• vfreire85@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    you know, i tell you what. i’m fed up with all this gringo self-righteousness when you talk about “oh communism was bad, oh people where killed, oh people had no food, oh people had no liberty, oh people could not buy ataris, oh our countries are so democratic”. your countries were democratic during the cold war in the first place because you had people to sort things out for you here in the global south. for each person complaining about how the food rations in eastern europe were not tasty enough, there were 10 dying of hunger or malnourishment here in the global south. for every person complaining they had to wait 5 years in a queue to buy a trabant or an oka, there were 10 who got no school in a range of 50 km. for every person complaining that their 8 hour shifts in state owned factories were overwhelming, there were 10 who were indentured workers. for every person complaining about how the stasi, kgb or the stb had bugged their apartment, there were 10 suffering the most horrific tortures inside black sites of the military of u.s. allies here in the “third world”. for every person complaining about dull standard apartment blocks in mikrorayons, there were 10 who lived in mud shacks and slums, and those are just who were lucky enough to have a roof over their heads. finally, for everyone complaining about chinese sweatshops, which are indeed a problem, there are 10 americans who work and yet cannot afford proper housing.

    you wanna complain about how communism was bad? go ahead. you wanna complain how your parents lived under communism and could not drink coke? do so if you wish. but there are still millions of people down here who would give an arm and a leg to have a polish ration, an apartment in a russian gray building, or a yugoslav job. and while the chinese maoist red guard was bad, surely it won’t be an inch closer to the harassement people endured on a daily basis by our police forces.

    again: you wanna complain? be my guest. but for me that’s an encyclopedic example of white privilege.

    • nargis@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      This, so much this. Having a job and a roof over your head is such a luxury in the ‘global south’, the true face of capitalism

    • galanthus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Why would you not compare european communist countries woth european capitalist countries? Sure, africans and asians were poorer, but that goes without saying, honestly, what does that even have to do with this matter?

      East Germany was poorer than west Germany. That tells us something. The fact that Ethiopia or whatever was poorer does not really tell us much about ehich economic system is better.

      • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        You’re conveniently forgeting all the plundering of the global south the good ol’ european capitalist countries did to develop themselves.

      • missandry351@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        Loool it’s easy to say East Germany was poorer when they had to deal with all the sanctions. But be my guest, how many homeless people in USA and how many in Cuba?

        • galanthus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          If only there was a superpower leading a blok of nations rivaling the west that could have supported east Germany…

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Hard to do so in the aftermath of World War II when the Nazis destroyed half your buildings and murdered 20 million of your people. The Soviets did 80% of the combat against the Nazis.

            • galanthus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              So you claim the USSR did not support East Germany because of anti-german sentiments, while the west invested quite a lot into the reconstruction of FRG. I am afraid I am not qualified to assess how accurate that claim is(the former half of it, specifically). But I am deeply skeptical about this, since it would be quite a useful propaganda tool both domestically and in the west. Also, the east had a communist government and it distanced itself from it’s past. The internationalist ideology of the USSR should have triumphed over the nationalist sentiments that might have existed.

              However, I should say, that the main point of my original comment still stands. Of course, there are always many factors at play and it is not the case that the disparity between the east and the west can be attributed to the economic system alone. However, this does not mean that such comparisons are not valid, and I still would say that comparing european countries to underdeveloped countries to say that life in eastern Europe “wasn’t that bad” is quite absurd.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                2 days ago

                I didn’t say the USSR didn’t support East Germany, I explained the unique struggles East Germany faced compared to West Germany.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        West Germany had almost all of the industry of Germany, and East Germany was made to pay harsh reparations for the immense devastation the Nazis wrought upon the Soviet people and countries. Moreover, West Germany was never de-Nazified, and the US and Western Countries heavily invested into its development as a means to destabilize the relations with the East, even threatening to put NATO nukes in West Germany.

    • turnip@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      “Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it’s just the opposite.”

  • missandry351@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    When people ask me what communist country was successful I usually say all of them until cia decided to go there and spread freedom 🇺🇸🦅

    • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well… There was this thing called Soviet Union. They decided to try to speed up the transition to communism by using repression and violence. And ended up being a totalitarian state, a direct opposite of what a communist state is supposed to be like.

      Of course you can argue that Soviet Union was not communist, it was just a state that had chosen to call itself communist for propaganda reasons… But still, Soviet Union is an example of a communist country that was unsuccessful as a communist project already by itself. Then came outsiders and helped make it even worse, but bad doesn’t become good by some people wanting it to be even worse. Burma is another example. I’d say they hacked away their own leg before anyone else, such as CIA, had time to interfere in their business.

        • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Finland decreased its poverty between 1917 and 1991 more than Soviet Union did. In the beginning of year 1917 Finland was a part of the Russian Empire, so we were extremely poor here as well. Soviet Union could be on the second place, perhaps. But, since there is at least one country that fared better, the claim you made it evidently false. There can very well be other countries than just Finland that decreased poverty more than USSR did. I do not know for sure, though, as I’m not terribly well aware of how faraway places like Chile or Burma were faring in 1917.

      • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The USSR had to deal with a civil war, rising up during WWI and being sabotaged by the Germans, more civil war, foreign meddling, and all while being the first successful communist revolution. Yet they still managed to raise literacy, raise health outcomes, raise average life expectancy, gender equality, science and technology, end the cycle of famines (after the first one or two they had when they were still building up), had faster growth during that period than any capitalist country (except maybe the US, which was doing imperialism at the time and the biggest hegemon), all while helping sustain other socialist countries, like Cuba, Venezuela, or North Korea.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            20 hours ago

            Comparing the Nazis to the Communists is a form of Nazi Apologia, originating with Double Genocide Theory. The truth is that they are in no way comparable, read Blackshirts and Reds..

            The Soviet Union existed for the workers. They doubled life expectancy, over tripled literacy rates to 99.9% from the low 30s, dramatically reduced wealth inequality, provided free and high quality healthcare and education, and democratized the economy.

            Comparing Finland to the USSR is… odd. Finland funds its safety nets through Imperialism. The Soviet Union was also far larger and far more populous, and yet cared for its people while detached from much of the global economy. The Soviets did 80% of the combat against the Nazis and had half their buildings destroyed and 20 million people killed by the Nazis, while Finland saw no such comparable devastation. The Soviets largely rebuilt on their own, while Western countries had an unscathed United States propping them up. The point is that Finland didn’t accomplish any of this on their own, and moreover a lot of these concessions came to prevent revolution like was seen in Russia.

            I recommend reading Blackshirts and Reds.

            • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              19 hours ago

              I’m not comparing them. I’m saying that doing something good does not mean that the instance that does the good is also good. The Nazis are simply the most extreme example that can be found, and therefore the most efficient way to show that the concept of “doing some good things does not automatically mean you’re a good guy” exists in general.

              They doubled life expectancy, over tripled literacy rates to 99.9% from the low 30s, dramatically reduced wealth inequality, provided free and high quality healthcare and education

              And the only part of the Russia that did not become Soviet did the same things in an even bigger scale. Why?

              Finland funds its safety nets through Imperialism.

              The eastern block got money from Moscow through Warsaw pact. The western block got money from Marshall Aid. There was only one country in Europe that received neither: Finland. We were considered to be in the eastern block, so we were not allowed to get Marshall Aid. And USSR’s aid required accepting that “if the country’s independence is endangered, Moscow can choose to send its forces to help”. We demanded a change to that rule so that Helsinki decides if the help is needed, not Moscow. And then Soviet Union said, “okay, no money for you people, then”. Soviet Union got reparations from Germany and Finland. Finland paid all of its reparations, fully. The last payment was made in the 1990’s. While being the only country not getting any money from foreign countries for rebuilding after the war, we also paid huge war reparations to the country that had begun the war in coöperation with Germany by attacking us in 1939. And yes, that does mean that the advances Soviet Union did after the second world war were partially financed by Finland. Which still managed to do better than Soviet Union it was helping. Could you please tell, how precisely does all this mean that Finland was funding its safety nets through imperialism? Was the Finnish imperialism visible in the huge decrease of Finno-Ugric population, from whose colonized territories Soviet Union got almost all of its oil and minerals? Or where did the Finnish imperialism physically take place?

              Finland saw no such comparable devastation

              During just three nights in 1940, Soviet Union dropped 16489 bombs in Helsinki alone. How is that not devastation? And of course those were only the most intense nights of bombing, there were of course maaany more of them between 1939 and 1944.

              The Soviet Union existed for the workers.

              The Soviet Union said that it exists for the workers. But the workers were who got sent to the camps to die, not the ruling class.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                19 hours ago

                You stated that the Nazis did some good things, but that they also did many horrible things, and used that to show that the good the USSR did was outweighed by the bad. That right there is Nazi apologia, the sheer scale of bad in the Nazis far surpassed that of the Soviets, just like the sheer good of the Soviets far outweighed that of the Nazis, to incomparable levels. Using the Nazis as an “easy example” doesn’t prove your point better, it serves as Nazi apologia.

                No, Finland did not achieve better metrics at a larger scale, and further I already explained that Finland is Imperialist. It’s a landlord in country form, like the rest of Western Europe, and especially the US.

