• volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    this is what MLs genuinely believe about the Soviet Union

    Please explain how there were exploitation of surplus value, a mythical past of greatness, ethnonationalism in the USSR, and how womens rights weren’t categorically forwarded to world-pioneer levels, tell us the percentages of representation in the party of different ethnicities, tell us how the USSR’s ideas weren’t based on internationalist solidarity, and tell me one country with more union members than the former USSR.

    I know you’re not going to answer to any of these questions seriously and you’re gonna dismiss it with “lol u are fash”, just pointing out you haven’t done and won’t do any research on the topic because you’ve been brainwashed by leftist anti-communism.

    • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      exploitation of surplus value

      Ignore the surplus. Value was taken away from those who needed it (example case holomodor)

      ethnonationalism in the USSR

      Especially in occupied areas, non-russians were treated as 2nd class citizens and partially eradicated (insert “go to gulag” -meme. See also: genocide)

      how womens rights weren’t categorically forwarded to world-pioneer levels

      So quick online search already shows you that it had nothing to do with equality between the men and women, but about better abusing women’s labor. Just like in a capitalist society

      Below a lazy Wikipedia quote:

      Though the prevailing Soviet ideology stressed total gender equality, and many Soviet women held jobs and advanced degrees, they did not participate in core political roles and institutions.[24][25] Above the middle levels, political and economic leaders were overwhelmingly male[citation needed]. While propaganda claimed, accurately, that more women sat in the Supreme Soviet than in most democratic countries’ legislative bodies combined, only two women, Yekaterina Furtseva and (in its last year of existence) Galina Semyonova, were ever members of the party’s Politburo, arguably the most important component of country’s government

      tell us how the USSR’s ideas weren’t based on internationalist solidarity,

      Your ideas don’t mean a shit if your actions don’t reflect it.

      tell me one country with more union members than the former USSR

      The unions were led and controlled by the communist party, which was also on control of everything else. That’s like naming Musk the leader of trade union at Tesla

      • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Ignore the surplus

        Spoken like a true Marxist

        Value was taken away from those who needed it (example case holomodor)

        You’re telling me that the first attempt in history at collectivisation of land wasn’t perfect? Damn, communism destroyed. Fyi, land collectivisation was carried out by poor farmers, and they were so bloody and excessive against Kulaks that the party had to go and impose limits on how many people were declared Kulak per region. Holodomor was a tragedy as a result of a poor first attempt in history at land collectivisation, not an intended extraction of value of workers from a given place at a given time, as proven by the fact that when land collectivisation ended, nothing like that ever happened again.

        Especially in occupied areas, non-russians were treated as 2nd class citizens and partially eradicated (insert “go to gulag” -meme. See also: genocide)

        The Stalinist terror can and should be condemned. It was senseless, excessive, cruel, inhumane, and worst of all, unfounded and pointless. But trying to add racial/ethnical undertones to it is ahistorical. It happened to Russians and Georgians and Armenians and Uzbeki alike.

        So quick online search already shows you that it had nothing to do with equality between the men and women, but about better abusing women’s labor. Just like in a capitalist society

        Sure, that’s why women would retire at 55 compared to 60 years old for men. That’s why there were widely available restaurants and canteens in cities and food service in workplaces to relieve women from the burden of cooking. That’s why there was a wide availability of kindergarten to rid women of the burden of child rearing. But oh yeah, you did a quick online search, which totally proves that feminism in the USSR was actually not true feminism somehow!

        While propaganda claimed, accurately, that more women sat in the Supreme Soviet than in most democratic countries’ legislative bodies combined

        So wait, you’re telling me, that the country with more women in the Supreme Soviet than in basically the rest of the worlds’ legislative bodies combined, wasn’t pioneer in feminism? I’m not saying it was feminist to 2024 standards, or that it was perfect, but it was by FAR the most progressive country on earth at the time.

