A reminder that you can join orgs like PSL, the two-party system is designed to prevent change and we can break it.

jorjor well rule 34

You can edit titles! :)

Fair enough.

The solution is working class organizing, with well-trained and disciplined people’s millitias. Pacifism gets people killed, as does adventurism. The only way out of the death spiral is revolution.

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.

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.

The place where the Zionist mods permabanned me for saying the democrats are complicit in Palestinian genocide? Checks out.

Edit: Oh, it’s Eldritch, makes even more sense. For some reason they like to insult me but don’t respond when I explain things to them.

Gotcha, why not?

Any thoughts?

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.

It’s a sarcastic reference to communists correctly pointing out that the deaths on June 4th, 1989 were in and around Beijing, not on Tian’anmen square itself. It’s a comment intentionally undermining how communists are dispelling Red Scare mythos.

Yes, there’s a chance he’d still be alive today if he did so, and there’d be at least one fewer fascist.

I’d prefer if we could come to an understanding. The Red Scare isn’t over, and repeating its dogma stands in the way of progressing to a better, more equitable world. Attacking socialism and communism based on novels, while refusing to engage with academic literature on the subject, is making it difficult for those who organize in real life to do our jobs as activists.

I’d rather read real historical texts and accounts from historians than unverified biographies pushed heavily by anti-communist western media. Consider giving the books I linked a read.

The USSR was a wonderful, progressive project. Life expectancies doubled, literacy rates went from 20-30% to 99.9%. Additonally, the USSR brought dramatic democratization to society. First-hand accounts from Statesian journalist Anna Louise Strong in her book This Soviet World describe soviet elections and factory councils in action. Statesian Pat Sloan even wrote Soviet Democracy to describe in detail the system the soviets had built for curious Statesians to read about, and today we have Professor Roland Boer’s Socialism in Power: On the History and Theory of Socialist Governance to reference.

When it comes to social progressivism, the soviet union was among the best out of their peers, so instead we must look at who was actually repressed outside of the norm. In the USSR, it was the capitalist class, the kulaks, the fascists who were repressed. This is out of necessity for any socialist state. When it comes to working class freedoms, however, the soviet union represented a dramatic expansion. Soviet progressivism was documented quite well in Albert Syzmanski’s Human Rights in the Soviet Union.

The USSR was an internationalist federation of nation-states. They recognized the progressive nature of nationalist movements against imperialism, such as in Algeria, Cuba, and Vietnam, but tried to promote internationalism as the basis of cooperation.

This extended to Lithuania, which was often used as a “showcase for socialism” to the west. Lithuania, for instance, surpassed its pre-war industrial output by 90% just two years after reaching pre-war figures in 1948, bolstered by a non-repayable Soviet subsidy of 200 million rubles for reconstruction. The region boasted the highest quality roads in the USSR, with Lithuania benefiting from a 300-kilometer expressway considered the best in the Union, featuring modern overpasses and interchanges. Per capita consumption figures clearly illustrate this advantage: Estonia stood at 151% of the all-Union level, Latvia at 137%, and Lithuania at 127%. This is backed by consistent polling showing life deteriorating after socialism. As for Finland, they were far-right Nazi collaborators, and had territorial disputes due to preceding decades of war.

Overall, the USSR was immensely positive, and taking an anti-communist position is unwarranted.

My favorite part so far was Noam Chomsky telling Epstein that “Venezuela isn’t real socialism,” lmao.

Chomsky’s always been terrible.

For what it’s worth, I have more faith in Nutomic turning around socially than I do Rimu, precisely due to being a Marxist. This doesn’t excuse Nutomic in any way, but it’s worth considering.

For anyone that hasn’t read or listened to Parenti before, I highly recommend the “Yellow Parenti” Speech and Blackshirts and Reds | Audiobook

This post is about PieFed, which does track up and down votes.