                As for how Finnish Imperialism works, through various international loans and overseas production, Finland extracts superprofits off of exploitation of the Global South. To get into specifics of this takes up entire volumes, but you can start with Lenin’s Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism to see how the system generally works, though not specific to Finland.

                20 million soviet citizens died in World War 2, and half of their buildings were destroyed. The Winter War does not compare, neither in proportion nor in raw quantity, to the sheer amount of rebuilding necessary. That’s also ignoring Finland’s history of anticommunism and cozying up to fascists.

                The Workers in the Soviet Union were not sent to camps to die en mass. The "ruling class’ was the Proletariat. There was Prison labor, but overall incarceration rates, even despite having genuine Tsarists and fascists to contend with, were usually lower than the United States as a comparison. Consider reading Russian Justice.

                The Soviet Union served the Working Class. Free, high quality healthcare and education, dramatically lowered wealth inequality, support for national liberation movements globally, defeated the Nazis, provided childcare, large movements in women’s rights, democratized the economy, and more.

                The notion that there was a “ruling class” that exploited the workers is ludicrous, because they would have sucked at their job given that they dramatically lowered wealth inequality. They walked the walk as well as talked the talk.

                • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  17 hours ago

                  used that to show that the good the USSR did was outweighed by the bad.

                  Nope. I used it to show that it is possible that the good the USSR did was outweighed by the bad. That the concept exists. The Nazis are a warning example of what we must never become. It is super scary that it is not allowed to talk about them. In this case nothing like Nazis actions was under conversation, but sometimes things do look almost 1:1 the same as Germany looked in 1920’s when the foundations for Nazism were laid and early 1930’s. It is not good that it is considered Nazi apologia, because if we can’t say aloud when things are going that way again, we will eventually end up Nazis ourselves.

                  I used to live in Germany, and it scared me that people there don’t see that their way will eventually lead to rise of fascism again, no matter how understandable the principles behind the “do not compare anything to Nazis” rule is! When it comes again, Germans are not going to anything to stop it, and will stop anyone who does try to. Except, of course, if it uses the swastika. Then it will be stopped.

                  But, now back to the actual subject!

                  The Workers in the Soviet Union were not sent to camps to die en mass.

                  Correct, it was largely based on the ethnic background, not so much on social strata. For example Latvians were sent there in such amounts that now almost 50 % of Latvians speak Russian as their main language. It also does not really matter if they were sent there en mass or not, when several millions from around Soviet Union were sent there and 70 % of them died. Camps where millions are sent and less than a third come back alive is not something that can ever be considered acceptable. Camps where you put six people to sleep in a space built for one or two are not okay. It is not okay, it was not okay, and it never will be okay. And it is not okay to defend them.

                  Then there are some claims that you just let hanging in the air:

                  No, Finland did not achieve better metrics at a larger scale

                  I already explained that Finland [was between 1917 and 1991] Imperialist

                  Finland extract[ed] superprofits off of exploitation of the Global South [between 1917 and 1991].

                  You need to elaborate on those. I did alter the quotes, because in the context of comparing countries’ growth 1917–1991 whatever happened after 1991 is not really relevant. The altered parts are marked clearly.

                  “ruling class” – would have sucked at their job given that they dramatically lowered wealth inequality.

                  The job of the ruling class is not to maximize wealth inequality. They very often do that, yes, but it is not their job. Lowering wealth inequality is a sign of the ruling class is doing their job correctly, not incorrectly. I do not understand why you would think otherwise.

          • On the southern Kazak steppe an aged yellow-skinned herdsman, dying, sent a last message to his son who had been village president and who was now elected delegate to the All-Union Congress: “All the years of my life were dark with toil and hunger. But I lived to see the new day. Take care of the Soviet power, my son; it is our power, our happiness.”

      • Dengalicious@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe don’t brag about your ignorance publicly and keep your mouth shut about things you know nothing about?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The USSR didn’t “do repression and violence to speed up Communism,” they had a successful revolution and established Socialism. By all accounts it was quite successful overall, but we can learn from where they erred and adapt for the future.

        The only ones who believe the Soviet Union wasn’t Socialist are generally Western Trots or liberals/Anarchists who already don’t want the form of society Marxists want, which is a government that publicly owns its large and key industries and gradually folds in the new firms that grow to that level until the entire economy is publicly owned.

        • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 day ago

          Have you never heard of bolševiks and menševiks? What you’re explaining is what menševiks wanted, but what happened was what bolševiks aimed for.

