A loosely moderated place to ask open ended questions
If your post is
- Open ended
- Not offensive
- Not regarding lemmy support (c/lemmy_support)
- not ad nauseam inducing (please make sure its a question that would be new to most members)
it’s welcome here!
- 0 users online
- 1 user / day
- 25 users / week
- 77 users / month
- 420 users / 6 months
- 3.31K subscribers
- 1.08K Posts
- 11.5K Comments
Fair enough, I shouldn’t extrapolate - my bad.
But at the very least it proves how easy it is for the meaning of “communist” to be twisted. Even the Nazi’s called themselves “national socialists” not because they had any remotely socialist policies but because it was popular. Anyone can start and lead a “communist” revolution and then pull a switchreoo at the last moment, and because communism typically involves a “dictatorship of the proletariat” this is exceedingly easy to do.
To talk further on the topic of education, I agree that communism is probably too underrepresented - but so is anarchism. People tended to loose interest with the communist manifesto after the gulags started; the only people who supported state communism post 1950’s was powergrabbing revolutionaries, and uneducated workers who were smart enough to see its advantages but not enough to see its immense drawbacks.
That’s why we study those systems. We (marxists) didn’t come to realise the nazis were not socialists out of nowhere, we saw what they said about their ideology, how they conducted it, what their class character was for society (the most important criteria), etc.
That’s why we uphold the USSR, the PRC, the DPRK… but not Nazi Germany or Pol Pot’s Cambodia. Because after studying them in and out (through our own framework, as anyone does) we see how they operated and still operate.
Only in the imperialist core (the west). During the 20th century, even after Stalin’s death, we saw Cuba, Burkina Faso, Chile, probably others I’m not remembering right now…
This is also the time of the Cold War, where our information in this core was filtered through the “leader of the free world”, the United States. And to this day when you find people that lived through it on this side, they will tell you (I’m not joking) that the United States is a champion of human rights and liberty. Even in Europe.
The gulag system (an acronym for the ministry of justice and corrections) was started under the Tsar so if we want to use them on a chart you won’t have a single data point but many. That’s why I picked Stalin’s death instead.
Right… that makes sense, though in my view it shouldn’t take an expert to spot an overt fascist.
Hold up, doesn’t the DPRK have forced labour camps? Didn’t they once sentence a western tourist to hard labour for stealing a poster? Again I’m not trying to say the west has never imprisoned people for dumb reasons, but forced labour??? Also China is hardly communist these days, and if I’m frank I feel like they align more closely with 1935 Nazi Germany than any kind of proletariat utopia.
Agreed, sorry I should have been more clear. Still, I wonder how many of those revolutions weren’t a “yay let’s implement a communist utopia” but instead a “hey lets trick the people into supporting our communist revolution”.
Yeah, it’s a little funny how often people will talk about how the US is some kind of gracious bringer of democracy. Maybe it started after their help in WW2?
Still, I think it’s fair to argue that the US is at least no worse than China or Russia.
Forced labour has existed and exists in virtually all prison systems to this day. It existed in Makhnovia, it existed in Revolutionary Catalonia too. It’s a historical phenomenon and while it does offend our modern sensibilities for various (correct) reasons, it’s a more complicated topic than it appears.
But I wouldn’t call them forced labour camps. What is the difference between a camp and a prison? I highly recommend this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BO83Ig-E8E.
During WW2, a ceasefire of sorts was declared from the US and their European, imperialist allies towards the Soviet Union.
It’s well known that the European powers hated the USSR ever since the October Revolution, and so they expected to let Hitler fight against them. This would weaken both countries and Europe expected they could just swoop in and finally destroy both.
This is not what happened obviously, as Hitler went west first, and the USSR fought Germany on their own.
During the war, you would see propaganda posters like these :
And yet right after the war, communications “broke down” between the two countries? No, the United States never hid who they were. This truce with the Soviet Union was merely temporary and enacted for various reasons. What we call the Cold War was effectively just the revival of anti-communist tensions that started in 1917.
The USA then started lending public money to European countries for rebuilding, known as the Marshall Program. The catch was that this money could only be used to buy American. And the USSR was not allowed to receive this help or any help.
This is how the United States finally brought itself to the status of superpower and was able to dictate history, policy, and diplomacy. That’s why some people today are feeling grateful to the USA (despite not living there or having ever lived there) and they don’t really even know why.
Even if everything we heard about Russia and China was absolutely true, if the death tolls were true, if the atrocity propaganda was true, if the human rights violation were all true, and even if we only counted the crimes of the US from the time the PRC has existed (and not for the whole 276 years of the USA), the US would still rack up a higher death and crime toll than both China and Russia combined.
you can hate china, but doing this is just asking to be wrong