Is it simply over-correcting in response to western anti-communist propaganda? I'd like to think it's simply memeing for memes sake, but it feels too genuine.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 8 months ago (81 children)
  • [–] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (78 children)

    Mhm. I get that your country is hostile to the world and its own citizens. I do. But that doesn't make Stalin - or any era USSR - good. This dichotomy of white vs black, good vs evil is the most USian brainwashing that is afflicted on your people. From your post I can see you preemptively dismiss any critisizm or argument and while you said MLs don't idealise Stalin, it seems that you do.

    Those who denounce Stalin entirely, also denounce the USSR, and existing socialism.

    I'm from Poland. To us, to a country betrayed by the Allies and sold to Stalin, their occupation did not bring prosperity, or equality, nor socialism. We were systematically robbed by the USSR from the wealth, intellect and industry (as noted by then governments and listed as a plea for USSR to stop), and even lives. We were made to take loans to invest in the Empire, while staying a satelite country and tying our planned economy to better native Russian territories. We did call then the Red Army - Red Locust. You need to realise that when you glorify it, you automatically dismiss our traumatic past. It is like getting told by a stupid child that if we're hungry we should eat cake.

    Since USA wages war outside its territory and was never invaded nor conquered, you might not know that trauma - especially from war and being a conquered nation, worse nation - is transgenerational https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_trauma

    Were there people who thrived under USSR occupation? Yes, but they are thriving currently too, both politicians and capitalist leeches. Did Poland progress under the occupation? Yes, like every damn other country in Europe. We would progress more as free people, no historian thinks differently.

    The latter, Stalin’s policy positions, are largely either contextualized and explained, rather than actively defended, or are genuinely good feats

    When I read your comments I can't not see you as anything else than a guilt feeling nepo baby. Or at least someone so privileged, that they never ever thought about other people lives outside of statistics. An empty headed academic.

    Tl; dr; the revolution was made into abomination of itself and claiming otherwise is blindness

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 78 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (77 children)

    Mhm. I get that your country is hostile to the world and its own citizens. I do. But that doesn’t make Stalin - or any era USSR - good.

    The USSR was good based on its own progressive merits.

    From your post I can see you preemptively dismiss any critisizm or argument and while you said MLs don’t idealise Stalin, it seems that you do.

    I don't.

    I’m from Poland. To us, to a country betrayed by the Allies and sold to Stalin, their occupation did not bring prosperity, or equality, nor socialism.

    I've spoken to people from Poland that have the opposite to say. The fall of socialism in Poland brought a dramatic collapse in any kind of left, which is why Poland is so far-right today.

    We were systematically robbed by the USSR from the wealth, intellect and industry (as noted by then governments and listed as a plea for USSR to stop), we were made take loans to invest in the Empire, while staying a satelite country. We did call then the Red Army - Red Locust. You need to realise that when you glorify it, you automatically dismiss our traumatic past. It is like getting told by a stupid child that if we’re hungry we should eat cake.

    Again, I've heard much the opposite. That's why anecdotes are terrible measures of truth. The collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe brought skyrocketing poverty rates, prostitutuon, drug abuse, homelessness, and 7 million excess deaths.

    Since USA wages war outside its territory and was never invaded, you might not know that trauma - especially from war and being a conquered nation - is transgenerational https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgenerational_trauma

    I'm aware.

    Were they people who thrived under USSR occupation? Yes, but they are thriving currently too, both politicians and capitalist leeches. Did Poland progress under the occupation? Yes, like every damn other country in Europe. We would progress more as free people, no historian thinks differently.

    And yet Poland is now in a far-right spiral with far greater disparity.

    When I read your comments I can’t not see you as anything else than a guilt feeling nepo baby. Or at least someone so privileged, that they never ever thought about other people lives outside of statistics. An empty headed academic.

    Cool story, you know nothing about me. Believe it or not, statistics and historical fact do outweigh simple anecdote, and the idea that I have never thought about people's lives outside of statistics is deeply wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 77 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (37 children)

    Splitting this to a separate comment because it was too long:

    The fall of socialism in Poland brought a dramatic collapse in any kind of left, which is why Poland is so far-right today.

    I mean dude, not even close. Polish leftist parties were antiworker from the 90s. Anything further left was dismissed as "USSR was saying the same lies". Fool me once kind of thing.

