KOLLAPS

2y

pre rev russia was feudalist so i dont see how thats relevant

im saying if socialism is so based that list of belligerents would be flipped

Fargo

2y

yes because the collapse of the USSR which even anti communist historians call one of the greatest humanitarian tragedies in history is totally funny

KOLLAPS

2y

ima directly answer ur question and say no

i think its obvious this is not my point tho but w/e

ARCADE GOON

2y

Pre-revolution Russia was semi-feudal and semi-capitalist.

The list cannot be reversed because Soviet Russia was the first communist country in the world. This is like saying why weren't more nations capitalist other than England in the late 17th century.

Fargo

2y

i know what your point is. most socialist nations do/did not flourish because of siege style sanctions and foreign meddling.

Nessy

2y

It’s been proven markets are very efficient at their purpose and not efficient at all at doing any good

KOLLAPS

2y

u saying that is a complete disregard of my point tho lmao

but sure ur not wrong

KOLLAPS

2y

soviet russia lasted for almost 100 yrs

niggas had time to campaign lmao

and they did

im saying if socialism was so strong it would be more popular thus capable of toppling capitalist nations just like the opposite happens now

KOLLAPS

2y

why do u guys just spew?

stop moralizing everything

ppl live well under markets certainly better than under any centrally planned economy

KOLLAPS

2y

pre rev russia was feudalist so i dont see how thats relevant

im saying if socialism is so based that list of belligerents would be flipped

Scratchin Mamba

2y

"If socialism was good why is the US against it"

Scratchin Mamba

2y

Either a bad troll or u dumb as shyt ngl

ARCADE GOON

2y

And I'm saying this view is ahistorical because you can study the transitions of economic modes of production we have seen throughout history, the second most recent one being the switch from feudalism to capitalism. They had a bunch of setbacks too to develop modern capitalism, for example the English Civil War, or the French Revolution which had a massive counter-reaction later on that revitalized the aristocracy for a few more decades. The American Civil War was in essence also a war between industrial capitalists and slaver-owners. It's not like capitalism appeared right away and conquered everything everywhere. Who is to say the same cannot happen to socialism? We will see.

KOLLAPS

2y

unironically, answer this question lol

ARCADE GOON

2y

I already know about that concept.

You can trace the failure of the USSR back:

Capitalist reforms after 1985 completely ruined the economy because the entire infrastructure was not built for capitalism. This destroyed the state and made the system collapse.

-> Why did these capitalist reforms happen?

Because the light industry planning was deemed inadequate and consumers were getting anxious while comparing their own economy to the USA in this regard. The USSR economy wasn't complete s*** like some people claim, the major problem they had were luxury goods and some consumer items like cars or electronics being too expensive/taking too long to be delivered.

-> Why was the planning bad?

Because they had bad information to work off of, and slow communication. You can only plan as well as your information is. If your inputs are crap, your outputs will be crap too.

-> Why wasn't planning reformed first?

Because cybernetic planning would have made the system more transparent and more democratic.

-> Why was the party able to refuse the cybernetic reforms?

Because since Stalin, the internal democracy of the CPSU was extremely lacking and dissent was discouraged. The CPSU lost the connection to the common population. They became "bureaucrats of the revolution" who were more-or-less effective at running things, but did not have any visions on how to press forwards in their transition towards communism.

This led to a stagnation, both in terms of innovation and ideology, in the late 70s that set the stage for glasnost and perestroika.

You can link all the economic problems back to lack of democratic participation and institutions. Note that I don't mean elections or something with that but a true polling of the people and their needs and desires, both in economics and in all other spheres of life.

Scratchin Mamba

2y

I'll start by asking you why the US was explicitly against racial inequality despite it being a good thing (presumably you agree).

Could it be because.. the US isn't good?

Scratchin Mamba

2y

I'll start by asking you why the US was explicitly against racial inequality despite it being a good thing (presumably you agree).

Could it be because.. the US isn't good?

KOLLAPS

2y

because the US used to (take that used to with a grain of salt) be a piece of s*** faux-democracy that was really a constitutionless dictatorship for POC and women

it wasnt until the passage of the civil rights act and women’s suffrage that this country started acting with a bit of decency, at least for 21st century standards

KOLLAPS

2y

also id say america is good now (relative to other nations)

Experiment626

2y

How is the Market God when we created The Market?

Wouldn’t that make us God since we have the power to manipulate or even destroy it if we willed?