• @leanleft
    link
    English
    14 hours ago

    Governance has deeper roblems that trace to the top. We are at the bottom… hell.

  • Praise Idleness
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1265 months ago

    A communist nation that can really provide all that is as realistic as capitalistic utopia.

    • @SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      795 months ago

      Not a tankie, but the USSR had mostly solved this problem, despite all its other issues. There did exist some homelessness, but nowhere near the extent of current USA.

      • pelya
        link
        fedilink
        185 months ago

        Sure, you could get a piece of land in Siberian tundra at any time, I would not call that housing.

        Moving to a city was way more complicated than in capitalist US. You could not simply buy an apartment. You had to be allocated an apartment by the government. And you needed connections for that. Or bribes. Ideally both. If you think your local rabid Republicans do not care for little wage slave men, you never experienced USSR, it was like that but 100x worse.

          • pelya
            link
            fedilink
            -35 months ago

            Yup. And networking would inevitably involve vodka. All major decisions would eventually involve vodka in USSR.

            • GrayoxOP
              link
              55 months ago

              One of Stalin’s failures almost any tankie won’t deny.

              • @AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                -3
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Vodka had been linked to the Russian economy under multiple Czars. I’m not sure that Stalin could have separated the two even if he had wanted to. Admittedly it doesn’t appear that he wanted to.

                I’m pretty sure that the USSR was screwed the moment that Lenin returned from exile in Germany, or when Wilson was elected. Take your pick.

                The Menchaviks would have been a better government.

                • @OurToothbrush
                  link
                  2
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  The mechaviks literally wanted to continue ww1 and have a psuedo democracy where the bourgeoisie were literally guaranteed a majority of seats, wtf are you talking about?

                • GrayoxOP
                  link
                  -25 months ago

                  I just find it ironic that Stalin was everything that the party worried about Trotsky becoming.

      • @Mercival@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        -45 months ago

        Well, I’m from a post-USSR country and a substantial part of this was the criminalization of homelessness. Can’t have homeless people, if you lock them up (be it in a prison or asylum).

        Then again, just about anyone, who did not conform to the party’s message got locked up. Getting your place bugged at the slightest hint you might be up to something disagreeable and all that good stuff. The secret police could disappear and or beat you up without any real justification.

        I hate late-stage capitalism as much as you, but coming from a country that’s been through this, I am extremely reluctant to give the rotten and frankly repugnant USSR regime any credit.

      • SloganLessons
        link
        fedilink
        585 months ago

        This is a trick question, the real answer is that there weren’t real communist countries

            • @OurToothbrush
              link
              55 months ago

              “social democracy only works by exploiting the global south” canard.

              Yeah, I could see finding this unconvincing if you haven’t read theory, history, or were just cool with benefiting from imperialism

      • Praise Idleness
        link
        fedilink
        English
        135 months ago

        I mean even in the case of USSR they had to wait for more than a decade to actually get a livable apartment, not to mention severe lack of infrastructure…

        But of course, better than people just kicked out to the streets. But then again, less is not none. The housing situation definitely didn’t do USSR’s overall economic status any favor.

        People at least had somewhere to go

        that’s just moving the goal post, isn’t it?

      • Dr. Moose
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        Soviet Union? It was uncommon for a family of 6 to live in a small apartment. You can even see it in old soviet movies where apartments would be separated by curtains (common comedy trope).

      • probablyaCat
        link
        fedilink
        -25 months ago

        I’m sure there were extra houses after all those people that starved to death.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          105 months ago

          In Communist countries people starve to death because of famine, in Capitalist countries people also strave to death because of famine while still starving to death after famines are over because they cant afford groceries.

        • probablyaCat
          link
          fedilink
          -25 months ago

          Woohoo both systems suck. You can actually believe that just because one system is bad, what is considered the opposite is also bad. Marx was not some omniscient doctor manhattan. He had some ideas. Some were good critiques on capitalist culture. Others were fantasy that do not function in the real world.

          • GrayoxOP
            link
            35 months ago

            Notice how the folks arguing in favor of Communism have sources and receipts, while the folks arguing against it have done nothing but regurgitated Capitalist propaganda. Also note folks who are opposed to Communism and Marx’s philosophy are always forced to admit that it only works on paper, because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆
              link
              -15 months ago

              It’s funny how upset it makes people when you point out the elephant in the room.

            • Praise Idleness
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -75 months ago

              No one is going to deny that making perpetual motion device is good. How are you going to do that?