          And that was inhumane horror.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            No, the Mensheviks had a poor understanding of Historical Materialism and didn’t think the Peasantry could truly be allied to the Proletariat. What I am describing is what the Bolsheviks did. To a better extent the PRC also fulfills this.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                21 hours ago

                I don’t think reeducation camps should be considered “concentration camps,” which brings to mind the mass killings of the Holocaust, but regardless the reeducation program is pretty much complete.

                As far as can be considered a successful country, the PRC absolutely fits that. Conditions for the people are rapidly improving, the economy when adjusted for purchasing power parity is the largest in the world, it’s a world leader in renewable energy, and is overtaking the rest of the world in key metrics.

                • Tuukka R@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  17 hours ago

                  A camp where people are sent because of their ethnic background and where a large part of inmates die is a concentration camp, absolutely. Especially if human experiments are done on the inmates and torture is common.

                  I would not want my conditions to improve through slavery and torture of others. There is a big difference between you and me regarding that.

  • Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    And it’s a holiday in Cambodia

    Where you’ll what you’re told

    Holiday in Cambodia

    Where the slum’s got so much soul

    DK

  • rumba@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Communism isn’t bad, it just crumples as soon you put anything but saints in charge of it.

    I’m not entirely sure anything works better in a long-term scenario though :)

  • umbrella@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    whoops, brazil. we had a budding workers movement that was absolutely crushed by the traitorous brazilian military, in the name of the US of course.

    that hasnt stopped syndicalism to take root here and improve our lives a bit, but the communist organizations responsible were all crushed and we see our rights being taken away ever since because no one is left to defend them. we are scrambling rn to see if we can stop fascism.

  • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    I wonder if anyone ever said “Democracy would never work, just look at what happened to Athens”.

    Socialism and communism are relatively new ideas. While I don’t believe communism is an effective form of government, it’s still kind of silly to write it off so quickly.

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      There isn’t really a single form of communist government, same as there isn’t a single way to do democracy or capitalism. Every country does it different, experiments a different way. For all we know, the perfect way to do it is just waiting for us to discover.

      For example, I’d say the US’s form of liberal, bourgeois democracy is one of the worst ways to implement it, but it was also an early experiment with it and deserves credit for at least trying it and helping us learn what to do and what not to do.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      There is a poem in Polish, it goes in fast and dirty translation: “Today you scare us with communists, just as years ago, you scared our fathers with the democrat name”.

      • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The more I study history, the more I see the great wheel of humanity. Communists now, Jews in the 40s, Muslims in the early middles ages, the barbaric Gauls before Christ was even born. It never stops. The people with wisdom die off leaving remnants of their culture and ideas while the next generations tries to piece it all together.

  • CircaV@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Luckily the US is dismantling the CIA so that’s good news for communism!!!

    • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      For those that don’t like to read, you don’t have to read theory. In fact, most theory is old. There are newer and better takes on these ideas. Find a good YouTube channel that goes over the ideas. I like Vaush.

      If you like to read theory, go for it. But I think there are faster and easier ways to get the concepts.

      • PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Instead of sending you to the Vaush Gulag I’m going to instead reccomend that you try audiobooks. There are many on youtube, but that is not the only place you can find audiobooks of Marxist theory. Let’s just say Marxists are real keen on making sure these texts are readily accessible. While a lot of theory is old, not all of it is, but you’ll be lost in newer theory if you don’t know the basics.

        I highly recommend “Black Shirts and Reds” by Parenti for newbies to Marxism. I also recommend “Socialism Scientific and Utopian” by Engels, “Reform and Revolution” by Luxembourg. All of these can easily be found as both pdf and audiobook, and are short, and easily digestible by lay people.

      • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        For all the people talking about Vaush and Hasan and their controversies, realize that there are other folks out there where you can learn about theory without the Twitch brainrot. The Revolutionary Left podcast is my personal favorite.

        • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Or even better, reading books. With respect to a small minority, podcasts are not a great source to learn about anything.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          Why? Information is information. Why does it matter if it comes from books or videos?

          • Dengalicious@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Firstly, “Results from the study confirmed the substantial equivalence of all conditions in immediate comprehension. Conversely, results confirmed the disadvantage of subtitled videos for deep learning outcomes.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131520302323

            Secondly, there are no videos ever made that explain the depth and volume that many books do. They simply don’t exist

            Thirdly, you can easily refer back to other areas of books that are more difficult in videos.

            Fourthly, you can read sentence over again when you don’t understand but you have to stop to rewind which makes it more difficult to place in context.

            Fifthly, videos just don’t exist for this. There are no videos that exist that explain things in the structured format that actual theory provides.

            You cannot become educated on this matter with videos and it will just leave you over-confident and ignorant

            • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              19 hours ago

              Be that as it may, the left is not going to do well if the prerequisite to having discussions is to read a bunch of literature. I think we need to find a way to make our tent bigger.

      • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        You DO have to read theory. Just because it is old doesn’t mean it’s wrong or outdated.

        Also I’m not opposed to watching YouTube videos, but it shouldn’t be your only source for it, and recommending Vaush is a huge problem, don’t do that.

        If anyone wants some actual good recommendations:

        In english: Second Thought, Hakim, Yugopnik, Luna Oi, revolutionary_thot, azurescapegoat. There’s also Hasan, but he does commentary and not theory teaching or analisys or anything like that.

        In portuguese: Ian Neves/História Pública, Laura Sabino, Jones Manoel, Tempero Drag/Rita von Hunty, João Carvalho.

        There’s of course others, I’m just going by the ones I remember right now.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          How can you have a problem with Vaush when he is so ideologically similar to Hasan? Unless you have have disagreements with Hasan.

          • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Comrade Cowbee already listed the issues with Vaush that I’ll not repeat here.

            That being said, I can’t really say much about Vaush’s ideological stance since I don’t watch him. What I can say is that I doubt he’s anywhere close to Hasan ideologically if going by how his fans act. Most of the times what I have seen is a pretty clear anticommunist stance from them that I cannot comprehend, specially when they love to laud Vaush as such a great leftist youtuber.

            Unless you have have disagreements with Hasan

            I do have some issues with Hasan actually, which I’ll use this comment to inform anyone that reads it after my recommendation. I don’t watch a lot of Hasan, I usually see bits and pieces of him here and there when youtube recommends him to me, and I mostly disagree with some of his instances on China, from the little I seen he’s mostly pro China, but I have seen some iffy stuff on his knowledge about the Uyghurs. I also don’t think his format of reaction/commentary to be that great either, specially since he likes to leave mid video a lot while it is still playing for his audience. I think his content could benefit a lot more if he actually paused on key points of the videos he reacts to to explain, debunk and or give context to the stuff said while also giving his opinion and stance on that as a Marxist. If you want an example of what that would be like, the brasilian youtuber João Carvalho I mentioned before does this, a lot, like to the point of even being a bit tiring sometimes, lol, but makes the content usually pretty transformative instead of just content theft.

            That being said, Hasan is a very important figure in radicalizing and propagandizing for the left in the english speaking internet since he’s at the top of the left pipeline on youtube at least. I recommend this video by Yugopnik to learn more about this.

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Vaush’s whole thing is controversy bait. He purposely crosses lines to get people mad at him while maintaining some form of “plausible deniability” to where his fans can always find a way to defend and excuse his actions by talking about “you don’t understand the context” or whatever, it’s a very common and tiresome tactic. Like, if you’re trying to promote a shitty video game that can’t stand on it’s own merits, just do something to antagonize either the left or the right (doesn’t matter which) and then go to the other group and be like, “Look, the guys you hate hate us, you should check us out.” Controversy generates clicks. A big reason for Trump’s success is that he cracked the code on how to apply this formula to a political campaign. If you know how to recognize it, it’s very obvious that Vaush does this.

        This sort of opportunism is very detrimental to actually understanding the world or promoting ideas or building a movement. It’s essentially brain-poisoning and a cognitohazard. You’re much better off reading actual books than just following whoever’s best at attracting attention on the internet. If you are going to shun books for videos, you should at least go with someone more educational, like Shaun.

        • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I don’t know where you are getting the idea that he purposefully generates controversies. He lost subs during most of his controversies, not gained. And it has down stream negative impacts on his channel other than just sub count.

          He is just very careless.

          • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            24 hours ago

            No way it’s just carelessness, nobody forces him to say edgy shit. It’s the classic “no such thing as bad publicity,” or, “but you have heard of me” thing. I’d have never heard of him without the controversies (of which there are many), and despite making a conscious effort to avoid him, even I’ve seen clips of him. When you get people talking about something, people will get curious and want to see it straight from the horses mouth, then some percentage of the people who show up “to get the full story” will like what they see and stick around, and even if they don’t, a hate click is still “engagement,” it doesn’t matter why you click, if you click, it boosts him in the algorithm.

            Going into examples will naturally only play into this effect, but I recall him once talking about performing eugenics to eradicate trans people from existence, under the idea of detecting gender dysphoria in the womb and aborting the fetus. This is an example of walking right up to the line and getting people mad on purpose, that’s not something someone just “organically” says out of “carelessness,” it’s specifically formulated to generate outrage, while, as always, leaving him an out that he can fall back on.

            • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              24 hours ago

              There is 100% such a thing as bad publicity. Your post here is a literal example of this, you actively avoid him and there are many people who feel the same way as you.

