feddit.org

3 points

5 months ago

Yes, which is why it is important to protect communist projects from capitalist backed coups, like the presidential coup that illegally and undemocratically dissolved the USSR

report

[ - ]

RidderSport@feddit.org

-4 points

5 months ago

Quite funny of you to mention undemocratic in the context of the USSR, as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence. And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal. I can only think of the German constitution that actually has clauses on how to legally phase it out.

report

[ - ]

1 point

5 months ago

as if it had been a democracy even one day of its existence

It was literally a democracy for its entire existence. Now, during the last couple decades it wasn’t as democratic as proletarian democracies like Cuba Vietnam and China, but it was still more democratic than bourgeois “democracies”

And about illegal, most of the times a country and its constitution is absolved its technically illegal.

Okay but was it good that the Russian president ordered tanks to bombard the Soviet parliament building until the parliament surrendered? Is that your take? Even when it led to the installation of “bourgeois” democracies and a humanitarian crisis not seen outside of war?

Just now the nations which made up the USSR are meeting old life expectancy metrics. And that is uneven, some of them still haven’t, some of them are doing better.

Also LOL you are German, you’d know a thing about reducing Soviet life expectancy. Your nation killed more than 25 million Soviet citizens, 1/6 of the total population. Maybe you have an imperative to do some research on what Soviet democracy was from their perspective instead of regurgitating anticommunist shit out your mouth like a good little anti-communist German.

report

[ - ]

RidderSport@feddit.org

-1 points

5 months ago

Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go? Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy. To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections, which in hindsight should be obvious considering that they had a parliament. They still had dictators of much the time

As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

report

[ - ]

3 points

5 months ago

Ah right so we go ad-hominum now? Frankly pretty low of you. Also it just sounds like a way to say that I am not allowed to have any differing opinion, simply because of my country’s past. Makes me want to find out where you’re from and tell you you’re not eligible to say anything because your country fucked up badly in the past.

No, you are not personally responsible for your country being incredibly anticommunist. I know what my country has done in the past, it has happened to some of my ancestors and living family. Which is why I am skeptical of the things my country tells me about its opponents, as I am encouraging you to be by emphasizing to you what is in the political atmosphere you find yourself breathing.

You expect me to believe that USSR votes weren’t rigged from the get-go?

Do you have any evidence that they were?

Next you tell me the GDR was an actual democracy.

If was. And women and LGBT people lost a lot of rights during reunification. Not to mention the plundering of nationalized industry by the capitalist class, greatly decreasing the wealth of the rest of the country.

I would suggest reading “why women had better sex under socialism, and other arguments for economic independence”

To be fair I actually didn’t know that there were elections

It takes a lot to admit this. I would suggest taking this as a moment to reflect on what you actually know vs what you think you know.

They still had dictators of much the time

Uh, no? Even during the height of WW2 Stalin still answered to a committee.

As for the violence part, not that I am supporting that, but frankly it seems to be pretty much part of the Russian identity. It’s not like the USSR was not to take a friendly approach to any kind of civil unrest at all.

Frankly this is kinda racist and beneath you from the moments of reflection I’ve seen in this interaction.

report

[ - ]

RidderSport@feddit.org

0 points

5 months ago

Look I’d actually support socialism or at least strong social-capitalism. Just wanna make that clear.

Arguing certain things worked way better during the GDR does not at all refute my point of it not being a democracy apart from on paper. Child care for one worked incomparably better than it now does. Privatisation and more importantly the dissolvement of companies did not go well and is certainly still a problem. Actually it caused neo-feudalism in parts of the former GDR.

Stalin being officially reproachable does not actually mean he was reproachable. The kind of socialism the USSR practiced is in my opinion not all better than a well restricted capitalism. But to be fair, that is subjective and I am financially not in any kind of trouble.

It was not meant to be racist, the history of violence in Russia since I am vaguely aware of its history, does speak of itself. Certainly in the years since the founding of the RF, has violence among the people and state-sanctioned been a common thing. The wide-spread unrestricted violence can be openly observed in Ukraine. If you look at any macro-violense theories you see my point proven. All and I mean all factors for mass-violence are fulfilled.

Also if anything, my comment was xenophobic, racism is something different

report

[ - ]

2 points

5 months ago

Hey, it looks like your heart is in the right place, I would really suggest you read a bit about participatory democracy and whole process people’s democracy (although the latter has a lot of misinfo about it) I would also try to understand the socialist argument from one party democracies and how they lead to more generative conflict (that is, collegeal onflict that genuinely resolves problems and addresses needs in a way that achieves democratic consensus)

I would also suggest reading some marx who talks a lot about how even regulated capitalism cannot function. I would not start with capital though.

report