You're viewing a single thread.
idk but in Poland the 99% had a terrible experience with socialism, and I think that's the case for nearly everyone who had to go through it, except the parasite class (communist party elites) who own everything... ultimately the theory is wrong because it never turned out how they said it would
Actually, if you look at the surveys about socialism in Eastern Europe, Poland included, and break them down by age range, a pattern shows up where the older generation that actually lived in the USSR for a good portion of their lives have consistently more favourable views of it than younger adults who were born shortly before or after the USSR's collapse.
Sources and more info: https://dessalines.github.io/essays/socialism_faq.html#did-the-citizens-of-the-soviet-union-dislike-their-government
The soviet union wasn't the shit show western nations paint it as. That's not to say that it didn't have a ton of flaws including authoritarianism. But when it came to things like the space race they kicked the ass of every country till the US eventually landed on the moon. First satellite in orbit first person in space/orbit etc etc etc. Science and technology. Science and technology weren't neglected either.
The biggest problem with the soviet union and other bolshevik style authoritarian communist countries. Is that they're the only bit of socialism western nations indoctrinate their drones with. To frighten them and keep them from ever thinking about it. I'm a socialist and anti bolshevik etc etc etc. But to most westerners that's just a head scratcher. Socialist but not bolshevik?! How can be!?
@Eldritch @HiddenLayer5 agreed about the u.s.s.r. point, despite the lack of consumer goods, having a life long right to a house and a job are very appealing to me living in the American capitalist hellscape at the moment
not so sure how i feel about the anti Bolshevik part. tho im not fond of calling things authoritarian or not. i am anti autocratic tho
It's about calling things what they are. Doesn't matter if were fond of it or not. The problem with soviet/north Korean/Chinese large C Communism is their placing absolute authority in a single entity. The state the party etc. Especially when that entity is ultimately the "military". Or derived from it. As the euphemism goes. When you're a hammer everything looks like a nail. Addendum and when things don't work like nails you just keep hitting them harder out of frustration.
Mao Zedong's famine comes to mind. Lets assume that many of us here are fairly techy and nerdy. Being on a federated opensource platform as early adopters. Risky bet I know. Now would you think it's a good idea to put someone, say a baker. Who has no experience with tech whatsoever as the supreme authority in running something like this? Let alone multiple non related essential things? You're just asking for trouble. Maybe they will listen to advisers and take the advice to heart. Maybe they will do the normal human thing and over estimate their abilities and ignore them. There shouldn't be a single ultimate authority that people fear to cross. True small c communism could work. But that would rely on the workers, not the state being the authority. And cooperating with other workers to fill the needs of each. The state can be an effective arbitrator for those groups. And I'm not so far down the libertarian/anarchist rabbit hole to believe we can get away with zero state authority. But the power needs to be balanced between the workers and the state.
@Eldritch you do have good points in here, by the way have you ever read state and revolution?
i think i may count as a big C communist that cant get their nose out of the books
No I have not. And I'll be honest there's a lot of related socialist and communist reading that I probably haven't done. Some of it because I have fundamental disagreements with the basic premise of many of them. Such as the all too common belief that Karl Marx's figurative call for a dictatorship of proletariat. Was literal. Which happens to be the basic underpinning premise of Big C communism. And the ultimate failure of every group that has implemented it.
In my view at least. If everyone is the proletariat. Then by definition the proletariat has an effective dictatorship. Because no one but the proletariat would have a say. The problem with making the state etc the dictator. Is that they Don't always understand or want to understand the needs and wants of different groups. China's government has done a lot of infrastructure projects for instance. But extremely wastefully. Because it wasn't for, or fulfilling of the people's needs. It was for status and to flatter the vanity of the non proletariat in the government.
There are so many more ideologies and concepts under socialism than authoritarian communism. And it's really a shame they don't get more attention/recognition.
@Eldritch i would reccomend reading what these poeple had to say, it'll clear up a lot of issues. theres also value in reading what your self proclaimed enemies have to say, even if its a very frustrating read.
a book from somebody i have good reason to not like was the book propaganda, thats the name of it by frueds nephew whose name im forgetting. this is also how i know the n@zis think im jewish for some reason(im not)
a good first read for socialism would be vlack shirts and reds
Oh it's not that I don't understand the sentiment etc for it. You have to understand something to have a hope of dismantling and countering it. I simply don't have a strong desire to wade through it repeatedly for fun. I am largely anti authoritarian whether it's any form of capitalism or the loose forms of socialism often used to slander the the general ideology as a whole.
I absolutely understand the misguided reasoning behind the desire for a strong central authority etc. It's efficient, no duplication of hierarchy, resources, or conflicts in leadership. All you need to do is find someone who isn't human in any way and subject to the ethical and moral flaws of humans. Maybe with AGI someday if it hasn't killed us. But till then it's a fools errand. For now authority should be as granular as reasonably possible. And preferably with those with the knowledge and motivation to lead where their self interest aligns with those they lead.
Again I'm not one that would argue that these systems were always nothing but hellscapes. Soviet Russia was a good example of a fairly nuanced instance. Disregarding the authoritarian annexing of large chunks of eastern europe. An in-arguably negative thing. There are plenty things that Soviet Russia did reasonably well. I just can't say that makes up for the disappearances, the gulags, and the outright assassinations of dissidents or those the state deems as enemies. And sadly. Russia even as a net negative was the best of them. China is far worse about crushing dissidents. We even just had a notable anniversary related to that IIRC. And North Korea should go without saying. But it's not the communism that's the problem. It's the flawed IE human authoritarian leadership.
@Eldritch please read state and revolution, lenin goes over every point you made here in that work
I'm not sure the USSR space race is the best example to use to make your point. The largely accepted reason as to why the US eventually beat them to the moon was that the NASA let a significantly more coordinated and efficient effort, combined with more robust and quality controlled manufacturing.
The USSR program had a number of competing chief designers ultimately promising ambitious, but commonly uncompleted, projects. They were known for treating each project as a standalone, as opposed to efficiently using each project as a stepping stone towards achieving the next. Their space program was 100% limited by the systems they had in place.
All in all, the "space race" was a marketing campaign on both sides to get the public to accept programs that honestly were too expensive for either side. After the whole moon race, both sides decided to change direction, got proper expectations in place, and ended up completing many other firsts that are a whole lot less sensationalized.
Sometimes people like things that aren't good for them, like if you've ever known someone who is stuck in a bad relationship they ignore the shockingly horrible things and just focus on some happy memory or something they are desperately holding onto. I agree Soviet nostalgia is cool but if it was really that great it wouldn't have collapsed, you know
It's extremely presumptuous to just assume that the people who lived through BOTH socialism and capitalism are mistaken or have Stockholm syndrome or whatever for liking socialism. Like, did YOU live through both and have that unique point of comparison between them? Instead of dismissing their opinions and refusing to even consider that they might have a point, maybe look to them for first hand insight into how socialism compared to capitalism?