USSR

I just got an issue involving "a farmer's attempts to drive a family of travelers off of private property." Ando Teca is a communist nation! It doesn't have private property!

Vayanskaya wrote:

Hello comrades, I had been looking for a leftist region and chose this one for now. Since I moved here, I would like to shortly introduce myself, I hope we can start a conversation.
I am from Balkan peninsula, left-oriented in politics, but I am generally opposed to old socialist regimes that ruled in last century. I was born after collapse of those regimes, but since I must deal with a corrupt autocracy here where I live, I suppose that I would not have unconditionally supported those one-party socialist regimes. Corrupted autocracy eventually leads to decline of the state prosperity, if there even was one. Here in ex-Yugoslavia we had what is generally considered to be one of the most advanced socialist regimes under Josip Broz Tito, and it really was a recognited state. But after Tito died no one was really capable to properly replace him, and it didn't take a while to get whole country destroyed in war. If there is no criticism, there is not going to be permanent advance. Lets even say that Tito was entirely good and one of the best rulers of the time. System will probably function even under the censorship, but when uncapable and greedy staff takes power, they are certainly going to keep that censorship just to maintain their positions, and since one cannot say nothing against them and they rule for some time, it is absolutely predictable what is going to happen. I dare to say that's what destroyed old socialist order. Soviet invasion on Czechoslovakia made it worse and cut all possibilities for a different path of socialist' destiny.
However, I am nostalgic for Yugoslavia, Soviet Union and whole that order (I was not born at the time but you know what I mean) because at least it had been real counterpower to the west, had provided balance and safety for us (people in Yugoslavia who got attacked by NATO later). It was real counterpower to the imperial capitalism, whose big companies could not operate, molest and treat people only as a cheap labor. Now it is really tough time to fight for socialist ideas, world has almost completely turned into a corporate hell after fall of Warsaw Pact. I hope we establish socialist order again, but in more advanced form than it was.

I'm not a fan of Tito; although, I respect the comrade. I'm stanch old fashion Marxist-leninist open to the idea that what is China's '90 year' "New Economic Policy" in of the USSR's own NEP. It can't be denied that it has had immense ego-polictical benefits in establishing itself as a world power, which in all likely hood will replace the USA; however, it did establish a pervasive capitalist class.

I hold true to the tenets Established by Marx, Engels , Lenin, Stalin (and many of his confidence), Mao (to a lesser degree), plus others.

First, I think you have to understand that the USSR and Yugoslavia were faced by the entire classical than neo liberal world in terms of subversion. The ussr almost had a second civil war, plus many of the the party members dispelled and/or tried and convicted were later able to join the party after their term ended.

Also, the west has done a great job of depicting communist countries as evil when their own document (ie the cia for example) admit the ussr isn't a dictatorship, practice democracy (albeit a different form than traditional western democracy), granted universal suverage and the right to equal opportunity, women right to abortion, and equality in gender in terms of law and government.

There's political ideology and then there is realpolitik and it's hard to balance the both. He had to essentially move the ussr eastern industrial region to the west of Moscow as well as population to protect them and work the factory because the Nazis would have steam rolled them and used them for labor. The collect farmers were hard for the mid-range wealth but they need to feed an entire population engaged in literally moving the entire industrial sector as well a build rail roads.

The soviet archives depict Stalin before his death to make many of these policies in exercising authority a lot friendlier as well as establish a system between the centeral committee and the party at large plus the structure of the supreme soviet into a system that was guided more so by shared power, rather than the concentration of power Stalin had due to the great patriotic war and the following external and internal subversion at large.

Khrushchev is largely to blame for killing the Comintern (the international org for communists), consolidating power, and preventing Stalin plans of distributing power for a time of peace, and of course denouncing Stalin. Finishing with Gorbachev who was more focused on being an "internationalist" rather than fixing the coup brewing under him.

The USSR main long term failure is not exploring telecom and later digital computing. Running the planned economy was literally impossible with their tech plus they spent enough on bombs to blow up the world 4-5 times at least some of that could have been devoted to other places.

Also the ussr had elections regardless of party affiliation in the gov.