    Add to that the short time where there was upwards mobility in the country when it first became "capitalists", as well as fhe fact that in the past 20 years median personal real wealth grew.

    And yet Poland is now in a far-right spiral with far greater disparity

    Yup. The current generation is seeing that the wealth is unequally distributed (1% owns 45% of wealth), as well as all those rentier leeches, banks making record profits year after year, and the Facebook/Tiktok ( or generally USA right wing) propaganda is turning like 10% into MAGA-style idiots, and the rest is also slowly radicalizing. We do see that in the below 35 age group the left-leaning is still strongest, but the PIS and Konfederacja are following Repulican party strategies and gaining tracktion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (36 children)

    So in other words, the far-right used the standard red-scare playbook to purge communists and socialists, and now Poland has immense disparity and is entirely controlled by the far-right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (35 children)

    No, don't hyperbolize. This isn't your narrative.

    the far-right used the standard red-scare playbook to purge communists and socialists

    No. It was everyone in the free Poland. We were rebelling constantly under USSR occupation.

    and now Poland has immense disparity and is

    No. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?locations=PL&start=1985 But we do see foreign corporations leeching from us and actively enshittifying. The home ownership rate is decreasing.

    and is entirely controlled by the far-right.

    That depends what you mean by far right. I'd call the current political landscape of Poland as right-centrist PO in coalition with centrists (the rest of the coalition) vs (oppositon) right-centrist PiS with (growing) republican-clone Konfederacja

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 35 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (34 children)

    No, it was not "everyone in the free Poland." Many Polish people opposed the dissolution of socialism. Further, disparity in Poland is high, and the foreign companies plundering Poland is a direct consequence of the dissolution of socialism, purging of the left, and the dominance of the far-right.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (33 children)

    The Polish economy was hit particularly hard by the 2008/2009 crisis.

    ??? We're famously the only country in the EU that wasn't affected by it. Please be critical of what you read.

    What a garbage article you sent here.

    Further, disparity in Poland is high,

    I literally send you a credible source that shows its similar to 1985 year. Are you saying that it was high during USSR occupation or ignoring the source?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (31 children)

    You're confusing my critique that USSR sucked for Poland with your imagination that means I must love capitalism?

    affected all economies yet for the Polish economy to be a little smaller in 2015 than it was in 2008 is

    Are you both stupid? I figured how you calculated that. You both took a look at the "Polish GDP in USD" and compared.

    In 2007 USD to PLN was ~2.77 exchange rate.

    In 2008 it was ~2.41 because USA had recession.

    In 2015 it was ~3.4 because USA is again corporating and stealing.

    This is GDP, but adjusted for PPP (PPP = how much shit we can buy locally) for Poland:

    https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=PL&start=1990

    Did not go down in 2008.

    The idiot you're quoting would have to compare, p25, p50 and p90 income adjusted for inflation between those years, which they didn't. And if they did, they'd notice it was up. The only dip we had in 2022.

    Upon the adoption of capitalism, Poland has had unstable growth to even flatlining,

    Prove it. You make wild claims, prove them.

    (Also I'm curious what you think about China then since they gave up on communism if favour of their current flavour of capitalism leeching off of worker class)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    You’re batting pretty hard for capitalism and against socialism.

    You're confusing USSR with being a socialist country. I'm batting against USSR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (25 children)

    The PRC is rapidly rising thanks to socialism,

    https://jacobin.com/2019/06/tiananmen-square-worker-organization-socialist-democracy

    So I assume the Tiananmen Square protests (also) against leaving communism and implementing capitalistic worker class leeching did not happen in your world?

    I mean they can call themselves whatever they want, but their duck quacks eerily similarly to the capitalistic duck. At least according to the people who went through their reforms into current state?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (24 children)

    The protests and riots in Beijing in 1989 were multi-faceted. Among the protestors were hard-line Maoists that supported the older Gang of Four, while being accompanied by students that sought liberalization of the economy and an end to the rural subsidies equalizing rural and urban development. This was further agitated by western elements pushing for regime change.

    It's Socialism with Chinese Characteristics, and it's still dominated by the proletariat. Public ownership is the principle aspect of China's economy, and capitalists are held on a tight leash to focus on developing the productive forces. The large firms and key industries in China are publicly owned, it's only the small and medium firms that are private.

