The vast majority believe they are worse off now than under Socialism, which makes sense because the reintroduction of Capitalism resulted in skyrocketing rates of poverty, prostitution, drug abuse, homelessness, and an estimated 7 million excess deaths around the world.

[+] SugaredScoundrel@sh.itjust.works -10 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Over 15 year old data at this point. And in countries that don't have a free press.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 15 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It's still well-documented and consistent. Socialism worked better than Capitalism. Plus, no press is ever "free," either private interests dominate it or public interests do.

[+] cotlovan@lemm.ee -9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Oh my fing god, I thought lemmy is only full of extreme liberals, but it's also full of wannabe comunists. Dude, have you ever asked yourself why USSR fell if everything was better than in the west? Why people risked their lives jumping over the Berlin wall? Why there was a whole black market of importing goods from the west into ussr? Why people didn't enjoy being sent to Siberia by the millions to die of hunger and of forced labor?

Or was Cuba a success?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 5 days ago

Lemmy is developed by Communists, the Communists were here first.

Secondly, the dissolution of the USSR was driven instead by numerous complex factors:

Liberal reforms that gave the Bourgeoisie power over key industries
A firm dedication to planning by hand even as the economy grew more complex and computers too slow to be adapted to the planning mechanisms
A huge portion of resources were spent on maintaining millitary parity with the US in order to dissuade US invasion
80% of the combat done in World War II was on the Eastern Front, and 20 million Soviets lost their lives, with no real economic support from the West in rebuilding despite taking the largest cost of war
An enclosed, heavily sanctioned economy relied on internal resource gathering, closed off from the world market

Countries like the PRC have taken to heart what happened in the USSR. As an example, the PRC shifted to a more classically Marxist economy, focusing on public ownership of only the large firms and key industries, and relying on markets to develop out of private ownership. This keeps them in touch with the global economy without giving the bourgeoisie control of key industries, and thus the bourgeoisie has no power over the economy or the state.

People left the DDR after getting good educations for free, and higher wages in West Germany. They got the best of both worlds.

Millions were not sent to Siberia.

Cuba is a resilliant success story given its brutal embargo and sanctions, yes. It has astounding metrics in areas like life expectancy despite being intentionally impoverished by the US Empire.

[+] SugaredScoundrel@sh.itjust.works -11 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Private interests do align, but rarely. Meaning you have more chance at opposing narratives forming. Public is monovoiced. Without an opposing voice its data becomes suspect.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Private is controlled by large corporations, and often gets state funding. All press has bias. Really, you don't have anything against the data other than you feel like it could be wrong.

[+] SugaredScoundrel@sh.itjust.works -12 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I don't trust it. Correct. I like multiple sources not controlled by one person. I like independent journalism. I think your data is bunk, drummed up, fake propaganda.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 14 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You don't even have sources, just ambient cultural anti-communism. When Cowbee tried to present you with new information, you just responded "tldr".

You have zero interest in independent journalism, you reject anything that doesn't agree with you out of hand

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

You have nothing for that but vibes, though. You can go to the sources and debunk them if you wish, but with just vibes, you have nothing.

[+] SugaredScoundrel@sh.itjust.works -11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I have done my investigation in communism, into Italian fascism, naziism, the kkk, the interment of Japanese Citizens in the US, the destruction of native American cultures, etc etc. Ive done my research. I know what totalitarians say, because they say the same thing regardless of what ideology they support. "Sure x did bad thing, but also x did good thing!" "We only killed this type of person because they were enemies of the state!"

Your two powers were bloodthirsty expansionists. Intent on spreading their cultural hegemony across borders. Just as the U.S. exists now and did in the past. Power corrupts. And concentrating it in the hands of the few, in one bureaucracy is disastrous for the majority.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 10 points 5 days ago

Considering your hatred of data and facts, I'll just repost what I said earlier:

The portrayal of the Communists and Nazis as "twin evils" exaggerates the sins of the Communists in quantity and quality, while minimizing the sins of the Nazis in quantity and quality, in order to show them as relatively equal problems. In other words, its Nazi apologia, and historical revisionism. Read Blackshirts and Reds.

The Nazis executed the Communists, Socialists, gay people, trans people, disabled people, Jewish people, Slavic people, and many, many more. It wasn't simple opposition, it was a racially supremacist ideology.

The Communists executed Tsarists, fascists, and terrorists to the state. They did not create a systematic industrialized murder machine like the Nazis did in order to keep up with how many people they needed to kill.

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 days ago

if you gave a shit what they wanted you wouldn't have overthrown them in a violent coup