The Supreme Socialist Soviet Union wrote:

I'm not a fan of Tito; although, I respect the comrade. I'm stanch old fashion Marxist-leninist open to the idea that what is China's '90 year' "New Economic Policy" in of the USSR's own NEP. It can't be denied that it has had immense ego-polictical benefits in establishing itself as a world power, which in all likely hood will replace the USA; however, it did establish a pervasive capitalist class.

I hold true to the tenets Established by Marx, Engels , Lenin, Stalin (and many of his confidence), Mao (to a lesser degree), plus others.

First, I think you have to understand that the USSR and Yugoslavia were faced by the entire classical than neo liberal world in terms of subversion. The ussr almost had a second civil war, plus many of the the party members dispelled and/or tried and convicted were later able to join the party after their term ended.

Also, the west has done a great job of depicting communist countries as evil when their own document (ie the cia for example) admit the ussr isn't a dictatorship, practice democracy (albeit a different form than traditional western democracy), granted universal suverage and the right to equal opportunity, women right to abortion, and equality in gender in terms of law and government.

There's political ideology and then there is realpolitik and it's hard to balance the both. He had to essentially move the ussr eastern industrial region to the west of Moscow as well as population to protect them and work the factory because the Nazis would have steam rolled them and used them for labor. The collect farmers were hard for the mid-range wealth but they need to feed an entire population engaged in literally moving the entire industrial sector as well a build rail roads.

The soviet archives depict Stalin before his death to make many of these policies in exercising authority a lot friendlier as well as establish a system between the centeral committee and the party at large plus the structure of the supreme soviet into a system that was guided more so by shared power, rather than the concentration of power Stalin had due to the great patriotic war and the following external and internal subversion at large.

Khrushchev is largely to blame for killing the Comintern (the international org for communists), consolidating power, and preventing Stalin plans of distributing power for a time of peace, and of course denouncing Stalin. Finishing with Gorbachev who was more focused on being an "internationalist" rather than fixing the coup brewing under him.

The USSR main long term failure is not exploring telecom and later digital computing. Running the planned economy was literally impossible with their tech plus they spent enough on bombs to blow up the world 4-5 times at least some of that could have been devoted to other places.

Also the ussr had elections regardless of party affiliation in the gov.

I heard one Russian politician or army general who said in the 90s there were only to options: wild privatization or civil war. It might even be Yeltsin but I ain't sure. I am neither not sure if there was nothing more to do. However my statement is that collapse of Eastern bloc (or at least Soviet Union) is the biggest geopolitical catastrophe we faced. China's ruling party preserved their power by transitioning to new economic policy, now state capitalism. I am not fan of China, I think they are as opportunistic as US are. They were reaching agreements with US long before Soviet collapse. Chinese are very pragmatic and opportunistic. But I believe that's what needed to be done to preserve Soviet Union as well. Essentially it is hard to fight large capitalist forces when you are a socialist state. Who is going to be richer: large capitalist states or corporations who exploit Africa and South America, not giving a damn to the people, or when you are building a society which ought to be as equal as it can possibly get.
Everybody knows that US don't care about democracy, they have supported dictators who play their game, from Latin America to Saudi Arabia. Serbia is accused to be the only bad guy in Yugoslav wars, simply because you need to create enemy in your head to justify all military operations you have planned before. And it was easy back then for western imperialists because USSR was no more. US became like Roman Empire, the only major force in the world. I really despise western concept of so-called freedom. It can be seen even in this online game while you are addressing the issues. If you cut someone's opportunity to get rich, you don't respect civil rights. Keep advertising LGBTQ+ rights and put the worker's issues in shadow. (I do support LGBT people, especially when they are facing conservative 'moralists', I just don't respect motifs of western propaganda, that's all).
My opinion about Stalin is that he can easily be considered as an emperor like there was in Russian Empire, he was imperialists and dictator, much like the old emperors, and if he lived 200+ years back, he would be considered as great ruler, when autocracy was completely normal way of ruling. He was an imperialists, I don't know how someone can deny it, he even had plans to attack Yugoslavia (Tito was an opportunist so he gain US and Britain to our side). But if you look from geopolitical side, Stalin did magnificent job for Soviet Union, like no other Russian emperor. Still I think that he damaged reputation of communism by his dictatorship, when even many westerns supported socialist idea.

You sure you are a "People's Republic"?

With capitalism and slavery? Uh huh