    The form of democracy and the mode of production in China ensures that there is a connection between the people and the state. Policies like the mass line are in place to ensure this direct connection remains. This is why over 90% of the Chinese population supports the government, and why they have such strong perceptions around democracy:

    China does have billionaires, as you might then protest. China is in the developing stages of socialism. Between capitalism, which is characterized by private ownership being the principle aspect of the economy and the capitalists in control of the state, and communism, characterized by full collectivization of production and distribution devoid of classes, is socialism, where public ownership is principle and the working classes in control. China in particular is working its way out of the initial stages of socialism:

    The reason China has billionaires is because China has private property, and the reason it has private property is because of 2 major factors: the world economy is still dominated by the US empire, and because you cannot simply abolish private property at the stroke of a pen. China tried that already. The Gang of Four tried to dogmatically force a publicly owned and planned economy when the infrastructure best suited to that hadn't been laid out by markets, and as a consequence growth was positive but highly unstable.

    Why does it matter that the US Empire controls the world economy? Because as capitalism monopolizes, it is compelled to expand outward in order to fight falling rates of profit by raising absolute profits. The merging of bank and industrial capital into finance capital leads to export of capital, ie outsourcing. This process allows super-exploitation for super-profits, and is known as imperialism.

    In the People's Republic of China, under Mao and later the Gang of Four, growth was overall positive but was unstable. The centrally planned economy had brought great benefits in many areas, but because the productive forces themselves were underdeveloped, economic growth wasn't steady. There began to be discussion and division in the party, until Deng Xiapoing's faction pushing for Reform and Opening Up won out, and growth was stabilized:

    Deng's plan was to introduce market reforms, localized around Special Economic Zones, while maintaining full control over the principle aspects of the economy. Limited private capital would be introduced, especially by luring in foreign investors, such as the US, pivoting from more isolationist positions into one fully immersed in the global marketplace. As the small and medium firms grow into large firms, the state exerts more control and subsumes them more into the public sector. This was a gamble, but unlike what happened to the USSR, this was done in a controlled manner that ended up not undermining the socialist system overall.

    China's rapidly improving productive forces and cheap labor ended up being an irresistable match for US financial capital, even though the CPC maintained full sovereignty. This is in stark contrast to how the global north traditionally acts imperialistically, because it relies on financial and millitant dominance of the global south. This is why there is a "love/hate" relationship between the US Empire and PRC, the US wants more freedom for capital movement while the CPC is maintaining dominance.

    Fast-forward to today, and the benefits of the CPC's gamble are paying off. The US Empire is de-industrializing, while China is a productive super-power. The CPC has managed to maintain full control, and while there are neoliberals in China pushing for more liberalization now, the path to exerting more socialization is also open, and the economy is still socialist. It is the job of the CPC to continue building up the productive forces, while gradually winning back more of the benefits the working class enjoyed under the previous era, developing to higher and higher stages of socialism.

    In doing this, China has presented itself to the global south as an alternative to the unequal exchange the global north does with the global south, which is accelerating the development of the global south. China is taking a more indirect method of undermining global imperialism than, say, the USSR, but its been remarkably effective at uplifting the global working classes, especially in China but also in the global south.

    It's not about "ducks quacking" or any of that vibes-based analysis, but consistent materialist analysis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (23 children)

    I can counterpoint all that you wrote simply by asking you... What is China gig economy size? What are the labour protections for the gig workers? If there are none, then it's pure exploitation of worker class for the wealthy and I'd argue that invalidates all your lofty claims about being socialist at heart (or in the future. "Someday", also trademarked). Why is the population nationalistic? What happened to anti-imperialism - was it just redefined to mean anti-west lol? What is the current percentage representation of farmers and workers in the Congress and why is it nosediving?

    The protests and riots in Beijing in 1989 were multi-faceted

    Stupid but effective test I have leftover from my gaming days. Write Tiananmen Square (Massacre) before I interact with you any further.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Stupid but effective test I have leftover from my gaming days. Write Tiananmen Square (Massacre) before I interact with you any further.

    Aside from this being pure chauvinist racism. Let's take it you bought into the propoganda that Tiananmen Square is completely censored and Chinese people get punished for seeing or saying it by being sent to a camp or disappeared or whatever (even though that's patently and obviously not true).

