States do not arbitrarily enact violence, they do so to uphold the ruling class of society. Denmark is an imperialist state, the nicer conditions for the domestic working class come from the backs of exploited labor in the global south. This isn't because Denmark is more "moral," but instead because it can successfully use the spoils of imperial plunder to bribe its own working class. Iraq could not do the same, and was under intense pressure from the outside, hence the heightened repression.

My point isn't that form doesn't matter at all, that would be reductive. My point is that class is primary.

Because Iraq and Denmark are famously socialist, never having exploited anyone.

Alan Turing invented computing and helped defeat the nazis, but Britain still chemically castrated him for being gay. This is the baseline of government interference you've been raised to believe is normal or at least explainable, and you are attacking a country whose human rights record is way, way better than that.

where do you get your info on cuba lmao

you're also wrong on china but i get that one at least because there's endless anti-china slop, but with cuba you have to be watching wildly reactionary shit to believe it's like the us

It must be very interesting to know so little and just say things.

Yes, the working classes run both Cuba and China. Their economies are dominated by a working class-owned public sector, and society is oriented in a way that values the people over profit. Private enterprise exists, but only insofar as it is contributing to that overall pro-social aim, and not as a permanent fixture of society but a temporary measure.

Cuba == usa???????????

Zombies would starve from just being near you.

Yes, Cuba and China are very obviously serving the working class. Maybe spend a bit of time educating yourself instead of smoking whatever it is you smoke.

There are no homeless in China. Cuba has the most progressive queer rights legislation.

Can you name a non-authoritarian government?

Hannah Arendt, the woman who said Jews were to blame for the holocaust because they didnt rise up?

"I, the arbiter of credibility, have decided this claim is self-evidently ridiculous for reasons I don't need to explain"

Hannah Arendt

Lol, of course

The communist party consisted of workers. Working class is not a level of income, but a relation to ownership of the means of production and distribution. Further, the USSR saw incredibly high rates of democratic participation, both having some of the highest voting percentages and the actual highest rates of measures to vote on.

Wealth inequality in the USSR existed, but was nowhere even fathomably close to wealth inequality in modern Russia, let alone the US Empire.

The working class in the usa empire mostly lives in the colonies. Labor aristocrats always "conveniently forget" about their overseas plundering.

Do you dismiss the very concept of Badguyism?

Libs being confronted with the fact that propaganda terms they've memorized are meaningless never gets old.

I was being sarcastic and poking fun at people using it. Congrats on taking the bait. What the picture says is that the US which libs championed as a 'free and enlightened society' in the 90s was incarcerating more people than USSR did during Stalin years. Rate of incarceration in USSR dropped significantly after that while it remains as high as ever in the US today.

Our good law abiding society, their authoritarian regime

Comments like this make it painfully obvious that someone has not engaged with the actual history, because guess who agreed with you that lip service is not enough? The communists. Life expectancy, infant mortality, nutrition, medical outcomes, literacy, addiction rates, poverty, all of this shit immediately improves drastically in every time and place communists have ever seized power. Often these improvements have come despite nightmarish wartime conditions, such as during the Chinese Revolution when life expectancy shot up despite being in active combat with Imperial Japan after 20 years of civil war. The people of Cuba have created one of the most advanced medical systems on earth despite sixty years of strangulation. The people of the USSR risked their safety to send weapons to uprisings across the world despite needing every bullet themselves for the near century of fascist invasion and expansion that ultimately took thirty million of their lives.

The idea that communists are secretly only pretending to care about other people is the single biggest piece of capitalist projection, and the one most foundational to holding up other myths about communists. Every abuser in history has said all the same things the white empire drills into our heads: this is just how the world is, everyone else is just like me or worse, so there's no point in looking for better. But in reality, Cuba has no Gates Foundation. Laos has no Mr Beast. Our economic system is the one set up to reward and incentivize exploiting people you pretend to care about, not theirs. To look around at the very specific, grotesque circumstances created by capitalism and attribute it to some universal axiom of human society is what having an imagination trapped by capitalist "realism" looks like.

This attitude of "well everyone is shit" is one of the last layers of refuge before you get to the truth: that we, westerners raised in a culture of advanced imperialism, are specifically and deeply sick, that we have forcibly exported this sickness across our planet and we desperately need drastic mass change and healing before it kills us all.

I don't really get what you're trying to do. Capitalists and slavers aren't an ethnicity, nor were they murdered en masse by the USSR. The USSR wasn't genocidal.

Also not sure why you are going into a socialist community and calling socialists "fascists," this is nonsense word salad on top of your strange and baseless jab.

I'd genuinely like to hear your answer on this, because it's something I think a lot about as an anarchist. Specifically, do you think the problem power hierarchies solve can only be solved by power hierarchies? Do you think that problem necessarily exists and needs solving in all contexts, perhaps because of some innate human nature? Who is it that has told you this is the case--that the fact that history is filled with hierarchies should be interpreted as "hierarchies are inevitable"--instead of, say, "power over others is an unhealthy coping mechanism humans have consistently turned to in the face of the unknown and maybe we should try to build a society that Doesn't Do That before we give up and resign ourselves to benevolent kings again"?

I'm an "authoritarian" for affirming the Marxist theory of the state?

Famines were extremely common in both Tsarist Russia and feudal China. Their respective famines in the beginning were ended because they developed out of that underdeveloped form of agriculture. This is not difficult to understand. Why compare the Soviet Union and PRC to capitalist countries, when we should be comparing them to their former selves?