nifty

Yeah, “Nazis” and “Kulaks”

Please stop trying to fool people with your revisionist and rose colored glasses historical fiction. Cherry picking some out of context quote is just disingenuous, and doesn’t make sense for me to continue discussing this then.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_Stalin

Some leaders of a country indeed do not have its best interests in mind because they’re self-interested. This is why it helps to have an educated public, and a democratic system of governance. When I look at all the countries subjugated by imperialists, I notice that each one of them has its own reasons for failing and succeeding, that’s all I am saying. It’s easy to distract your citizens by saying that all your problems are the fault of those greedy capitalists.

It is not questionable that Socialism was better for the Soviets than Tsarism or Capitalism. This is an established fact, as life expectancy doubled, literacy rates over tripled to over 99% (more than any western country), science and technology dramatically improved, wealth disparity lowered and total wealth raised dramatically. The return of Capitalism caused 7 million excess deaths.

You’re whitewashing history. Yes, when you go from relatively less to relatively more, you’ll experience improvements like life expectancy and child height. But that doesn’t mean anything when compared to the bigger picture of a failing and disingenuous social and economic model. There have been many analyses on the quality of life under the Soviet Union, and I’ll specifically mention only these sources since you’re so intent on painting a picture of harmony and glory

https://www.learnliberty.org/blog/myths-about-the-soviet-union-inequality-poverty-and-quality-of-life/

https://www.adamsmith.org/research/back-in-the-ussr

https://www.ranker.com/list/life-in-the-soviet-union/kellen-perry

I am not interested in “winning” for one economic tool or another. What I don’t like is someone pretending the bad stuff didn’t happen, or blaming all the bad stuff on someone else. It’s childish and disingenuous.

As for the idea that “individualism” is punished in Socialism, the reality is that individualism can better flourish under it. There is no need to have Capitalists dictate production and exchange, rather than the whole of society. I think it would benefit you greatly to read some basic theory and history of AES countries if you want to bat against them in service of something else.

No, this is just rose glasses idealism and isn’t backed by any facts or history. What is backed by facts is that humans are greedy, self-interested and self-preserving in any scenario.

From a source (linked below):

As the 1990s progressed, the Stalinist period and the first half of the twentieth century in general increasingly retained the attention of scholars interested in the Soviet Union. Everyday Soviet life was seen as a history of repression, rationing, privation, famine, “survival strategies,” control, and social stratification. It was intimately tied to the campaign for Soviet culturedness (kul’turnost’), meaning the inculcation of proper manners and taste, which began in the second half of the 1930s. In these years, the regime recognized the legitimacy of consumption, notably through slogans proclaiming that life “became better and gayer” with the introduction of luxury consumer goods (Soviet champagne, caviar, chocolate, perfume, etc.), which were nonetheless accessible only to groups that the regime considered privileged.

Indeed, the distribution of objects as rewards was central to the social policies of Communist countries. Following the October Revolution, the distribution of noble and bourgeois property among workers and Bolshevik leaders at all levels, which was part of an urban campaign for housing redistribution, lent concrete meaning to the reversal of social hierarchies and confirmed the right of the neediest citizens to oppress those who were once the most privileged within the latter’s own apartments, which were now transformed into communal residences.

https://shs.cairn.info/article/E_ANNA_682_0305?lang=en

One more for reference:

Soviet beggars found themselves in an ambivalent situation. The authorities wanted to exclude them from the future Communist society, but, incapable of solving the begging problem, they simply concealed it from the 1930s until the mid-1950s so as not to contradict the USSR’s image as a prosperous state —even as they made it impossible to devise any form of welfare policy towards them. The launch of a program aimed at solving the begging problem in the second half of the 1950s led to a debate in the press, which exposed the contradictions between the official discourse and social reality.

The Nordic model isn’t a socialism model which works for socialism purists, but it makes the most sense for those who don’t want to be subjected to oppression from one source or another.

I didn’t misunderstand anything about BRICS, I said exactly what you’re saying, that these countries succeeded because they were more unified in their approach to outside instigators. Corruption (greed) and lack of unity has been the bane of the failure examples you’re citing.

Please spare me the oppression politics slogans. You can’t live your life on other people’s charity anymore than you can run a country on the good will of others. People will always be assholes to each others, and it’s the responsibility of leaders in a country to give a shit and figure out how to make their country survive. Look at the history of Singapore, and how much outside influence tried to destabilize it. The point is that the root cause of failure in many nations is within, not without.

As for the USSR, while it certainly had very real problems, ultimately the Socialist system was a dramatic improvement on the Tsarist regime and was far superior to modern Capitalism.

I don’t know, this is questionable. A lot of science and tech achievements were more related to competition with capitalists nations. It’s hard to say at this point, nothing happened in a vacuum.