    You were in your mind just condemning random innocent Chinese people to punishment for fun while you gamed? You are fucking disgusting. I hope you realise that you are a terrible person on the level of a German snitching on Jews in ww2. Even if thankfully the propaganda isn't true doesn't take away from how vile and evil it is that you would try.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (21 children)

    No, you can't counterpoint anything that I wrote. China is already socialist, it isn't going to become socialist because it already is. China has worker protections, and the lives of the working classes have been improving year over year. This is extreme cope on your part, and your refusal to engage with my points because they cleanly and clearly refute yours is just dishonesty.

    Stupid but effective test I have leftover from my gaming days. Write Tiananmen Square (Massacre) before I interact with you any further.

    Why? The 1989 Beijing riots didn't take place on the square itself, which was evacuated bloodlessly.

    In 2011, three secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing from the time of the events were leaked and published by WikiLeaks, all of which stated that there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square itself.[185] Instead, they said Chinese soldiers opened fire on protesters in Beijing outside the square, around Muxidi station, as they fought their way from the west towards the centre.[185] A Chilean diplomat who had been positioned next to a Red Cross station inside the square told his US counterparts that he did not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds in the square itself, although sporadic gunfire was heard. He said that most of the troops who entered the square were armed only with anti-riot gear.[185][207]

    Per wikipedia. There were hundreds of killings around Beijing, none of which happened on the square itself.

    Can you actually engage with my points, rather than dodge them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (20 children)

    China is already socialist, it isn’t going to become socialist because it already is. China has worker protections, and the lives of the working classes have been improving year over year.

    Can you actually engage with my points, rather than dodge them?

    Sure. Per our earlier discussion and exchange of sources, the same criteria are met by Poland. Is Poland socialist to you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (19 children)

    Modern poland has private ownership as its principle aspect, and capitalists in control of the state. Did you read my prior comment at all? Socialism is a mode of production where public ownership is principle and the working classes in charge of the state, as I already said. You then pivoted to questions of quality of life, which is improving in China. Poland dropped in quality of life for most people after the dissolution of socialism in the immediate, and in the long run the poor in Poland are worse off than they were in socialism.

    Why do you bother replying if you aren't going to engage with the points I make?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    The PRC is socialist because public ownership is the principle aspect of the economy and the working classes control the state

    The 13th NPC (2018–2023) included 468 representatives categorized as farmers and workers, representing roughly 15.7% Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20230224112256/http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202302/be334508d78a41c4bf3b2d2b47a22fd0.shtml

    Dude. How the fuck working class controls the state if 15.7% of NPC are workers according to the NPC

    Like... Literally, how? Like stop for a second. You're saying you're from USA. Do you think if 15.7% of USA congress members were from working class, the USA congress would pivot to being pro worker class socialist country?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    I believe I asked a very direct question, not asked for an excuse.

    For someone claiming I'm not engaging with what you write you seem to be doing that a lot of?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    I didn't give you an excuse, I refuted your point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (8 children)

    On 996: it is way less common than people seems to think. It was a fringe practice in ~40 companies during the tech boom. It has since been made illegal and is declining from it’s already fringe position.

    While overtime pressure which was more common and 996 still does unfortunately exist, the trend is clearly negative. As in, it’s being actively cracked down on. The Supreme Court ruled 996 illegal in 2021, and recent policy pushes like the 2025 Consumption Boost Plan are specifically targeting illegal overtime and pushing for better enforcement of rest/vacation rights among other benefits. It’s not perfect, obviously, but it’s hugely improved from where things were in the 2000s or even 2010s, and honestly it’s just not the omnipresent norm that English-language coverage sometimes makes it sound like.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    Good for them. It's 2026 and they finally made illegal a year ago something that Europe made illegal (and enforced) decades ago.

    Now China is almost at the level of USA when it comes to workers rights forced to work vastly too long hours without repayment.

    But since I have you here, what is the gig economy rate and workers protection in China? We're seeing a boom of gig economy of the worst exploited kind (Uber, Glovo, etc) among immigrants from muslim and asian countries in Poland (first it was gig economy and then migrants were imported en masse).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Improvement vs. decline isn’t a tie.

    Totally agree. Although it's like the old saying 瘦死的骆驼比马大, right? Do you remember EU's Forced Labour Ban that affected Apples companies in China, and that the exploited Chinese workers complained to EU instead of CPC? Or Brazils BYD scandal that for Brazilians Chinese workers treatment by BYD was tantamount to slavery, while for the workers it was an improvement?

