• Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 months ago

    I agree with most of what you’ve said, you should read more from anarchist philosophers like Tolstoy or Goldman though.

    Socialists

    However I would subtract the socialist from you comment and just keep it at communist, there’s plenty of democratic socialist parties that never devolved into rampant totalitarianism like the leninist parties did.

    • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      plenty of democratic socialist parties that never devolved into rampant totalitarianism like the leninist parties did

      I guess you’re right there, still, they tend to be authoritarian - socialism in the soviet controlled republics was rather ugly - centrally planned economy, rationing of everything from meat and sugar to cars and housing, censorship of any political subject in media, ever present corruption, berlin wall to keep people from escaping…

      Not a place you’d want to live in.

      • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not a place you’d want to live in.

        Of course not, which is why it’s unfair to lump in welfare state creators like the demsoc parties of western Europe, and the brutal leninist parties of Asia and Eastern Europe.

        • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          the demsoc parties of western Europe

          They often have socialism in their name, but I don’t really consider them socialist, as you said - they’re welfare state supporters, which is really, really far away from socialism in soviet controlled eastern europe

          • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            which is really, really far away from socialism in soviet controlled eastern europe

            In that it’s democratic and they want to expand rights from just being political to also being economic? Yes I agree, they’re severely different from the Soviet style parties, but that doesn’t make them not socialist, their left wing members will usually still argue for the ownership of the means of production by workers, usually they just argue for cooperatives rather than mass nationalization nowadays.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, of course. Only the bad things are socialist! The good ones clearly are not true socialist! /s

            You’re pretty fucking stupid my man. Leftism is as broad as anything else, and socialism can take a wide variety of forms and positions. Authoritarianism is the thing that causes issues, and that can be anywhere on the left, right, and center. In the traditional political compass (which isn’t worth much, but whatever) there’s left/right as liberal/conservative, but there’s also up/down as authority/liberty.

            • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              No, of course. Only the bad things are socialist!

              Well it happens it’s a shitty system.

              You’re pretty fucking stupid my man

              That’s pretty rich coming from a person who probably cant even define socialism, not to mention applying that definition in real life

              • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                That’s pretty rich coming from a person who probably cant even define socialism, not to mention applying that definition in real life

                Projection. Your previous comment pretty much just said it has to be USSR countries, which is absolutely wrong.

                Capitalism is a shitty system. So many capitalist countries have horrible living conditions and/or have collapsed. You just don’t hear about them because the capitalists want you to support capitalism and hate alternatives.

                So many socialist countries have failed because of the intervention of capitalist countries. We can’t know what would have happened if they were left alone. If socialism was such a shitty system it wouldn’t require intervention everywhere it appears to ensure it fails. It’d be left to fail on it’s own. Instead we (the US mostly, with other countries assistance) support coups, replace elected leaders with dictators, assassinate legitimately elected officials, support genocides, undermine labor movements, enact embargos, and all kinds of other things.

                Again, if socialism was doomed to failure none of this would be required. There would be no reason to fear it spreading. Instead capitalist countries see it as as an existential threat. Why is that so if it’s such a bad system? Could you have been mislead?

                • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Capitalism is a shitty system. So many capitalist countries have horrible living conditions and/or have collapsed

                  You have no idea what are you talking about. I happen to be born in one of those post socialist countries, and had to grow up in the shit left after that failed system.

                  Do you know how did it fail? After USSR lost it’s grip on the eastern Europe, the governments in these countries for the first time organized free, untampered elections, and the socialists system lost by the vote of the people in every single one of them. Everyone hated it, even the governments that were previously tasked by USSR to enforce it.

                  And you know what happened next? Decades of rebuilding of the broken economy, EU accesion, access to the common EU market, and the greatest wealth creation in the history of these republics.

                  Your argument is invalid.

                  Again, if socialism was doomed to failure none of this would be required

                  Are you joking? Do you know how many lives were ruined or lost before that cursed thing fell apart??? All the poverty all the repression, it’s all fucked up, and you want this pathology to be tolerated around the world?

                  You bought into a toxic cult. Face it.

                  • Cethin@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Yeah man, I didn’t defend the USSR. It was pretty shit. It was designed to funnel wealth out of all the other USSR countries into Russia, specifically into the hands of the elite. It was pretty fucked up and exploitative. I don’t know what that has to do with the exact same thing happening in capitalist countries though. Socialism wasn’t the issue. It was authoritarianism and imperialism.

                    You’re only talking about USSR countries. That is where you’re entire breadth of knowledge is coming from seemingly. There’s a whole world out there. Just because the USSR fucked over so many people doesn’t mean socialism must. Again, capitalist countries fuck over a ton of people too. Is it also evil by requirement?