Capitalism must be replaced with Socialism. The Nordic Model is not “sensible,” it’s dying.

The Nordic Model is socialism, it just co-exists with a regulated capitalism. You’re wrong about any death of this model, if you look at GDP growth https://www.nordicstatistics.org/news/nordic-gdp-growth-returns-to-pre-pandemic-levels/. It has its issues, but it’s a far better alternative to becoming subjugated by Stalin-like overlords and/or having everyone be equally poor.

You’re just going to have to live with the fact that some people will always reject the centralized proletariat control of production because 1) people, even in socialist systems, will always be greedy and cannot be trusted, and 2) people desire individuality and autonomy. A persons life is finite, they’re not here to be a slave for capitalist or to be a bee in the hive mind, there needs to be a system which lets someone exercise their individuality and autonomy without creating social ruin.

How does that discount my point? Anyone can edit it.

lol what a cherry picked example, ignoring ranks of his people getting picked up by state agents to be put to death. How disingenuous

Anyone can edit it, what’s your problem?

I mean, every country to date has been an ethnostate of one type or another, with the exception of what America wanted or purported to be. I’d add Canada and Australia to that as well. Have a look at these socialists states, which one isn’t centered around a dominant ethnicity? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_states. So I don’t think using the label of “ethnostate” to disparage democratic counties is justified.

Second, I agree that the global south is heavily exploited, but that seriously discounts successful countries in BRICS or East Asia. We need to understand why those countries succeeded, and others could not, and a lot of the failures of global south actors have to do with corruption and lack of solidarity with each other. Granted, imperial powers instigated instability in every continent, but it didn’t work many times, especially in East Asia. Africa is a great example of failing to realize its potential, a unionized Africa would be a force to reckon with. The “global south” needs to stop blaming convenient scapegoats for many of its own problems. You can’t be like, oh once we fix greed everything will be okay! How do you ever propose to fix greed? Even if the whole world agrees to be socialist, examples like Stalins USSR show us that greed exists to corrupt any economic and political model. It’s disingenuous to say otherwise.

I am not saying we have to be capitalist, I am saying it’s disingenuous to say that greed occurs because of capitalism, and not the other way around. You don’t have to dismantle the whole world to start taxing wealthy people at a higher rate, and start using those funds in a sensible way like they do in the Nordic model.

Cool, also read about it on neutral sources

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism

Capitalism sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats, and socialism also sucks because of oligarchs and kleptocrats.

Remember Stalin and his style of socialism? Just because one hell sucks doesn’t mean another hell is better.

The only type of socialism which has made any kind of sense in recent times is the Nordic Model.

Edit let’s not kid ourselves about the “greatness” of socialist countries when China has 50% poverty rate

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/poverty-rate-by-country

Here’s also a great article on how everyday life was like in the Soviet Union, https://shs.cairn.info/article/E_ANNA_682_0305?lang=en

Yeah, I like sprawling places and country living. I used to describe it as suburban, but that’s the wrong word. People can do as they please, if you like what you like, more power to you. I hope city centers and near by places become more affordable as I know that’s an issue for many.

Except driving was awful because everything is so pedestrian leaning, which is fine actually because EU cities are too densely packed to lean towards more car use. I know that’s by design, and I am okay with people choosing a design they like. I am just saying that I don’t like their design, so I choose to live somewhere else. Simple.

Hard disagree, lol. Judging by the downvotes, this is what many aren’t ready to hear 😂

But the point is that masculinity [and femininity] is programmed throughout the core development of the brain. Unless there’s a motivation to question it that developed neuron architecture only gets reinforced. By the time you’re able to question it you’re so set in the concrete it takes years or decades of struggle to unlearn the worst traits. When you unlearn them it’s a threat to people who haven’t had to question it.

Except for children with autism, I’d say. My mom couldn’t get me to be girly or feminine while I was growing up, I just did what made sense, sometimes that was a girly or feminine thing and other times not.

Maybe the patriarchy is an allistic people problem lol.

Not everyone wants to live in some EU places because those areas are too densely packed. Vienna has been voted the most livable city many years in a row, but most residential areas I saw were filled with apartments, condos or townhomes.

Tbh, some of these scenes were pretty mind boggling to me even as a kid. Never understood what people have against different bodies.

I think the set and costumes are on point for a satirical punk comedy.

The 90s in general were pretty bad for portrayal of trans and lgb+ characters. Remember Ace Ventura, first one?

I agree, though, close minded people ruin everything.

Ghostbusters 2016 is under appreciated for what it accomplishes over the original, the recent one with the grandkids is so generic and bland.

Tank Girl, it got shit reviews when it came out, but has grown a cult following since then, https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tank_girl

I am also partial to Dude Where’s My Car