Keep peddling debunked Black Book of Communism mythology, I guess.

No, not really

Thanks!

Doing my best as a baby ML 🫡

Always love and appreciate your comments, comrade!

I am aware of the Soviet Union expelling fascists and Tsarists from the party, and punishing those found corrupt, criminals, or had been members of the White Army. I am aware of the GULAG administration that formed the early Soviet prison system, read Russian Justice for more on how that functioned. I am aware of the famine in the 1930s. I have read these articles, as pretty much every Western Communist has had to, these are not “gotchas.”

The real truth of the matter is that the western anti-Communist “Left” that denounces the USSR and every real attempt at building Socialism plays into the hands of the US Empire. The Soviet Union was a massive victory for the working class, the first real Socialist state in history, and with it came dramatic improvements in key life metrics and working class dignity.

1. Life expectancy doubled.

2. The economy was democratized, following the method of Soviet Democracy

3. Wealth inequality shrank, while economic growth boomed:

4. Large expansions in social safety nets were made, such as free and high quality education and healthcare.

5. Housing rates skyrocketed, and literacy rates over tripled to 99.9%.

6. Food security was achieved in a country that was always food insecure.

7. The Red Army defeated the Nazis, with 80% of the combat of World War II on the Eastern Front.

8. The Soviet Union supported countless liberation movements, such as in Cuba, Algeria, and more.

And many, many more achievements. People who denounce the USSR maintain unstated approval for the other Great Power, the United States, which without the USSR would have been entirely unopposed. The US, which committed Imperialist slaughter and even genocide in Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Angola, Palestine, and many, many more countries, was opposed primarily by the Soviets.

The Soviet Union was by no means perfect, nobody asserts that, but to claim that the Soviet Union did “more harm than good to the Leftist movement” is ludicrous. This is the sentiment of Western Chauvanists that don’t want to support Socialism unless they are the ones who acheive it. Jones Maonel was spot on in Western Marxism Loves Purity and Martyrdom, but not Real Revolution.

You should read Dr. Michael Parenti’s Blackshirts and Reds, or at the very least the sections on “Left” Anti-Communism.

I think you should use your experiences in Azerbaijan as a push to confront some of your biases, and re-examine your understanding of Socialism in the Soviet Union. It wasn’t perfect, but it wasn’t “totalitarian” by any stretch either. The benefits of the Socialist economic structure are pined for precisely because they worked, and did so for the common people. There are improvements that can and have been made in other Socialist countries, but these improvements would not have been possible without the brave Soviet people pioneering Socialism as it exists in the real world.

…liberal?

Removing gender roles in order to more equitably distribute the workload is progressive. You can remove morality from that equation and it still works, ergo it is absolutely something we should support and there are no reasons to perpetuate backwards gender roles.

Absolutely, it was only for symbolic reasons, not even for practical gain.

The US is founded on settler-colonialism and genocide, and is currently the world’s largest Empire.

I have, actually. Want to elaboroate at all?

You give it away when you said the US isn’t really Capitalist. It’s pretty clear that, at minimum, you haven’t studied Marxism in any capacity. You also are quick to dismiss evidence and even quicker to firehose a bunch of claims without any sources too, so that doesn’t help your case either.

I really don’t think you’re in a position to tell China what their economic model is. They aren’t a hybrid between Capitalism and Socialism, but firmly Socialist, because their large firms and key industries are overwhelmingly publicly owned and planned, while the Private Sector is dominated by small industry and self-proprietors. This is straight from Marx, who believed that markets themselves centralize and therefore build up the large industry public ownership thrives on.

Again, if you want to learn more about Socialism and Communism, I am more than willing to walk you through theory. That would be a much more productive conversation, I would think. However, you have a very clear tendency to speak confidently on matters you have not studied, such as claiming China is a “hybrid system” just because it follows classical Marxism.

You also rapid-fired more unsourced claims, so I’ll address those:

1. China is a democracy. It is not a liberal democracy, where multiple parties compete, but a Socialist democracy. You can watch a quick video from Chinese state media on how it functions, or how elections work. Over 90% of Chinese citizens approve of their government, and the majority believes they have a democratic impact on policy, at a higher rate than the US.

2. Social Credit doesn’t really exist in China. There’s a version for businesses, but not the often memed about version of a totalitarian spy state.

3. The US has more CCTVs per Capita than the PRC. A large factor is due to China’s lower crime rates, due to having better working class protections and safety nets.

So, to return, China is Socialist. The presence of markets are only with respect to where Marxists would want markets, as Marxists believe you must develop out of markets, not simply make them illegal and punish them. If you approve of this system of publicly owning and planning firms as they get larger and leaving small businesses and cooperatives free to develop into these large firms before aquiring them, you might just be a Communist!