    To add to that is the hukou system. It’s extremely flawed in it’s own way, no question. But for rural hukou holders, it does guarantee land use rights and homestead eligibility, a subsistence buffer that doesn’t exist in the same form in the US or Europe

    Lets leave USA on the side. I'm not from there, from what I've seen I wouldn't like to live there as a worker.

    does guarantee land use rights and homestead eligibility

    Let's call spade a spade. Hukou is system made to stop urbanization. It's effects are that there's a lot of rural workers lacking social safety nets in cities that still migrated to the cities looking for better work opportunities, and because of missing social safety net they had no choice but to agree to be exploited by the capitalist class (no matter if privately owned or if state owned, if a company exploits the workforce it's a capitalistic leech, agreed?).

    Sources: uh... Literally definition and exceptions under which migration was allowed, and the hukou wages are, what, 40% (?) lower for the same job today, see this or one of the sources (too many links opened on the phone, sorry) https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ecot.12412#ecot12412-bib-0029

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (2 children)

    Sorry to hear that.

    Something I always find interesting about people bringing up 996 and that era is that at its peak it was about as bad as Japanese work culture while being far less prevalent as a percentage of the population affected.

    Now China is putting multi year plans in place to fix it and support workers and yet is still demonised for it while Japan under the cart titan is continuing to push workers harder and doesn't get half the blowback especially among westerners.

    I understand propaganda and racism play a big part in it it's still an interesting sight to behold.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    I understand propaganda and racism play a big part in it it’s still an interesting sight to behold.

    I don't know about USA. In the Europe it was met with the same disgust (for the companies and the failing country) and pity (for the affected).

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (38 children)

    What anecdote? I've made no anecdotes? The only person mentioning any anecdotes is you, e.g.

    Again, I’ve heard much the opposite

    Regarding USSR stealing industry:

    https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grabie%C5%BC_i_przejmowanie_mienia_poniemieckiego_na_Ziemiach_Odzyskanych#%3A%7E%3Atext=Grabie%C5%BC+i+przejmowanie+mienia+poniemieckiego+na+Ziemiach+Odzyskanych+%E2%80%93+Wikipedia%2C+wolna+encyklopedia

    (I'm sorry wo don't really translate that to English). But you can try to Google for sources in English.

    I’ve spoken to people from Poland that have the opposite to say

    You might've spoken to people who remember the late 80's fondly. Not 50-70s. Or ZOMO (secret terror police) or similar, they always had privileged lives.

    Unless you were in the Party, Army or Zomo, life was not roses at all, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_October

    The collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe brought skyrocketing poverty rates, prostitutuon, drug abuse, homelessness, and 7 million excess deaths.

    1. Poland is not Eastern Europe

    2. prostitutuon, drug abuse, homelessness <- you might be confusing that with what is common in the USA.

    3. Excess deaths https://wol.iza.org/articles/mortality-crisis-in-transition-economies/long#%3A%7E%3Atext=Features+of+the+transition+mortality%2Climited+changes+in+family+stability.

    4. skyrocketing poverty rates

    Not really, no? After we detached from the ZSSR everything had to be restarted and the first decade was hard. We had to start from little, figure out export routes, rebuild a damn lot of industries etc? We were economy attached and made dependant on USSR, how could the split not be hard?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (37 children)

    Poland, prior to socialism, was 2/3rds controlled by foreign capital, and was severely lagging behind the rest of Europe industrially. By 1948, Poland's industrial output was 153% of what it had been in 1938. Post-war, the economy grew over 300% from 1945 to 1948.

    In the 1930s, Polish life expectancy was ~46 years old. After the introduction of socialism, and improved healthcare, it reached 70. Before socialism, literacy rates were ~80% in urban areas and ~30% in rural areas. With socialism, total literacy rates were 98%. With socialism came legalized abortion and greatly expanded women's rights.

