• Demdaru@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s similiar, not the same. From what I recall, Americans didn’t have their country violently buttfucked behind a curtain, something that is still visible where I live - thankfully less so in the country itself, but it’s still embedded into people. And I don’t fear communism. I despise it. I do admit, maybe unjustly. Hard to feel otherwise though, seeing effects of one of the greatest, or at least highest scale shots at it’s implementation.

        However, yeah, my definition of socialism must be fucked, will educate myself further before making fool out of myself again. :|

        • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’d quite happily argue that the USSR never tried to implement it in the slightest.

          Can you imagine the politburo actually fighting to give up their privileged position? I can’t.

          • Demdaru@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            To be quite honest, it seems to me - and I can be wrong - that it simply substituted power of wealth for power of position. Where I live I know that during occupation people were deemed as important based on where they worked - because where they worked dictated what they could steal obtain, be it items, access or favors.

            There always will be someone on top, one way or the other. In capitalist society, it’s the guy who has the most money. In co- … socialist…? society it’s the guy with most connections.

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            Because there is not a way for communism to work… sounds great on paper but always ends the same.

              • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                8 months ago

                You can doubt it all you want, but communism’s fatal flaw is humans. They will always want more.

                • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Why is it bad for people to want more in Communism? Do you think once a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society would be reached, people would want to regress?

                  • StellarExtract@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    This is an aspect I’m genuinely curious about (as someone who is relatively uneducated on this subject) because my answer would be that yes, there will definitely be people who want to regress. There have always been individuals who are willing to sacrifice absolutely anything to obtain more material wealth or power. They’re a minority, but their existence has to be assumed and accounted for. For all of capitalism’s failings, one of its strengths is that it does give these people a path to follow that produces (some) benefit to society. How does a fully-implemented communist society deal with these individuals without them subverting and corrupting the system?

                  • SupraMario@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    That’s not how human nature works. You really think you can sit there and tell me that someone who did 10 years of school and has the knowledge to operate and save people should be getting the same as someone who’s job is to cook you fast food? You live in a fantasy land where the Star Trek replicators exists. No one is going to do more work for the same amount as someone who does less. Society doesn’t work this way.

        • iain@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          The problem is that people point to the problems of the USSR and say it’s because of communism, but when the USA does similar things, it’s just them fucking up, not because they’re capitalist. It’s a double standard hinted at by OP.

          The problem with the USSR was not that they were communist. I think that communism worked well for them, which magnified both their successes (beating nazis, reducing poverty, increasing literacy, getting to space, etc), but also magnified their mistakes (suppressing religion, art, etc).

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        It fit USSR interests to say that they were the standard bearer of communism back in the day. It fit US interests to say exactly the same. Neither had any reason to think about how the word was used prior to the USSR and if it actually applies at all.

        It’s no wonder that people who lived behind the Iron Curtain have just as bad an understanding of communism as people in the US. The USSR certainly didn’t want you reading theory outside of Marxist-Leninist material.

        • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          What’s your point exactly? I’m not reading some poorly written 10,000 word essay to try to figure out what you’re wanting to say.

          • whogivesashit@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Believing that the Nazis, who systematically gassed millions as a part of their ideology, is at all akin to any of the atrocities committed under the Soviet Union is historical revisionism in order to downplay the crimes of the fascists and, what you can clearly see in this thread already, foster anti communist sentiment with barely a reason why.

          • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            So it’s actually a pretty interesting read but I think this paragraph gets the idea across pretty well:

            (Obv out of context)

            Most current antisemitism in Eastern Europe is closely related to these debates, as nationalists strive to “fix” their nations’ collaboration (or in the case of the Baltics and Ukraine, participation) in the Holocaust with revised paradigms that equal everything out. One of the poisons of ultranationalism is the perceived need to construct a perfect history (no country on the planet has one of those). Another is hatred of local Jewish communities who have memory, or family, or collective memory, of nationalist neighbors turning viciously on their neighbors in 1941, and of the Soviets being responsible for their own grandparents or parents being saved from the Holocaust. In America, this would be akin to someone hating African Americans for having a different opinion of Washington or Jefferson because they were slaveholders.

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            A Jewish linguist/historian/activist talking about how equating the Soviets and the Nazis is rhetoric used to justify current and past antisemitism including holocaust collaboration.

            • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Ah, so it’s being used as chud fud.

              My comparison of the two stems from their harsh authoritarian/totalitarian nature as seen from an anarchist lens, nothing to do with genocide.

              • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Yeah so the thing is you’re still doing it, the whole “authoritarian” thing is another way of doing a false equivalence between the two.

                If you want to do an anarchist critique compare the USSR to bourgeoise democracies, it is a closer comparison.

                  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    You don’t know a lot of the history of bourgeois democracies if you think you can’t compare the worst the USSR has done with what bourgeois democracies have done.

                    Maybe you’d want to do it to stop taking part in holocaust trivialization, but you also insulted the Dovid Katz essay so IDK.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Socialism is not “Social Safety Nets,” and if you were knowledgeable about what you were talking about, you would say Socialism and attempts at Communism. Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production, and the USSR was a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The Communist party had stated goals of reaching Communism, a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society, by using Socialism. They never made it to Communism.

      The USSR of course isn’t the only form of Socialism, and isn’t the only method to achieve Communism, but what you just said makes absolutely no sense.

      Do you think that maybe people begin to understand what you’re talking about if you refer to Social Safety Nets as Social, not Socialism, because Social Safety Nets are not in fact Socialism?

      As a side note: terrible choice to use rape as a casual term for doing something bad. Be more empathetic.