I’m not being obtuse, this is my opinion on it: this is entirely expected and in line with what’s going on in Russia currently. Nothing about this is surprising.

Are you asking me to make a moral judgement? I think it’s a bit draconian, sure.

Are you asking me to expand more upon the dynamics in the Russian Federation right now, leading to why this is entitely unsurprising? The Russian Federation right now is split between 2 major and 1 minor groups:

1. The Nationalist Liberals. United Russia, the nationalist party, is the current dominant party in the Russian Federation and controls the largest number of seats in the State Duma. This is Putin’s political party. They have broad support due to opposing western imperialism, which devastated Russia in the aftermath of the dissolution of the USSR, but their support is shrinking in favor of group number 2 due to the failures of capitalism in Russia.

2. The Communists. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) is the second largest group in Russia, and controls the second most seats in the State Duma. In the last several years, communist party membership has skyrocketed, and a wave of soviet nostalgia has overtaken the populace. The nationalists are trying to steer that soviet nostalgia towarss Russian nationalism, but by and large this has resulted in more people moving to supporting a return of socialism. The CPRF critically supports the nationalists over group 3, which hardly anyone supports.

3. The pro-western Liberals. These are very unpopular, because the west looted and destroyed much of the gains made by the previous socialist system. Reconciliation with the west is an extremely unpopular view, but this group gets magnified in western viewpoints over the communists because they wish to present a narrative that Putin is unpopular.

The harsh truth is that Putin’s popularity in Russia is real because the nationalists stopped the outflow of wealth from the country, but this same group of nationalists largely keeps it for themselves, so the communists are rising to distrubute that wealth to the working classes and restore socialism. The pro-western liberals, which is who the subject of OP seems to belong to, are extremely unpopular, hence why the Russian state is cracking down on them to not much outcry from the Russian public.

Is that developed enough for you?

Socialism is pre-communism. Communism itself cannot fully exist until global socialism, but each individual country can begin the transition between capitalism and communism called “socialism.” Socialist states aren’t communist not because of imperialist aggression, but because communism itself is a higher, global mode of production.

Socialist countries exist under siege, but generally commit far less harm than capitalist countries.

Returning to the original comment, you just seem generally mixed up on terms and are drawing false conclusions from them.

That is what I think about it, though. This isn’t surprising or out of the norm with what we know. I’m not sure what special addition or commentary they want me to add.

They’re all over the place in the US Empire.

One problem with your argument here is that we actually do believe that there have been proper socialist countries governed by communist parties, it’s just that we understand that they exist under siege and aren’t “pure” like so many western leftists require. They are absolutely proper, but there is excess and mistakes made by administrative bodies meant to protect socialism that exist out of a genuine necessity to fight counter-revolution and imperialist aggression.

Further, we can compare peer countries by how well each system has worked at satisfying the needs of the people, where socialism absolutely has superiority. Capitalism’s death toll is higher both by rate and by magnitude as well.

No. Bukharin was both a Mechanist and a right-opportunist that rejected collectivization, and ultimately stood against the USSR.

I think it’s better for you to confront the ghost of Stalin than focus on what the USSR may have been had someone else been elected.

Stalin’s point was that it was better to focus on solidifying socialism in Russia over launching a suicidal attack on the peasantry immediately after establishing state power Stalin was wary of the peasantry, but did not follow through with Trotsky’s plan.

Further, there’s no evidence that the USSR would have been better off administratively had they elected Trotsky. The Fourth International itself was a mess, and Trotskyist parties are notorious for their lack of discipline and their tendency to endlessly split, rather than form a unified line and push for it. The Trotskyist parties that survive actually often return to Marxism-Leninism because of this, because Marxism-Leninism is correct.

The USSR did focus on international revolution, and aided many countries in their revolutions. Trotsky’s theory of Permanent Revolution was based on a distrust of the peasantry, believing them to undermine socialist construction and thus requiring a revolution in western Europe for long-term socialism in Russia. This ended up being false, and moreover, had the soviets not committed to building up heavy industry as much as they had, they would have lost to the Nazis in World War II.

I’m not sure what exactly you’re asking for, the nationalists governing Russia are cracking down on anti-war protestors. The article says there are around 2 dozen instances of this over the last few years.

The state of Israel has no right to exist, as it is a genocidal settler colony on stolen land. Palestine should have its original land returned.

Ukrainians had control and autonomy as the Ukrainian SSR. They were not a target of genocide either, these claims are utterly unsourced and originate with the Nazis.

The soviets tried to preserve Ukrainian culture while establishing a common “soviet identity,” in line with being a multinational federation.

The Politburo was also kept in the dark about how bad the famine was getting:

From: Archive of the President of the Russian Federation. Fond 3, Record Series 40, File 80, Page 58.

Excerpt from the protocol number of the meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party (Bolsheviks) “Regarding Measures to Prevent Failure to Sow in Ukraine, March 16th, 1932.

The Political Bureau believes that shortage of seed grain in Ukraine is many times worse than what was described in comrade Kosior’s telegram; therefore, the Political Bureau recommends the Central Committee of the Communist party of Ukraine to take all measures within its reach to prevent the threat of failing to sow [field crops] in Ukraine.