              Do you have source and receipts for real life communism solving housing problem? Not being better than capitalism. Solving. Being better than capitalism is kinda low bar you know. There are plenty of other things that real life capitalism does better than real life communism, hence communism failure. No one is going to show up with receipts and sources because obvious.

              You show us tents as a capitalist solution. That’s not a capitalist solution. That’s the problem itself. You’re misleading.

              because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

              Can you at least try to sound less douche about things?

              • GrayoxOP
                link
                65 months ago

                The joke is that Capitalism DOES NOT have a solution to homelessness because there is zero profit motive to solve it. And facts dont care about your feelngs, you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest. Capitalist Economists study Das Kapital because Marx was so fucking spot on.

                • Praise Idleness
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -25 months ago

                  Yes, that’s why there is no pure capitalist country anywhere.

                  you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest.

                  Why are you keep doing this? I said I don’t disagree with Marx. It’d be nice if communism can happen. Facts don’t care about your feelings either and all the shitty attemps of communism failed due to human being shitty. If you have to kill off people to keep the ideology, only to fail after about few decades, it has some reality problems.

                  And again, I cannot stress this enough, can you please stop sounding like a 16 year old kid who just read few paragraphs of Marx going iamverysmart about it?

                • @WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -45 months ago

                  No need to refute Marx, reality has already proven time and time again that communism doesn’t work in practice.

                  Btw your argument only applies to “pure” capitalism, without any government interference. Homelessness is not really an issue in many European countries.

    • GrayoxOP
      link
      -145 months ago

      Yeah that’s called late stage Communism, which we have never achieved as humanity. Late stage Capitalism is currently pushing more and more folks into dangerous housing situations like the bottom right quadrant of this meme. Capitalism and Utopia are oxymorons while Communism and Utopia are synonymous.

      • Praise Idleness
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Communism and your concept of utopia are synonymous. Communism and utopia are not synonymous.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          -5
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Call me old fashion but no one living on the streets and having their basic needs met sounds pretty utopian to me.

          • @MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            45 months ago

            They don’t call you old fashioned for that, they call you tankie. It’s because they’re mad that you don’t buy the bullshit they push. Look at all the claims they make about the USSR here while providing no evidence or context for the situations they claim people were living in.

            They compare apples to oranges when it’s communism they are criticizing and stick their fingers in their ears while screaming when it comes to criticizing crapitalism.

          • xerazal
            link
            fedilink
            English
            15 months ago

            There were still people that lived in the streets in the USSR. Also, the housing the USSR provided wasn’t really that… great… I watch a Russian YouTuber (NFKRZ) who has talked about Soviet architecture in not just Russia, but other former USSR countries and shows that yes it’s good they were built, they weren’t very well built.

            The USSR had many problems, and bureaucracy was a big problem. I never understood why tankies love the USSR so much when the USSR didn’t truly get rid of class. Those in the government lived like kings compared to the common man, who yes lived better than they had before but still not that well due to the bloated and mismanagement of the government.

            Idk, the fact that they even had a centralized government like that seems like… the opposite of communism to me.

            • @cecinestpasunbot
              link
              English
              5
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              I think what people don’t fully understand is that Marxism is meant to be scientific. That means that there will likely be many imperfect and failed attempts at building a socialist society before one comes along that is stable enough to outlast outside interference from capitalist states.

              As such, most people I know who like the USSR are also it’s biggest critiques. Unfortunately, there is so much misinformation about the USSR that most discussions about it online are just about delineating truth from propaganda.

          • @GrapesOfAss@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            -1
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Ah yes because there was no one living on the streets, yes because a propaganda told me that it must be true.

            I guess killing literal millions of your own citizens is better than being homeless, huh?

      • probablyaCat
        link
        fedilink
        -25 months ago

        Yeah those soviets sure got rid of the homeless problem. Can’t be homeless when you were intentionally starved to death.

        • xor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          The USSR and communism are separate things

          • GrayoxOP
            link
            -65 months ago

            Slaps Table Thank You!!

  • @Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    94
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Why is this shit always communist vs capitalist, like we’ve only got 2 answers avaliable. You fuckers never set foot in a communist country and worship this shit

    Fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens? Don’t really think showing a picture of some buildings is enough to prove that they actually solved any issues. They may have solved those issues for some who were lucky enough to get an apartment, but don’t be a hexbear and pretend they housed everyone.

    And no, I don’t want a response with a link about hurr duer capitalism bad, yeah I know, but I live in capitalism so I already know that.

