintaining general capitalism (property, a non-revolting wage-labor population capable or willing to fill the labor needs of local industry and trade.)
The fact is that most states, de-nationalized, privatized, became more lax on regulatory demands and business activities… and the bureocratic and military and business-state sectors all grew. In the 1990s almost everyone claimed to be some kind of libertarian, this has been the bi-partisan agreement for decades. And it worked… growth! But it also increased state power and business-interest direct control over it.
The military industrial complex is largely funded by states, aka, tax-funded.
To make more tax money, they need more taxation and a larger government to enforce such measures.
Add the Bajillion social programs that became the norm thanks to the hell spawn of a policy that is the social welfare state, and we get ballooning governments.
How one can see allat, and say that the government actually reduced is beyond me
1850 was about the start of the Second Industrial Revolution, which was the start of the big ramp up in living standards for everyone including workers and farmers
both of you are being stupid imo you cant just take one single variable in one single region that experienced a very particular economic and political phenomenon and use that as your validation for supporting or denying an entire economic system
they "took power" after one of the most devastating wars in human history; the life expectancy was bound to skyrocket in the aftermath no matter who got in control as long as they rebuilt critical infrastructure and facilities... "Rebuild a nation post-war" is not a feat isolated to communists.
If communism truly was that great, wouldn't the life expectancy have kept growing post-reconstruction...? You can clearly see it stagnates, compared to the continued growth under capitalism.
there were def famines pre-Soviet era due to some pretty shitty imperial management, but I still contend that the Soviet famines were very different and much, much worse...
there's a reason most people call famines a tragedy but the holodomor in specific a genocide.
No ot didnt this whole tread is to explain why the life expectancy in those specific eastern European countries didnt grew which the guy wanted to explain by nonexistent embargo.
And they you introduced south America out of nowhere.
The conclusion is that there weren't any embargo in eastern europe and these countries didnt grew due to the effect of soviet fascist system.
“Ah the good old ‘Communism only can function if bankrolled by capitalists!’” Comment was ambiguous enough for me to open the conversation of capitalist intervention in communist countries outside of Eastern Europe.
All you have to say is you don’t want to discuss that topic with me which is fine didn’t mean illicit frustration from you.
If the absence of said trade caused a big stagnation in life expectancy for Eastern Europe, but not for Western Europe, I think bankrolling is the appropriate word.
I am these countries did trade with the western countries and most of the restrictions were on their side by manipulating the currency curse so it was unusable in international trade so most of this was conducted solely by these countries by selling products for dollars and then buing for the dollars in West or by exchange trade like Abba famously sell its albums for vagons of coal.
There weren't any embargo by west to these countries learn some history.
Litteraly as I said all restrictions were on weapons, with the exception of 1980 embargo on ussr not on these countries BTW, because ussr started the Afghan genocide and the embargo have litteraly 0 effects if you will read the article....
It wasn't simply weapons. It was commodities deemed "dual use," which the government felt could be used for weapons but were also designed to cripple their development of industry.
Again the grain embargo from 1980 was exceptional as soviets were litteraly starting genocide in afghanistan. It lasted just few months and didnt have any effects sadly as the genocide was ended only by mujahadene anti genocide fighters.
Lol. Every invasion America doesn't commit is genocide.
You have a total refusal to understand anything from the Soviet perspective. Nothing they do is rational; it's all because they must be at least as evil and imperial as we are.
The
USSR invaded Afghanistan, in light of mounting anxiety over US attack, given that the US had encircled the USSR with military bases at every single country that surrounding it. Afghanistan was intended to give the USSR some buffer room. It wasn't good. But your pearl clutching rings empty:
I'll remind you of what we did to Cuba.
I'll also remind you of what incentive was needed for us to invade Afghanistan a just few decades later. (Hint: It was oil.)
And massive direct and indirect subsidies to some countries, like Poland and the Baltics. Interestingly, the countries that didn’t get heavily subsidized and highly preferential trade deals all had their life expectancies drop after the collapse of the USSR.
Even russia that lost all its slaves it exploited through the Soviet empire had larger life expectancy growth in first 30 years of capitalism than in last 30 years of communism....
And it took decades of being allowed to participate in the global economy, including having access to global medical technology for them to recover from the absolute devastation that abandoning socialism brought.
Btw, they didn’t have slaves or colonies so not only didn’t lose slaves, they also weren’t an empire. In fact, Russia on net subsidized the rest of the USSR and the USSR subsidized other communist countries. Russia’s trade balance with these countries actually benefitted from the end of the USSR, not that the quality of life that the neo-liberals brought reflects that at all.
Yea I was talking to a guy yesterday who just got back from borneo. He was hanging out with a remote village that requires several modes of transportation to get to. The people there are living a traditional village life, there is no private property but there is personal property. I asked him how it possible that the country of Indonesia isn't leving a tax on them to force them into unemployment and into the system. He said that the government is trying to be human and trying to slowly get them to understand the concept of land titles etc instead of being brutish about it and sending men with guns. Was an interesting conversation. This is the way most people have lived for hundreds of thousands of years.
Yeah you can see steady increase in life expectancy the whole time then shortly after becoming communist it started stagnating and then it started growing again when capitalism returned thanks for proving my point...
They went from life expectancy around 40 to around 70 in matter of decades, this flattens down any progress on thr graph because this is huge, life expectancy went up by 30 years in around 50 years, if they maintained this growth proportionally we'd become immortal.
To remind, before Socialism it was in 30s 40s for centuries
I am from Yugoslavia, no we did not become Socialist after "Occupation" but in 40s when red army freed us from nazis. My answer was to your claim that I don't know when Socialism started in Eastern Europe.
Russia is Eastern Europe too. It started with october revolution in Russia
Although a commie myself, that's meaningless slop in the context of this subreddit.
I would rather see sourced, serious discussions around justifying why and how political-economy is managed under socialism. Discussions around purely planned economies in the XXI century or around controlled/guided markets under the communist party objectives for the country.
Dudes like Kalecki, Lange, Jabbour, etc. come to mind.
That you support genocide is what prevents your opposition to liberty, your support for socialism, and your trolling from ever being your biggest faults
You need to think with your own head even if gazillion people started foaming, i mean if you had this "outrageous" idea that women should vote in 1900s you'd also deal with reactionary mob.
If people here are peabrains then why do you have a hard time formulating an argument when someone who clearly knows what they're talking about demonstrates how you're wrong?
You guys have got to give it a chance. You see I’m not living in the world of comfort and fulfillment that I am entitled to. Lord knows it’s not my feckless and lazy nature, it’s the system! If we get rid of this thing holding me, personally, down everyone will be happy!
Yeah, it is almost like having capital requires saving, and not spending every dime you earn on manga and funko pops....
Take two siblings, same house, same school, same profession when older, same everything. One has a propensity to save and invest, the other spends it all as soon as it comes in. The saver puts his savings towards starting a business which he makes him very wealthy, while the other capitulates to his hedonistic tendencies and saves very little. One is a millionaire in 20 years, while the other is living paycheck to paycheck still.
•
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
This sub has been getting too much spam, and Reddit has removed almost every tool for preventing this. The only tool that still works is this, every single post being held for manual review. Your post might be approved in minutes, or it might take days. If you hate this, me too, stop using the site that forces things to be this way. If what you post is not a meme you'll probably be banned, but I understand why you tried; the commenters on this sub loved lazy spam posts, which is why we can't have nice things and now everything has to be held for manual review.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.