        Your ideas don’t mean a shit if your actions don’t reflect it

        The USSR was the only country to sell weapons to republican Spain (I’m Spanish) in their struggle against fascism. They provided immense help to China in its early industrial development through technological exchange and sending experts to their economy, as they did with most other socialist countries at the time. The USSR was a beacon of internationalism in an otherwise capitalist hellhole of a planet. Key note in internationalism, the USSR itself had an incredible national diversity between its republics, with most people in central Asian republics not even speaking Russian after 7 decades of USSR. Industrial development being boosted in the poorest republics such as Central Asia, equal access to medicine and healthcare in all republics, education being provided in the local language of the republics… Fuck me if that’s not internationalist solidarity as opposed to nationalism.

        The unions were led and controlled by the communist party

        If unions were so bad and useless, but voluntary to join, why was the USSR the country with the highest unionization rate? The myth of “they were controlled by the communist party” is, well, just a myth. Some things that Unions did: Controlling important aspects of production. Enforcing workplace safety regulation. Organizing educational activities for workers by workers, and training for higher positions. Providing access to doctors and medical revisions. Providing access to affordable housing. Choosing representatives to make their demands. Electing higher positions within the workplace. Providing announcement boards and periodical publications with complaints and remarks of workers for everyone in the workplace to read.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Please explain how there were exploitation of surplus value,

      Insane that you think the workers weren’t exploited for the surplus value they created in the USSR. I guess the holsum state apparatus just took what value the workers produced and then very conveniently gave them the amount it was worth in incredibly shitty housing, bread lines, and police repression.

      a mythical past of greatness, ethnonationalism in the USSR,

      Denying ethnonationalism and an obsession with a great and mythical past in the USSR. Rich.

      Great Patriotic War was never mythologized, no cult of personality with Lenin or Stalin, no mass deportations and genocides of ethnicities inconvenient to the Russian majority -

      Oh. Wait. That’s right.

      and how womens rights weren’t categorically forwarded to world-pioneer levels, tell us the percentages of representation in the party of different ethnicities,

      Women’s rights were world pioneer levels in the USSR. Hah. Maybe in the 20s.

      tell us how the USSR’s ideas weren’t based on internationalist solidarity,

      Internationalist solidarity is when you run a colonial empire, and the more colonial it is, the more solidarity you express.

      and tell me one country with more union members than the former USSR.

      What good is a union that doesn’t even have the right (or ability) to strike? But sure, tell me more about how striking workers getting gunned down is actually union power.

      I know you’re not going to answer to any of these questions seriously and you’re gonna dismiss it with “lol u are fash”, just pointing out you haven’t done and won’t do any research on the topic because you’ve been brainwashed by leftist anti-communism.

      Oh no.

      Not leftist anti-Stalinism.

      • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        Insane that you think the workers weren’t exploited for the surplus value they created in the USSR. I guess the holsum state apparatus just took what value the workers produced

        You trying to justify that a society can exist without any degree of bureaucracy, and somehow the existence of administrative personnel earning normal wages totally means that there’s an oppressive class and an exploited one.

        and then very conveniently gave them the amount it was worth in incredibly shitty housing, bread lines

        Hahaha oh god no, “communism is when bread line and your house is ugly”. We’re at peak lib levels here. Bread lines were nonexistent in the USSR after WW2 until Perestroika, but sure buddy, you’ve done your research.

        no mass deportations and genocides of ethnicities inconvenient to the Russian majority

        you run a colonial empire

        You’re a fucking joke. You can possibly make the argument of forced deportations of Crimean Tatars, but that’s literally the only case of anything remotely like an attack to a given ethnicity that you can conjure. Saying that there was anything remotely resembling genocide in the USSR is ahistorical anti-communist bullshit. Again proving you haven’t read a fucking history book not written by libs. Oh, the russian majority, adoring a Georgian as a statesman and leaving as his successor a Ukrainian! There hasn’t been a single state on earth less oppressive towards local ethnicities than the USSR. Education being offered by law in the regional language of the republics, written publications in the local language exceeding that of Russian in most republics, celebration of local customs and traditions (go to Uzbekistan and tell me how Russified they are), equal access to education, healthcare, similar salaries between republics and ethnicities, vast investment in industrial development of all regions… You have no fucking idea what colonialism is.