Objectively they were used to prevent the Soviets from gaining influence, and forcing Japan into an unconditional surrender, instead of conditional. They didn’t save anyone but US Imperialism.

The US fights for Imperialism and famine, though. It doesn’t engage in war for moral reasons, but for profit, and as the world Hegemon, that directly incentivizes US Imperialism.

Well, seems like your intentions have backfired, and by not putting in any effort, even if you were right, you ended up making my points look more valid. I do recommend people read and look into my sources, hopefully your advice to do so helps create more Socialists.

Yes, I know how the 2/3rds data was gathered, and I am aware of the other countries listed there. It doesn’t invalidate my point, and the data is still sound.

On one final question, what do you mean by a rabbit hole of “starvation and misery?” Countries adopting Socialism got more food secure after doing so. Take the PRC, for example, which recently eliminated extreme poverty in a Socialist economy. If 15 million people per year are dying due to poverty, sounds like we need to move beyond Capitalism and into Socialism.

Wikipedia isn’t a source, Wikipedia references sources. I frequently use Wikipedia links instead of the source itself because it’s western controlled, and therefore less likely to be seen as pro-Communist “propaganda” by people like yourself. Either way, though, the sources I linked are still sound, you’ve done nothing to disprove them and have provided no sources of your own, other than numbers you admitted to have found “on your own,” ie they came to you in a dream.

Out of curiousity, why are you continuing this conversation? You’re only further making my argument look better. Is it for self-satisfaction? A genuine wish to debate? Then why not bring at least one source, or try to counter anything that I’ve said. As it stands, based on the upvotes and downvotes, you’re the only one being laughed at here.

Not at all, I provided peer reviewed sources and primary accounts. You provided exactly nothing. If you’re going to throw a fit about sources even Wikipedia uses, the least you could do is find a source of your own.

Or, here me out, you could stop trying to fight facts that are uncomfortable for you to learn. Much better for you in the long run, I’ll say.

I produced peer reviewed sources, news articles, primary sources, and more, and you produced none. It was worth my time, though, so if anyone wanders in they can learn, even if you’re determined not to.

Essentially, your entire comment relies on the following errors:

1. Having no clue what Capitalism is

Capitalism is a Mode of Production by which Private Property forms the principle aspect of the economy. Examples of Capitalist economies include the Russian Federation, United States, France, Norway, Mexico, Japan, South Korea, the UK, Germany, Canada, etc. Calling the US a “plutocracy” or whatever you want doesn’t change that it’s Capitalist, and relies on Private Property as the driving factor of the economy. The government bailing out wealthy Capitalists is Capitalism in action, the state is subservient to the Private Sector in Capitalist systems.

2. Having no clue what Socialism is

Socialism is a Mode of Production by which Public Property forms the principle aspect of the economy. Examples of Socialist economies include the PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, etc. Socialism is not when the government does stuff or provides safety nets, the US is not a “hybrid” because it has a post office. The government in Socialist countries often lets business owners fail, see the Evergrande collapse in China, or the punishment of Jack Ma.

3. Pretending Capitalism isn’t right-wing

Capitalism is right-wing. Violence perpetuated in the interest of Capitalist aims, such as the United States massacring countries that go against its Imperialism, is righwing violence. An easy example is the US slaughtering 1 million Iraqis in order to gain access to their oil.

4. Making numbers up and providing 0 sources for them.

As for the “making numbers up” part, you said you “did the math yourself.” You provided no sources of any of that, basically meaning you made it up, and redefined what left and right mean in a political context. It’s deliberately dishonest.

Now to address your claims:

I already showed how the economy grew rapidly in the USSR, yet disparity lowered. Do you think these economic gains vanished into thin-air? No. Instead, it came to the people, which is why life expectancy doubled in Russia and China after adopting Socialism. They did not immediately get to compete with the US Empire’s stolen wealth, but their lives rapidly improved over the Tsarist system and the nationalist system.

The government in the USSR was not a “ruling class.” See the wealth disparity metrics, they lowered. The gap between the wealthiest and the poorest was about a factor of 10 in the USSR, unlike Tsarist Russia and the Russian Federation, where that number is in the many, many, many thousands and millions. Poverty went drastically upward in the Russian Federation, and 2/3rds of Russians wish Socialism had remained. By far the biggest elimination of poverty in human history came from the USSR and PRC, and it isn’t close, while Capitalism perpetuates poverty and Imperialism.

Again, I can help you learn more if you want, but making numbers up and trying to redefine words into something else in order to prove a point doesn’t help anyone. You aren’t convincing anyone here, and you’ll never convince me either when I’ve done the effort of actually digging into the facts, like finding the 15 million figure you just ignored. You’re welcome to learn, again I have plenty of sources and have done the time to read them and read up on Marxist-Leninist theory and history.