• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    To be fair. “that wasn’t true Communism” is true. The problem is dictatorships keep getting sold with its name. Ironically proving how hard it would be to actually achieve a world or country of communes.

    • Roflmasterbigpimp@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The only kind of Communism I’m willing to accept is the Star Trek Communism. Until then I’m pro Team “Social market economy”!

    • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      The bolshivek revolution made it certain that any communist nation is a dictatorship. The menshiveks would have achieved better results.

      • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        The Mensheviks wouldn’t have been much more different than German and French socialdemocrats who accepted capitalism. But there were other relevant left-leaning political forces during the Russian Revolution that were neither Bolsheviks nor Mensheviks - I wonder what happened with them?

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s the problem though. When you study revolutions you overwhelmingly find there is a group doing reforms in a civilized way after the previous government is removed. And they almost always get lined up against a wall by a power hungry asshole.

        • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          You have to remember that your slow and patient reforms can drag their feet to the point it becomes indistinguishable from malice. That’s what happened to e.g. the “socialists” who allied with the Russian provisional government and kept supporting the war against the will of the people.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Well that’s what the Bolsheviks claim at any rate. It’s always what the dictator claims.

            • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              The masses supported the Bolsheviks in the summer and fall of 1917 because they were the most radically and consistently antiwar party, regardless of their other faults. It was the most urgent issue in politics at the time for reasons that should be obvious. This is a pretty widely accepted narrative even among right wing historians.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                I agree with that but it’s still just one issue that could have been solved with actual representation.

      • sudo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Toussant would’ve been better for Haiti than Dessalines. But him being a tyrant doesnt make me not an abolitionist.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Except those people prefer the Chinese and USSR style of social autocracies to actual socialist projects. Some of them even trash worker coops, although that was more true to the InfraHaz style lolcows than the tankies of lemmy…

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Social Autocracy, oh wow that’s a new one on me. They’re just brutal dictatorships with a shiny veneer.

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Right, the problem is they turn around and defend the dictatorship because obviously Marxism cannot survive less you continuously sanitize the marketplace of ideas.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Well their version can’t at any rate. I’d say Marxism can’t survive violence in the ideas market.