              Hes not forced to say edgy shit, he just doesn’t put much effort into not saying edgy shit and he naturally wants to. He doesn’t police his own words, for instance, his frequent use of the word “retarded” and his joking about hating women. He also constantly blurts out shit and then his audience points out he misspoke and he gets annoyed and says “You fucks know what I meant”. He has no anxiety or shame about his wording of things. There is no worry on his end about saying something shameful, he’s literally said that he thinks shame is a worthless emotion.

              He doesn’t “mask” essentially. He is not careful. Maybe to some degree that helps his internet career because of reputation of authenticity or something but it also frequently pisses off his own audience. The controversies have lost him subs, they’ve severely damaged his ability to engage with other creators because he has either alienated or outright insulted them, which means he doesn’t debate anyone anymore, left or right.

              Its not on purpose. Hes not playing 12D chess to boost his youtube career. He wouldn’t be a leftwing creator in that case, he’d be a rightwing grifter instead. A lot more money in that.

              • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                23 hours ago

                Your post here is a literal example of this, you actively avoid him and there are many people who feel the same way as you.

                And yet, I’ve given him clicks. And I’m talking about him. That’s what he wants, that’s why he does what he does. Were it not for the controversies, I wouldn’t watch him either because I wouldn’t have heard of him, and also because I’m not his target audience.

                Hopefully my criticism calls out the pattern directly enough that people take away that they should just ignore him, as opposed to playing into his specific controversies that are calculated to make use of criticism and outrage.

                Hes not forced to say edgy shit, he just doesn’t put much effort into not saying edgy shit and he naturally wants to.

                All I can see is that I see a pretty clear method to the madness. There’s always an out, it’s always “you don’t understand the context.” It’s the same tactic Trump uses, and the same tactic used in countless ad campaigns. I can’t really prove it because it’s just a matter of pattern recognition, but suffice to say, I don’t fuck with what he does. Even if your interpretation were correct, associating with someone so careless about messaging and so prone to controversies is more of a liability to the left than an asset. But also, your interpretation is not correct.

                The first time I see someone holding a bloody knife over a dead body, I might be willing to listen to their explanation and their side of the story. The 17th time I see the same person in the same situation, something’s going on. How many times am I expected to give him the benefit of the doubt? Because whatever that number is, he’s exceeded it, because he’s doing this constantly, and you can pretend that it isn’t a clear pattern of behavior all you want, but I’m not going to.

                He wouldn’t be a leftwing creator in that case, he’d be a rightwing grifter instead. A lot more money in that.

                No, there’s lot’s of little niches that one can carve out, regardless of being left or right. There’s plenty of opportunists with supposedly left-leaning brands. The right-wing grifts and personality cults are more profitable, but it’s also a fairly saturated market with a lot of competition. There’s plenty of room for people like Destiny, Jimmy Dore, and Vaush to carve out their respective “left-leaning” niches.

                Also, btw, I have never heard about any actual insight that watching Vaush gives. His content isn’t educational or edifying, the way someone like Shaun’s is. It’s all about aesthetics and personality. The best thing anyone can really claim about Vaush is that criticism towards him is invalid, or that he makes people they don’t like mad, nobody actually seems to learn anything from watching him.

                • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  23 hours ago

                  And yet, I’ve given him clicks.

                  I thought you said you only watched clips of him? I assumed you meant by other creators.

                  All I can see is that I see a pretty clear method to the madness. There’s always an out, it’s always “you don’t understand the context.” It’s the same tactic Trump uses, and the same tactic used in countless ad campaigns.

                  Trump supporters don’t actually care about context though. They say that shit for propaganda purposes. Vaush supporters bring up context because he literally gets clipped out of context for oppositional propaganda purposes.

                  Also, there isn’t always an “out”. Some of the things Vaush has said/done are bad even with context. Like when he told his followers to go harass Contrapoints on Twitter once because he was upset with her and wanted to “Force her to see reason” or whatever. When he was unnecessarily nasty to TJ Kirk during some debate. Or when he flashed on screen AI generated and drawn porn of a canonically 16 year old character and bestiality.

                  There are a few other things I’m probably forgetting.

                  No, there’s lot’s of little niches that one can carve out, regardless of being left or right. There’s plenty of opportunists with supposedly left-leaning brands. The right-wing grifts and personality cults are more profitable, but it’s also a fairly saturated market with a lot of competition. There’s plenty of room for people like Destiny, Jimmy Dore, and Vaush to carve out their respective “left-leaning” niches.

                  Jimmy Dore is 100% vapid grift. Destiny is a terrible human being but he is also almost certainly not a grifter. He says what he means and means what he says.