    The dissolution of socialism, as I said, brought ~7 million deaths around the world. You didn't dispute that, the argument seems to be on your end that these were necessary for economic growth. What Poland could have done is remain socialist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (36 children)

    Everything else tomorrow, its 1am

    The dissolution of socialism, as I said, brought ~7 million deaths. You didn’t dispute that, th

    I literally added a link it was 8400. You gave no sources. Trust me bro is not a source.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (35 children)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (34 children)

    Why did you send me a link to https://www.academia.edu/1072631/Review_Red_Plenty_by_Francis_Spufford review of Red Plenty by Francis Spufford, where reviewer names the genre science-fiction? The fuck?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (33 children)

    Because Paul Cockshott is an economist, and references real facts in his review. Just what I had on hand. Here's a grab from the PDF:

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (32 children)
    1. Dude. It is a review of a fictional book with no sources attached. How do I know it's fiction? Author says so on Goodreads.

    2. We were talking about Poland being conquered by the USSR and that it was better without it. The excess Russian deaths you're quoting - if they were true and not from a fiction book - still wouldn't matter for Poland being better off without USSR? Do you see the distinction between those 2? One is USSR, the other is Poland, and the excess deaths (I linked before) in Poland were 8400?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (30 children)

    The review is of a fictionalized socialist scenario. The author of the review is an economist that opposes the fictional allegories. This isn’t complicated

    My bad. Still no sources for his claims in the review? Just a graph.

    If you think that excessive deaths at the level of 8400 can be attributed to anything, you're wrong. I mean how would you even attribute them? The winter was cold, it could've been flu.

    Btw. USSR flavour of socialism was nationalism/imperialism with extra steps. Forcing subjected satellite states to produce in favour of the Russia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago (28 children)

    Let me rephrase that. 8400 excess deaths in a country or 40 mil is unattributable. But I agree that USSR dissolution was likely related to it.

    Damn, it could've been people dying from partying too much.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago* (26 children)

    Dude, why so you think Poles were rebelling in the 1970s and 1980s against USSR? :D Why do you think USSR split? Why Polish people were fighting to leave it? It was bankrupt. In the 70 and 80 extreme poor were oscillating between 10 to 25%. With shitton of places bankrupt you're surprised that the people were poor? Your argument amounts to "in bankrupt countries people were poor"?

    It took a decade of borrowing money, selling shit to foreigners to fix shit USSR broke or sucked from us. Then we had to pay the new loans in addition to the old loans USSR made us take to invest in Russia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (24 children)

    Poland selling out to foreigners was a deliberate action to enrich the few and plunder Poland, not a necessity.

    Poland was selling out (taking loans) from foreigners in 1970 and 1980 to fund USSR policies. By the 1989 when it was freed from USSR the foreign debt was mature, Poland had no venues to borrow new money untill mature debts were financed - this is the timeline and casuality of plundering Poland.

    We were fucked by the Paris Club (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poland_and_the_International_Monetary_Fund) but the real cause is the fucking damn being colony of USSR.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (22 children)

    I'd like to remind you that an absolute unit of Polish industry was piece by piece moved to USSR. Which I already told you about earlier IIRC including list of moved heavy industries.

    Anyone claiming Soviet invested in Poland should compare the amount of German war reparations that Soviet took over that should've been paid to Poland vs the "investments" made by the USSR.

    A trade agreement concluded with the Soviet Union early in 1948 had ensured the importation of investment goods to the value of £112,000,000. In general, trade with the Soviet Union had risen from 0.4 per cent in 1938 to 21.5 per cent in 1948; and trade with her and the other countries of planned economy now accounted for over a third (37.8 per cent) of [the Polish People’s Republic’s] total foreign trade

    Thank you for proving my point that we were forced to "trade" with the USSR. Subservient, colonized trade. For example, the USSR forced Poland to invest in shipbuilding (that we had to loan for) with a quota of ships to be traded for, for which of course the payment was transfer rubles managed by the USSR empire in their centralized bank - forcing inter-USSR trade by the prices made by the USSR. (Btw transfer rubles were also a part of Polish financial problems after 1990, see https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afera_rublowa#%3A%7E%3Atext=Afera+rublowa+%E2%80%93+Wikipedia%2C+wolna+encyklopedia)

    Anywho, by the 1980 the USSR, under prices that they enforced, Poland owed USSR 4 billion transfer roubles and was demanded to repay that in USD at the value of 7.3 billion USD.

    The next most important items were several large chemical factories. Pre-war Poland had had no chemical industry

    Poland was a free country since 1918. Before that it was conquered by Russia, Germany and Austria for 123 years. In the 20 years of not being a colony and exploited by those 3 countries, Poland has managed to kickstart it's own chemical industry, to be top of the class in post WW1 Europe - see example https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_Zak%C5%82ad%C3%B3w_Azotowych_w_Tarnowie-Mo%C5%9Bcicach

    If your source claims that Poland had no chemical industry, you can use that source as a kindling.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago (20 children)

    I need to ask something off topic:

    You're getting insta downvoted (maybe me too, or you're downvoting me, don't care).

