you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -5 points 1 year ago (11 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Not only do Marxists have theory, we also have practice. Practice doesn't look different from theory, actually, you'd know this if you actually understood that Marxists reject the perfect utopian wonderland from earlier socialists like Robert Owen. There is diversity in opinion, spirited debate, and many different perspectives. The bourgeoisie is indeed oppressed, as they should be. Socialist states do indeed have prisons. The "millions of deaths" you hint at, in reality, corresponds to far fewer deaths than the victims of liberalism and capitalism.

    I have spoken with people that grew up in socialism, and current citizens of socialist countries like the PRC. I don't rely on anecdotes for my stances, I read historical texts, statistics, track metrics, and engage with theory and practice. I don't care who your family member is, I can find Flat Earthers or those who think the US is the greatest country on the planet. What matters is the actual, on the ground facts.

    Industrialization in a planned fashion, with a direct focus on uplifiting the proletariat, was the cause of uplifting from poverty. Without Marxism, using England as an example, capitalism skyrocketed poverty. The working class had it far worse than as independent peasants for a long time, life expectancy dropped, and it was only when the proletariat began to organize violently did concessions come and begin to eventually surpass feudalism in England. In socialist countries, the impact was immediately positive.

    You're deeply unserious.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 1 year ago (9 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

    That's a horrible misattribution of the famines in the early USSR and PRC, where famine was common before collectivization and industrialized farming. It wasn't a misappropriation of food, but natural causes and a government ill-equipped to overcome the force of nature without industrialized farming. See why despite the early famines, life expectancy was consistently rising, unlike England where the introduction of industrialization caused a drop in life expectancy for a long time.

    The "higher economic prosperity" in the global north is because of imperialism. African countries are no longer traditional colonies, but are largely imperialized by western countries. The global south does the majority of the labor and production, the global north does the majority of consumption. The fact that you don't even consider that this is true means you likely have never actually engaged with Marxist theory (which, to be fair, was already obvious, just moreso now).

    The "wall" hit by the USSR was an increase in liberalization, recovery from 20 million dying due to World War II, and having to devote a ton of resources to millitary purposes to prevent the US from nuking them outright. It wasn't because of socialism inherently. Again, see the PRC, where there's no "wall" in sight despite the economy being increasingly socialized.

    The unions and labor movements in the global north also depended on the USSR as an example of what happens if concessions aren't given. When the USSR fell, workers rights in the global north shrank massively and wealth disparity rose massively. And, again, they depend on imperialism! The socialist bloc produced for themselves, their positive acheivements didn't depend on imperialism, but their own labor. Not true at all for the global north.

    Again, you're deeply unserious. You have no clue what you're talking about. If I heard from 3 family members about how Biden is an ultracommunist and Trump is going to save the world, that doesn't mean shit. What matters is looking at the facts, statistics, trends, and metrics.

    Edit: lmao, of course you're a genocide denier that supports the fascist Zionists. No wonder you don't factor in imperialism, you think it and settler-colonialism are good things. You bat for the IOF for free and say they are doing a good job of minimizing their genocide.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    No, it was not. It did not export capital, nor was it under the control of finance capital. The Soviet Union wasn't imperialist. Again, you're deeply unserious, have no idea what you're talking about, and are a genocide-denying Zionist sycophant for the IOF.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I like how they completely skipped over the genocide denial part lol. Even if they did address it, there's not much excuse to justify genocide denial lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yep, if you check their history it's filled with pro-IOF hasbara, I even think they're debating in other threads today on if Israel is commiting genocide or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I know lol, I saw their comments a few months ago and just tagged them as a zionist. Liberal mental gymnastics never cease to amaze me, defending a literal proven genocide 🫠

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Absolutely. Not only was it genocide pre-October 7th, but now it has ramped up to spiking sugar with narcotics, opening fire on Palestinians running for aid, and so much more. Fuck anyone trying to play cover for the IOF.

  • source
  • parent