                  Vaush is someone who is significantly egotistical, narcissistic, impulsive, and short sighted. But he is not a controversy-monger, on that front he is just a dumbass.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I do get that vibe from Vaush occasionally. Unfortunately the attention economy is a real thing and I would be impressed with anyone with the same reach as Vaush wouldn’t be doing similar things. I am not sure I would be as far left as I am without his content.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 day ago

                A big difference between Hasan and Vaush is that Hasan generally wastes very little of his time with sectarian nonsense or left-punching, while Vaush makes that one of his core focuses. Hasan networks with the Deprogram crew, Chapo, and other more Marxist aligned groups without screaming about “tankies,” while Vaush leans heavily into that.

                Hasan is also generally much better with foreign policy, even though I don’t always agree.

                The biggest thing is that Hasan serves as a great gateway to Leftist radicalization, while Vaush ends up preventing further Leftist movement, kinda like a more Libertarian Socialist-coded Destiny.

                My fiancé and I will still watch Hasan even when we may disagree with him on some issues because he is generally entertaining and generally more correct than not, but would never watch Vaush.

                • HalfSalesman@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Hasan avoids arguing with leftists because hes a cowardly clout monger and can’t debate for shit because he isn’t really that smart and is captured to some degree by his audience.

                  I don’t hate Hasan, I do agree with a lot of his takes but hes fundamentally a less ideologically honest person than Vaush. Vaush doesn’t give much of a shit about pissing off his audience, he does it constantly.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Support for chasers and sex-pests like Vaush is pretty awful, not to mentions his awful politics and constant butchering of Marxist theory for an audience that usually can’t tell the difference.

        Theory is important. Much of my list is newer, some is older when it holds up, some is newer when it meaningfully adds to the discussion. However, as someone who had your approach, reading theory directly genuinely is much faster than rolling the dice.

        I have audiobooks linked as well that people can listen to if they prefer, and importantly they won’t be distorted by a sex-pest who complains about Marxists constantly while misrepresenting them.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I am pretty familiar with Vaush’s arguments on Marxist theory. What are your points of contention?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            The vast majority of them, to be honest. He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, has no knowledge of AES, and horrendously distorts Lenin.

            He’s a liberal that cosplays an Anarchist and pretends to have beyond a Wikipedia understanding of Marxism.

            That’s, of course, ignoring that he’s a chaser, pedophile, sex offender.

            • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism

              Can you list a specific example? I think he has a good understanding of this.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 days ago

                One of the worst issues is when he depicts AES as “not real Socialism” because they contain contradictions, when Dialectical Materialism shows that all systems contain contradictions and must resolve them, that doesn’t mean they aren’t that system. Ie, Capitalist states contain public ownership, which is a contradiction but does not define the system.

                One of the recent and larger-scale issues was when he tried to explain Lenin advocated voting Socialism into existence.

                I don’t make it a point to hate-watch sex offenders that do the work of the US state department.

                • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Yeah, I am not surprised that you have disagreements behind Lenin and AES. The two are pretty related and hard to pull apart. I was just surprised that you would disagree with any of his Marxist takes. I think you both agree what the problems are from a Marxist perspective.

                  As for the sex offenders/sex pest stuff. I don’t think he is those things, but I understand I am just one person. From the stuff I have seen it is mostly people that disagree with him that label him as such as a way to get around the fact they don’t really have a leg to stand on; Fascists and the like. Not saying that is you of course.

                  Thanks for taking the time to talk this though by the way. I figure you get hit with a lot of stuff.

      • Realitaetsverlust@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I like Vaush

        Lmaoooo, ye I always follow the political opinions of some dude who watches child porn … oh wait, not child porn, it’s “shortstack goblins”

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          As far as I know, all the criticisms of Vaush watching child porn has been misinformation.

          • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Then you clearly don’t know much. Maybe you should actually learn about the people you recommend

  • MortUS@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Could a Communist Nation be considered viable if such a hostile force can take it down? Does it all come down to survival of the fittest (in the best use of the term)?

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yes and no. Yes in the sense that we can get a good idea of what does work as success/failure isn’t a binary, no in the sense that, ultimately, the overall strategy ended up not being viable. We can learn from this, taking what works and leaving behind what didn’t.

      The AES states of today have learned from what happened to the USSR and other former Socialist countries and have adapted, such as China’s Socialist Market Economy and stance towards international investment, not closing off but not ceding power.

  • Montreal_Metro@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    It doesn’t matter what ideology. If the people running it are rotten, any system can be corrupted.

        • Grapho@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Sure bro lemme teach my aunt to make her insulin, her own needles, her own glucose test strips and all that cheers

            • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              That’s good work for a lot of reasons, but there’s a world of difference between “open source and theoretically DIY” and it being anywhere near realistic for everyone to actually do it themselves.