    Dear lurker, care to join?

    Poland depended quite heavily on the USSR and was integrated into socialist trade, which worked remarkably well for developing Poland

    I dismissed the only source you gave for that by pointing the author clearly didn't know what they were talking about "Poland had no chemical industry".

    I gave Polish sources that show the numbers that it did not work well for Poland development. I told you about the transfer rubles, that the USSR was dictating the prices of good to be paid in those and requiring them paid back in the USD.

    I told you (with sources) you how the USSR forced Poland to take foreign loans during 1970 and 1980, that later had to be repaid after Poland was allowed to leave USSR and that it was the reason we had to privatize shitton of stuff and had galloping inflation in the early 90s (Poland and the IMF).

    I listed somewhere in the topic list of heavy industries stolen by the USSR just after the war.

    We compared poverty rates, GDP per capita in PPP all in favour of Poland not being an occupied country.

    I linked to Polish protests and general strikes against USSR forcing Poland into food poverty in the 1980s.

    And yet you still claim that USSR occupation was good for the Poland and Polish people financially.

    Can you imagine an argument that would convince you that you're wrong? What would that argument be?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 8 months ago* (18 children)

    ect, but at the same time it doesn’t mean abandoning socialism was the correct move.

    The point I made was that USSR (who happened to be pretending to be socialist) SUCKED for Poland and freeing itself from USSR was good for Poland (even though now were stuck with the capitalism).

    I gave you sources on instability of growth, on skyrocketing poverty rates, on real industrial development , and more. You’re taking the wording of Poland having “no” chemical industry in the context of a broader point on development of industry, which Poland was lagging behind in prior to socialism, as an excuse to dismiss the entire point.

    The instability of growth I dismiss as immaterial. Why is growth supposed to be stable?

    Skyrocketing poverty rates - refuted as loan repayment and bankrupcy under USSR - please note that your data points same poverty as 1.5% vs (vastly more during multiple decades under USSR occupation).

    on real industrial development

    Financed on loans Poland was forced to make that made sure the Poland was not self sustainable.

    You’re taking the wording of Poland having “no” chemical industry in the context of

    If the Dorothy whatever bases her theory on Polish development under USSR based on the wrong data (like critically wrong), and your unable to provide other sources, you've made false claims, not a point.

    However, on the things we can both agree on as fact, we utterly disagree on interpretation.

    I doubt that we agree on facts, as the what you quote as facts doesn't always seem to be... anchored... in reality. And yet not once you said "you're right, bad source". I did a few times?

    tangents then perhaps I would be able to be swayed by you.

    Oh, that's no longer something I think is possible. Now I genuinely wonder if there's a fact, or an argument, or smthing, that could make you change your wrong opinion that USSR occupation was good for Poland (against will of Polish worker class might I add, as proven by the multiple strikes - you also need to understand that the strikes were not necessarily against socialism system, but against being forced by USSR into subserviency)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [+] 2 points 8 months ago* (7 children)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    Why would you even call me into the thread full of reactionaries and especially the one debate pervert who is know for bad faith anticommunism ever since their nasty ass drifted here from reddit. 😩

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago* (4 children)

    Further, I did, Dorothy Douglas lived in Poland for a time during socialism.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_W._Douglas

    This Dorothy Douglas? On whom there's no information anywhere that she ever left the USA, yet lived in Poland?

    If the other people you talked to share your sources then you might've been catfished or in an echo chamber?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 3 points 8 months ago

    Interesting. I will try to look for anything corroborating that, because she was famously suspected to be a "Red" in the USA and she would've had her passport revoked.

    And the only Western economist that officially was invited to Poland in 1948 was Oskar Lange.

    Pugwash conferences started in 57.

    To have access to any economic data she would have to be approved by the USSR in 1948 and then likely she would have to be on the exit visa list, on which she is not - in 1949 there are 3 Americans of which she is neither.

    So if she were in Poland in 1948 or 1949 , with access to economic data, and left the USSR in 1949 she was better than Mata Hari. Good for her.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)