    • 小莱卡
      link
      fedilink
      205 months ago

      This is not “one or the another” situation, communism is the next qualitative stage in development of society. It solves the primary contradiction that we experience in capitalism, that is socialized production being privatized by individuals, aka capitalists.

      You can’t just declare communism by signing a document, because it is a process of development in which small quantitative changes in production (socialism) lead to a qualitative change (communism), thus to achieve the communism stage you have to achieve a certain level of development.

      This is why China is considered a communist country by marxists-leninist even though qualitatively it is a capitalist country. They are actively working to develop communism, this can be clearly seen throughout their rhetoric (i.e. “The Governance of China”) and their material results.

      • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        -95 months ago

        The problem with China being that it’s authoritarian, not that it’s capitalist or communist. There’s no choice other than the Communist Party, so when the party is wildly corrupt, you have no recourse at all short of revolution. And we all know what China does to counter-revolutionaries.

        • @OurToothbrush
          link
          95 months ago

          If the party was corrupt they wouldn’t be executing the rich and powerful whenever they did a financial crime. Come on.

        • 小莱卡
          link
          fedilink
          85 months ago

          And that is a problem to whom? Every single state is authoritarian, the question is whose interests are they protecting.

          China is clearly a dictatorship of the proletariat and they use authority to protect the interests of the proletariat. Yes, sometimes their policy is wrong and does harm but ultimately they work to improve their policies, governing is a learning experience after all.

          • @TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -15 months ago

            It’s a problem because people don’t feel like stakeholders when they don’t have a say and can’t participate in their system of governance. This in turn means that they aren’t incentivized to willingly participate and have to be forced or indoctrinated, both of which are violations of human rights.

            • @OurToothbrush
              link
              55 months ago

              Do you think people there don’t participate in elections? The party has literally 100 million members, people in China are politically involved.

            • 小莱卡
              link
              fedilink
              45 months ago

              People that want to participate in politics can join the CPC, in fact it has more than 100m official members. Also inside the CPC there are several factions with differents views, so no its not a monolithic entity.

        • @purahna@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          75 months ago

          What does “authoritarian” mean? Shouldn’t we reserve that word for the country with the largest police force, biggest military, and the highest prison population per capita in the world?

          • @HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            -25 months ago

            I wonder, do you think that the people that are being “re-educated” are counted as prison population…?

            I suppose that when you simply kill or disappear people that are political dissenters that you don’t have to worry about that prison population

        • @cecinestpasunbot
          link
          English
          45 months ago

          People don’t have much recourse in the US either. The two party system just obfuscates that reality. I’d actually argue that because revolution is the only alternative to the communist party in China, the government has to be more responsive to citizen demands than the US.

    • Unaware7013
      link
      fedilink
      20
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens?

      Bruh, centuries of capitalist exploitation of its citizens and treating them like a disposable commodity would like to have a word on the whole ‘citizens killed by their own country’ topic.

      How many thousands or millions of citizens die yearly because they can’t afford to live in this fucked up system?

      • @WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        -165 months ago

        None? People don’t starve to death in western countries. And where they do the issue is lack of infrastructure. A communist government couldn’t conjure the resources needed to build that out of thin air either.

        • Unaware7013
          link
          fedilink
          235 months ago

          None? People don’t starve to death in western countries. And where they do the issue is lack of infrastructure.

          “This thing doesn’t happen, and when it does, it’s not the fault of capitalism itself” is a monumentally stupid argument. Especially when talking about the homeless population, which absolutely does have people that starve.

          A communist government couldn’t conjure the resources needed to build that out of thin air either.

          And the capitalist economy chose not to build it because it wasn’t profitable, or after it was built, it was too expensive to be used.

          • 小莱卡
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Not to mention that the people in the global south starve because their food production literally goes to the west. What a fucking moron.

          • @Smk@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            -45 months ago

            Where is your great communist country ?? Oh wait, it’s not there. It doesn’t exist and it never will. Capitalism works. Not perfect but it works. Your idealized version of communism is great but so is my idealized version of capitalism where everyone has a shot at the American dream!

            • @Perfide@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              45 months ago

              Bullshit it doesn’t happen in the west. 12.8% of US households were considered food insecure in 2022, with 5.1% of that being considered to have VERY low food security(Source). Over 20,000 Americans died of malnutrition in 2022, more than double the number in 2018(Source).

              There’s also nearly 30 vacant homes for every 1 homeless person in the US, so there’s plenty of room, too. Nobody needs a 2nd home when over half a million people don’t even have one.

