As a communist, organizing in the post-soviet world, any time I bring up how we can solve many of the basic problems of today via working class organizing and collectivizing production and distribution, inevitably those with understandings of existing socialism that stem from red scare interpretations wield these accusations like a club.
The soviet union was tremendously progressive, though of course as all existing phenomena, had real flaws. As communists, we need to defend the real gains of existing socialism by highlighting them, while learning from real flaws. To get a real analysis, we need to reject the ruling class appraisal of existing socialism, which includes novels and other works pushed to people to serve as convenient conversation-terminators, like you did earlier.
Did you learn anything new from my comments? Do you disagree with what I said? Why? I’m interested in the answer to all of these questions, not someone throwing a novel at me and refusing to engage with well-thought out and studied comments.
I understand, but I want to know why, and on what basis. If we can come to a mutual understanding, and work towards a better world, I would consider that a great victory for today.
Hmmm…Well, I just think that they’re bad dudes. They did stuff that was bad and they knew it was bad but they still did it. Take Bucharest, Romania, 1989. Ceausescu was communist and look where that took all of the country and its people.
Do you mean communists are bad because they are communists? What did they do that was bad, that they deliberately chose to do? Do you believe communism was the cause, or other factors?
Looking purely at the final years of the soviet union, where nationalist groups were rising and political instability on the rise, would be an error.
As a communist, organizing in the post-soviet world, any time I bring up how we can solve many of the basic problems of today via working class organizing and collectivizing production and distribution, inevitably those with understandings of existing socialism that stem from red scare interpretations wield these accusations like a club.
The soviet union was tremendously progressive, though of course as all existing phenomena, had real flaws. As communists, we need to defend the real gains of existing socialism by highlighting them, while learning from real flaws. To get a real analysis, we need to reject the ruling class appraisal of existing socialism, which includes novels and other works pushed to people to serve as convenient conversation-terminators, like you did earlier.
Did you learn anything new from my comments? Do you disagree with what I said? Why? I’m interested in the answer to all of these questions, not someone throwing a novel at me and refusing to engage with well-thought out and studied comments.
alr
Any thoughts?
no now I understand your pov better but I still don’t agree with you
Gotcha, why not?
I just have opinions.
I understand, but I want to know why, and on what basis. If we can come to a mutual understanding, and work towards a better world, I would consider that a great victory for today.
Hmmm…Well, I just think that they’re bad dudes. They did stuff that was bad and they knew it was bad but they still did it. Take Bucharest, Romania, 1989. Ceausescu was communist and look where that took all of the country and its people.
Do you mean communists are bad because they are communists? What did they do that was bad, that they deliberately chose to do? Do you believe communism was the cause, or other factors?
Looking purely at the final years of the soviet union, where nationalist groups were rising and political instability on the rise, would be an error.