        Women’s rights were world pioneer levels in the USSR. Hah. Maybe in the 20s

        By the 70s, there were more engineer women in the USSR than in the rest of the world together. You can’t at that period find comparable numbers of women in justice, in higher positions at education, as doctors, or as any highly regarded position in society in literally any other country of the world, not even those that had been industrialised for 150 years longer than the USSR. Widely available canteens and restaurants so the burden of cooking won’t fall on women. Widely available kindergartens so that the burden of upbringing children won’t fall on women. Again with the fucking ahistorical bullshit. Claiming that the USSR was the most feminist nation of its time is simply a historical fact if you look at any fucking statistic on the topic, which you clearly haven’t done.

        What good is a union that doesn’t even have the right (or ability) to strike?

        Controlling important aspects of production. Enforcing workplace safety regulation. Organizing educational activities for workers by workers, and training for higher positions. Providing access to doctors and medical revisions. Providing access to affordable housing. Choosing representatives to make their demands. Electing higher positions within the workplace. Providing announcement boards and periodical publications with complaints and remarks of workers for everyone in the workplace to read. Again, proving you haven’t read a fucking book. I’ll flip the question: if unions were useless, why was the USSR factually the country with the highest number of unionized workers? Did Stalin personally go to everyone’s house and put a gun to their head to join the union or what?

        Not leftist anti-Stalinism

        Nuanced anti-Stalinism is actually good, I’m not Stalinist by any means. The great terror was absolutely horrendous, unnecessary, and accomplished nothing. But the extent of the analysis of Stalinism being “this happened because Stalin bad” isn’t Marxist, it’s lazy and peak lib.

        • silkroadtraveler@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          3 months ago

          70% cherry picking here. Uzbekistan is the way it is because of its remoteness and lack of exploitable natural resources not because of some state level benevolence. Look at what the Soviets did to Kazakhstan (RIP Aral Sea)…no matter how you spin it there is a huge chasm between the ideals of the USSR and the way its leaders exercised their power and authority.

          • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            Look at what the Soviets did to Kazakhstan

            Poor fucking Kazakhstan, the country in central Asia with the highest human development index and quality of life by a huge fucking margin. You guys are a joke.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          You trying to justify that a society can exist without any degree of bureaucracy, and somehow the existence of administrative personnel earning normal wages totally means that there’s an oppressive class and an exploited one.

          lol

          Figured you wouldn’t even try to respond to the arguments seriously. That might involve critical thought, which is dangerous to the party line, right?

          Saying that there was anything remotely resembling genocide in the USSR is ahistorical anti-communist bullshit.

          “When you murder tens-to-hundreds of thousands of a given ethnicity, and deport an even larger number (a practice known as ethnic cleansing and generally considered a key piece of genocide) when attempting to reshape ethnic borders to your liking, it’s nothing even remotely resembling genocide.”

          Least genocidal tankie.

          • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            Thank you for not responding to all parts of my comment when I bring actual fucking data that you can’t contest because you haven’t read a book.

            “When you murder tens-to-hundreds of thousands of a given ethnicity, and deport an even larger number (a practice known as ethnic cleansing and generally considered a key piece of genocide) when attempting to reshape ethnic borders to your liking, it’s nothing even remotely resembling genocide.”

            When you don’t discriminate or target by ethnicity because of paranoia during the unjustifiable Big Terror, when there’s no previous incidents against a given ethnicity and no later attempts to hurt a given ethnicity, then no, you can’t call it genocide, I’m sorry. You can condemn the big terror for what it was, but you can’t call it genocidal because there was no continuous attempt against any given nationality.