                • @Faresh
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  5 months ago

                  In the west, the main cause of malnutrition isn’t a lack of calories, but a difficulty in access (from availability or price or other factors) to healthy foods with the required nutrition for a healthy life or from an excess of certain nutrients. This is often manifested as conditions such a obesity and type II diabetes. So malnutrition does impact people in the west.

              • @WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                0
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Maybe you should have actually read that article before linking it. It discusses in detail the reasons for malnutrition being an issue, and none of those reasons is being unable to afford food. The problems are typically due to age and diseases.

        • @purahna@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          55 months ago

          saying that “people don’t starve to death in western countries” without understanding in the slightest the actual harms of food insecurity and how it leads to death is a very accurate representation of the scientific ignorance and sociopathic lack of empathy that capitalism supporters bring to the table in these kinds of discussions a hundred times out of a hundred

    • @OsrsNeedsF2P
      link
      12
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Remind me, how many capitalist countries have killed millions of their own citizens?

      Germany, pre-communist China, Japan, Armenia, pre-USSR Russia, Pakistan…

      Edit: if apparently this isn’t the point, why so passionately call out the communist killcount?

      • 小莱卡
        link
        fedilink
        95 months ago

        Not to mention all the fascist militaries supported by the US that regularly engaged on mass murders of “communists”. Indonesia, brazil, chile, south korea, south vietnam, etc… Ultimately they dont care, they just want to discredit communism by whatever means possible.

      • See, this is what the fuck I’m talking about.

        You’re so dense. I’m not advocating or simping got capitalism here. That’s what I’m trying to communicate, but you’re too fucking dense to even see that when I lay it out.

        Both are bad. Just because I say these turds who worship an imaginary and propagandized version of communism are dorks doesn’t mean I’m arguing in favor of capitalism. For fucks sake learn to read

        • @TheOneAndOnly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          35 months ago

          You are 100% correct in your assertion, my anti Mario sex toy friend, and I love your passion. I worry that the minute you call someone’s intelligence into question, they’ll take a defensive posture and stop thinking critically. Critical thinking is what we need more than anything else in this world right now. That’s what’s in short supply. It’s why the news is constantly being flooded with new things, and why there are so few media outlets that don’t have a slant. If I can get you outraged at team blue, or team red, or team US, or team THEM, your anger overrides your reason and you stop thinking about who benefits from the distraction provided by us arguing over whatever this new bullshit thing is we’re arguing over. Hopefully that last statement makes sense.

    • mycorrhiza they/them
      link
      5
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens

      Most of these articles cite the Black Book of Communism, which goes to absurd lengths to inflate the death toll of Communism, for example counting all the millions of nazi and soviet soldiers killed on the eastern front as victims of communism, counting the entire death toll of the Vietnam war, and even counting declining birth rates as deaths due to communism.

      Noam Chomsky used the same methodology to argue that, according to Black Book logic, capitalism in India alone, from 1947–1979, could be blamed for more deaths than communism worldwide from 1917–1979.

      https://web.archive.org/web/20160921084037/http://www.spectrezine.org/global/chomsky.htm

    • @Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      55 months ago

      I’m still confused and alarmed that the only alternative brought up is communism, not socialism. So far as I know, the core difference is transfer of power - one is peaceful, one is violent.

      So in communism, your home might be six feet underground because “It is necessary to achieve the revolution, comrade.” Absolutely zero chance of a leader that wants the best for their people, apparently.

      • @Cowbee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        355 months ago

        That’s incorrect.

        Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production. There sre many, many forms, such as Anarcho-Syndicalism, Marxism-Leninism, Democratic Socialism, Market Socialism, Libertarian Socialism, Anarcho-Communism, Council Communism, Left Communism, and more.

        Communism is a more specific form of Socialism, by which you have achieved a Stateless, Classless, moneyless society. Many Communist ideologies are transitional towards Communism, such as the USSR’s Marxism-Leninism or China’s Dengism and Maoism.

        Whether by reform or Revolution, the form doesn’t change.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          175 months ago

          Personally Star Trek is my favorite form of Communism.

          • @Cowbee@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            105 months ago

            Pretty sure that’s everyone’s ideal, across all forms of leftism, except perhaps Le Guin’s Anarchist societies she writes about.

            • @AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              -45 months ago

              Holy shit. That makes so much sense as to why I hated those books as a kid. Thanks for that insight. I knew something wasn’t working properly in Earthsea.