Signed: Secretary of the Central Committee – J. STALIN

Letter to Joseph Stalin from Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine regarding the course and the perspectives of the sowing campaign in Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

There are also isolated cases of starvation, and even whole villages [starving]; however, this is only the result of bungling on the local level, deviations [from the party line], especially in regard of kolkhozes. All rumours about “famine” in Ukraine must be unconditionally rejected. The crucial help that was provided for Ukraine will give us the opportunity to eradicate all such outbreaks [of starvation].

Letter from Joseph Stalin to Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

Comrade Kosior!

You must read attached summaries. Judging by this information, it looks like the Soviet authority has ceased to exist in some areas of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Can this be true? Is the situation invillages in Ukraine this bad? Where are the operatives of the OGPU [Joint Main Political Directorate], what are they doing?

Could you verify this information and inform the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party about taken measures.

Sincerely, J. Stalin

The origins of such a story of forced starvation came from the Nazi newspaper Völkischer Beobachter in 1933. Völkischer Beobachter reported on it as intentional, and then spread the story around further. We are not qustioning the legitimacy of the famine, but whether or not it was intentional, which all evidence post-opening of the soviet archives points to it not being intentional.

We are having this conversation because you believe Nazi propaganda, and distrust historical evidence.

The soviets did not force assimilation, nor erase Ukrainian culture, not force a famine. Ukraine was a soviet republic in the multinational USSR, with its own preserved culture. “Soviet” is not an ethnicity, but was a multinational identity. The origins of such a story of forced starvation came from the Nazi newspaper Völkischer Beobachter in 1933.

None of us are falling for propaganda here except for you.

The Polish People’s Republic wasn’t a member nation of the soviet union, but was a member of the Warsaw Pact. That’s like asking why Cuba was left out of the USSR. You’re deeply unserious.

You keep repeating literal Nazi propaganda, unsourced. I’m already in reality and am looking past decades old Nazi propaganda, you should try it sometime.

Communists exist whether you like it or not. Communists made Lemmy to begin with.

Ukrainian culture was preserved. Bourgeois farming was replaced with collectivized farming, and those who fought the red army and made the famine worse were targeted. Russians did not replace Ukrainians nor did the soviets incite a famine, adverse weather conditions started a famine and the kulaks made it worse by torching their farms and killing their livestock to protest collectivization.

You are parroting literal Nazi propaganda. I know Canada has a thing for Nazis, but this is beyond the normal levels.

Because “soviet” isn’t a nationality, but a multinational federation of socialist republics.

The slave owners killed by the northerners were primarily white southerners that tortured and killed slaves. Kulaks were not an ethnicity to be targeted for eradication, but a class that often violently resisted collectivization. Kulaks that complied were largely left alone.

As I proved to you, the soviets actually supported the preservation of Ukrainian identity, which was oppressed by the Tsarist empire. The soviet union was a multinational federation, it was in everyone’s interests for people to not starve, as you need people to farm. Russians were not trying to replace Ukrainians, a naturally occuring famine was made worse by kulaks resisting collectivization. After collectivization, crop yields were higher, and famine eradicated.

You are parroting literal Nazi propaganda.

Oh awesome! Cuba’s an area I need more development on, thanks for the rec!

Kulaks were not an ethnic group, but a class of bourgeois farmers. That’s like saying the US outlawing slavery “killed Confederate culture.” The famine was not preventable, and there’s absolutely no evidence that the soviets wanted to replace ethnic minorities, the opposite is true. The soviets tried to preserve Ukrainian culture while establishing a common “soviet identity,” in line with being a multinational federation.

The Politburo was also kept in the dark about how bad the famine was getting:

From: Archive of the President of the Russian Federation. Fond 3, Record Series 40, File 80, Page 58.

Excerpt from the protocol number of the meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party (Bolsheviks) “Regarding Measures to Prevent Failure to Sow in Ukraine, March 16th, 1932.

The Political Bureau believes that shortage of seed grain in Ukraine is many times worse than what was described in comrade Kosior’s telegram; therefore, the Political Bureau recommends the Central Committee of the Communist party of Ukraine to take all measures within its reach to prevent the threat of failing to sow [field crops] in Ukraine.

Signed: Secretary of the Central Committee – J. STALIN

Letter to Joseph Stalin from Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine regarding the course and the perspectives of the sowing campaign in Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

There are also isolated cases of starvation, and even whole villages [starving]; however, this is only the result of bungling on the local level, deviations [from the party line], especially in regard of kolkhozes. All rumours about “famine” in Ukraine must be unconditionally rejected. The crucial help that was provided for Ukraine will give us the opportunity to eradicate all such outbreaks [of starvation].

Letter from Joseph Stalin to Stanislaw Kosior, 1st secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, April 26th, 1932.

Comrade Kosior!

You must read attached summaries. Judging by this information, it looks like the Soviet authority has ceased to exist in some areas of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Can this be true? Is the situation invillages in Ukraine this bad? Where are the operatives of the OGPU [Joint Main Political Directorate], what are they doing?

Could you verify this information and inform the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist party about taken measures.

Sincerely, J. Stalin

The origins of such a story of forced starvation came from the Nazi newspaper Völkischer Beobachter in 1933. Völkischer Beobachter reported on it as intentional, and then spread the story around further. We are not qustioning the legitimacy of the famine, but whether or not it was intentional, which all evidence post-opening of the soviet archives points to it not being intentional.