Communists have, that’s why the rise of the USSR forced western countries to adopt large safety nets, and why the PRC is so heavily demonized.

It’s certainly a controversial take on communist-friendly instances.

The communists are learning new languages, the horror!

The PRC is socialist, public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state. Communism is a post-socialist mode of production that has not existed yet.

This is vibes-based.

Capitalism brought with it skyrocketing poverty rates, drug abuse, prostitution, homelessness, crime rates, and lowered life expectancy. An estimated 7 million people died due to the dissolution of socialism in the USSR. There’s no fetish here, but instead a dedication to historical accuracy and fighting for a better world, where humanity organizes production and distribution to suit the needs of the people instead of the profits of the few.

It likely isn’t worth continuing to argue on your end if you’re going to stick with anecdote as your sole method of argumentation, and accuse me of having a fetish for bringing sources to back up my points.

I started reading theory because I’m working class. I already hated capitalism, but didn’t understand the ways it works or what needs to be done to establish socialism. I wrote a basic ML study guide if anyone wants a place to start!

I wrote a basic ML study guide if anyone wants a place to start!

I love~ your actual historical evidence.

Life expectancy from birth:

Literacy rates, societal guarantees in the 1936 constitution, reports on the healthcare system over time, and more.

The USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.

When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.

Supply issues in the USSR were magnified by sanctions and recovery from taking by far the biggest hit in World War II. When looked at from its historical progress, the USSR was a system of dramatic, rapid development and improvement that was under siege for its entire existence. It never once had a year of “normal” development, nor was it allowed to.

Any shortcomings compared to western, imperialist countries need to be analyzed with the context that the USSR was developing from utter immiseration under the tsar. The USSR did not fall from tsarism, but rose from tsarism as its base level of development. Tsarist Russia was not a peer country of the west, so the idea that the west having better access to luxuries than the USSR isn’t a point against it.

The rest of your comment is a personal anecdote, which can be dismissed incredibly easy as such.

I’m still glad the CCCP dissolved. I will not argue that Russia is better after that, because it didn’t change for the better, but here I’m much happier

This really says it all, doesn’t it? Russia is worse off for the adoption of capitalism and the dissolution of socialism, but you in particular are happier about it. Love your reasoning, being essentially having access to western commodities.

The USSR wasn’t “broken systematically,” nor was it a “shithole.” Those are better descriptors for Russia under tsarism and capitalism than under socialism. Following actual historical evidence, the USSR had steady and consistent economic growth, and provided free, high quality education and healthcare, full employment, cheap or free housing, and fantastic infrastructure and city planning. This rapid development resulted in dramatic democratization of society, reduced disparity, doubling of life expectancy, tripling of functional literacy rates to 99.9%, and much more.

The truth, when judged based on historical evidence and contextualization, is that socialism was the best thing to happen to Russia in the last few centuries, and its absence has been devastating.

Forget socialism in one country, we are now moving onto country in one person!

MORE

Still not enough

Asymptotic rates of balkanization

There are only ~200 countries on the planet, we’d have far surpassed the number of global north countries if we did that lol

They’ll do it anyways for this post alone.

Imperialist. It’s international, but is an alliance of imperialist states that plunder internationally. Internationalism in a progressive manner requires undermining imperialism.

Can you answer why you’re insistent on analyzing processes outside of the context they exist in? That’s all this comment does as well. If you’re not going to respond to my criticisms of your metaphysical outlook, then defend it, otherwise all I can do is continue to point out that you keep trying to slice away context and view processes in a vacuum that doesn’t exist and doesn’t represent reality accurately as a consequence.

And yet I don’t think people who believed in WMD stuff from then thought Iraqis were subhuman either. Just a detail there.

Except they did. Anti-Iraqi bigotry was all over the news, manufacturing consent for war. The racism played a part in selling the lies about WMD.

No, you gave me one other data-point from statista that measured attitudes to socialism (not communism). Your other link just referred back to your original communism poll with 30% of under 30s. That same poll also asked people’s opinions on socialism, which is what it also spoke about.

I gave you an earlier poll from 1978 as well, you can feel free to revisit my earlier comments and find it. None of that changes your metaphysical outlook on the world around us, which is the fundamental problem here, one you refuse to even acknowledge as such.

Being an internationalist in the context of Marxism-Leninism means supporting movements undermining imperialism, which the WEF is a part of perpetuating. It isn’t about isolationism, and further much of that was driven by western sanctions.

I would assume many people who echo or read the claims here about organ harvesting are convinced, at least somewhat, by the many articles and groups that have investigated it. It has much more body behind it in writing than Trumps claims about Haitians eating cats and dogs which is an attack against individuals Haitians vs. Chinese government.

And these people would be falling for far-right propaganda, same as the anti-Haitian nonsense. The “body behind it” is built on shakey eyewitness testemony from a far-right cult, and counter-investigation has found nothing supporting the cult’s claims. This is just Saddam and the WMD allegations all over again, which also had a “large body of writing” that ended up being gibberish to anyone actually investigating it.

Small group says they’re growing. What a surprise.

You are, from what I can see monitoring reasonable rises in ‘socialism’ identification (which could mean a number of things) and then just assuming it’ll continue growing and then also saying it must also be heavily filtering down to communism based on one poll specifically, and which we have no historical polls to compare it to.

I gave you other polls, but more importantly I’m not just assuming proven trends will continue without basis, but by comparing it to other historical trends where support for socialism and communism rose. It climbs in response to decaying material conditions, which are observable in the US Empire. Your intention to ignore context, and to try to analyze everything as a static, unmoving abstract is again an example of metaphysics on your part, which is anti-scientific in analysis.