              It’s good that I have access to advanced technology without having to have learned how to build it from the ground up. That’s the whole point of civilization – doing more together than we could do apart.

          • Yeather@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Maybe we should all specialize, and pay each other with our own goods, or better yet, a sort of representation of goods we all agree is valuable, so you can get one persons goods with anothers.

            • XpeeN@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 hours ago

              That’s basically what happened before money was invented. Imagine being a shoe maker and wanting to get some food, can you convince the sellers to take new shoes for the food/groceries EVERY DAY?

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Kinda seems unfair that somebody’s aunt should have to purchase insulin she needs to survive, like she shouldn’t have to work harder to have the same lifestyle as someone without a disability. Maybe we should just give her the insulin she needs to survive, and compensate the people who make it out of some sort of common pool of resources everyone is required to contribute to, in order to distribute the costs more fairly.

              • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                When I was younger, I tried to design an universal constructor.

                Unfortunatelly, I was using Roblox studio to do this.

                How’s that for insanity?

                I also carved a log with a knife, hacking off pieces in an attempt to make a 3D printer

                • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  It’s not insane! 3D printing is making huge strides. You were just a little ahead of your time.

                  If we can run Doom on 16 billion crabs, then you can carve a 3D printer.

        • stardust@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Like how people were gifted ability to have more knowledge at their hands than previous generations and rapid communication, and then came to the conclusion that the earth is flat, vaccines are poision, and facism is holy?

          Humans are dumb fucks. They will inevitably fuck up even the most perfect utopia they arrive in short of some mass hive mind brain washing Equilibrium style. i don’t hold that high an opinion of human society.

          Leave the world to the animals. Humans are a failed experiment and a virus to the world.

          • Kras Mazov@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            This is some eco-fascist ass rethoric. You’re not taking into account how all the issues you listed are only possible to exist in a capitalist society, where misinformation and anti-intelectualism is accepted and allowed to grow instead of directly addressed.

            • Dengalicious@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Environmental issues did in fact exist before capitalism. Human arrival coincided with mass extinction in the Americas and in Australia. That’s certainly not to say these issues are unavoidable or that socialism isn’t the solution (because it 100% is) but we should see environmental issues as transcending others so I disagree that I would place this in an eco-fascist lens. Rejection of science certainly occurred in feudal societies as well

  • Fair Fairy@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    can communism survive in a single country was always a big question.

    I think the original idea was to try a world revolution but that didn’t work out.

    Us is the main holdout. Russia is basically socialist, EU is basically socialist. China is communist.

    Us is the only serious holdout

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Russia is Capitalist, the EU is Capitalist, the US is Capitalist, and China is Socialist. Communism must be global, but Socialism is the process of building towards that through publicly owning large firms and key industries. Communism exists as an ideology for now, and hasn’t been achieved yet.

      • Fair Fairy@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Russia has universal health care and mandatory vacations and many other perks - it’s in Russia constitution in 7.1. Same is EU.

        us is definitely capitalist

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Welfare and social programs are not Socialism. Socialism is when public ownership is the primary basis of your economy.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              No, not really. The purpose behind Socialism is that as time goes on, production becomes more and more complex, and eventually must be publicly planned to continue being effective. Social programs are important, but Social Programs in a system dominated by Private Capital are subject to the will of the bourgeoisie, and often done in a manner that supports private profits.

              Socialism and Capitalism are descriptors for economic formations, not if a country provides free healthcare or not.

    • Dimmer@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      China is a cocktail of socialism, capitalism, nationalism… claiming it’s only one ~ism is probably oversimplifying, but communism is probably a bit far stretch.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        China has a Socialist Market Economy, it isn’t so much a cocktail as it is Marxism-Leninism applied to China’s current conditions.

        • Dimmer@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          China has a Socialist Market Economy, it isn’t so much a cocktail as it is Marxism-Leninism applied to China’s current conditions.

          This sentence is in Chinese constitution and text book for every first grade student. Repeating it doesn’t help any meaningful conversation, unless you are a 7 years old trying to pass exam and get to second grade…

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’s a sentence I made, just because the PRC agrees with describing themselves that way doesn’t mean I’m not adding to meaningful conversation. When you declare that China is a cocktail of Capitalism and Socialism, what does that actually mean? It seemed like your comment was more about not analyzing China’s economy than coming up with a coherent and consistent answer, which is what I pushed forward.

            Basically, Capitalism and Socialism are descriptors of overall systems, not portions of an economy, so calling a system a cocktail of each doesn’t make too much sense and adds confusion more than clarity.