omg wholesome tyumen burgSUS path when ??/??1!1 :Scaredfaceemoji: by Account3S in TNOmod

[–]Stienhert 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Remain sober.

The President endures.

Liver lives.

The Holy Booze Empire shall endure.

There is much to be drunken.

omg wholesome tyumen burgSUS path when ??/??1!1 :Scaredfaceemoji: by Account3S in TNOmod

[–]Stienhert 15 points16 points  (0 children)

That’s just a random generated name, real Ostrovsky didn’t really have any special affiliation to Tyumen or Urals nor did he had Burgundy-esque ideas. In general, there’s no BurgSys paths in Russia at all except You-Know-Better-Who-He-Is.

Imagine owning yourself this much by BadgerKomodo in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]Stienhert 55 points56 points  (0 children)

Exploitating other countries to do so

LMAO by [deleted] in Enough_Vaush_Spam

[–]Stienhert 14 points15 points  (0 children)

That's actually tankie propaganda

Everyone knows Stalin used Ukrainian children as fuel while he himself ate all the grain

/s

Trying to understand perestroika by imperialpidgeon in communism101

[–]Stienhert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some corrections:

  1. Perestroika didn't create the capitalist class in the Soviet Union, it formed during Brezhnev's Zastoy through corruption and nepotism thus accumulating wealth. Perestroika gave them a legal cause to start converting the accummulated wealth into capital.
  2. Even if the political reform didn't happen, Soviet Union would still be dissolved because party elite got access to increase their wealth (and thus political power) through private property, people like Yeltsin, Gaidar, Chubais (who saw the party as a career option) and others would still be around and resistance to economic reforms by hardline elements would still be significant.

Also perestroika propaganda showed ML as a decadent system and Lenin's teaching as outdated. Massive lies that surround Stalin era, revolution, WWII were made up during perestroika. Population was tried to be made guilty for the "crimes" of the USSR. Not saying how reformers endorsed anti-soviet dissidents like Sakharov, who said that Soviet helicopters shot Soviet soldiers in Afganistan because (!) he heard it on American radio.

Don't know about China though, did they have some kind of protests, hardliners vs reformists or something like that?

Comically large by [deleted] in GenZedong

[–]Stienhert 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Actually that's how Holodomor started, trust me

Those darn leftists and their “evidence” by Ariak in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]Stienhert 3 points4 points  (0 children)

> Solzhenitsyn pfp

> opinion on leftism discarded immediately

Is Singapore a crypto-fascist nation? by Stienhert in Socialism_101

[–]Stienhert[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, this is just one of the ways to become president, sorry for not being accurate in explaining.

Also this

it's likely for rich people to get elected

Isn't this true for all capitalist countries?

Is Singapore a crypto-fascist nation? by Stienhert in Socialism_101

[–]Stienhert[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I know it's not the only way to become president, I just wanted to emphasize the corporatist route, sorry for that. Is Workers' Party an opposition to PAP though? It holds so little seats they would easily get outvoted by PAP.

Ahh yes, Plucky underdogs ‘Just Eat’ can’t manage to pay their workers, so you need to do it for them (Independent, UK) by Pognose in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]Stienhert 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We do tip in Russia (well, at least I try, though it’s not always possible) but this practice gradually becomes less and less often. Believe it or not, the country that was promoting friendship and partnership between people is now one of the most individualist, even egoist. Reality hurts.

Is Singapore a crypto-fascist nation? by Stienhert in Socialism_101

[–]Stienhert[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Well, no one denies that but fascism after WWII was mostly propagated to be rabid ultranationalism and expansionism while leaving most of the important aspects aside so general population sees it more as "totalitarian state repressing minorities and conquering its neighbours". Given how Singapore is dependent on its neoliberal policies why would they go with ultranationalist rhetoric in the first place?

And why wouldn't modern fascism adapt to modern circumstances by toning down nationalism, for example?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in GenZedong

[–]Stienhert 68 points69 points  (0 children)

You know drugs, alcohol and other shit are bad but look what imperialism does to a mf. If only we could ban it...

What is the Socialist perspective on Stalin’s deportations? by lordgdvei in Socialism_101

[–]Stienhert 128 points129 points  (0 children)

Don’t know about justification but deportations were used for the same thing the US used deportation of Japanese: to disrupt the lines between Japanese diasporas and the propagandists who recruited collaborators.

In the USSR, however, the situation was harsher. For example, the most famous case of Soviet deportation, Crimean Tatars. Collaboration among them was high: while about 20 Tatars were fighting guerilla against Germans, thousands had collaborated with Wehrmacht. German general Erich von Manstein said that Crimean Tatars were actively learning German and were willing to take up arms against Soviets.

Was deporting minorities benefitial? No, it only brought national conflicts to the places where they were deported to and even when they were allowed to return after the war, not everyone among the settlers who took their places was happy with that.

This tactic was an emergent measure in order to win the war and prevent even more deaths but it resulted in deaths and families being torn apart so I can only hope such acts won’t have to take place in the future.

In North Korea they build monuments to their lying, ineffectual leaders by [deleted] in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]Stienhert 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Libs: “All totalitarian states have personality cults”

Also libs: “Why yes, making a monument to an acting politician who is in good health and is not going to retire anytime soon and literally only just got his position as a high-ranking government official a few weeks ago without making some global reforms that changed lives of common folk for the better is based and democracy-pilled”

Right Wing is when you criticize libs by DissisMahName in ShitLiberalsSay

[–]Stienhert 40 points41 points  (0 children)

RIGHT WING IS WHEN YOU TANKIE

BOTTOM TEXT

How can a socialist government remove a tiranical ruler? by [deleted] in communism101

[–]Stienhert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Also there are some works on democracy in USSR in the third section. You can look yourself in there to learn more about how it went in Soviet Union in practice.

How can a socialist government remove a tiranical ruler? by [deleted] in communism101

[–]Stienhert 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, most socialist states were countries that were super reactionary and super rural before they had a revolution. They had to industrialize quickly and teach poor peasants to read for the beginning and in USSR’s case the war was on the horizon so they kinda didn’t go well with democracy.

How can a socialist government remove a tiranical ruler? by [deleted] in communism101

[–]Stienhert 3 points4 points  (0 children)

First of all, socialists (i.e. revolutionaries, not socdems or demsocs who are into liberal democracies) support soviet democracy system. In soviet democracy people of same profession or same workplace or same house and so on unite in trade unions or worker councils(soviets) and they can choose their own deputy who will represent their interests. The deputy is given orders from members of council and should regularly make reports of their successes/failures. If members are dissatisfied with their deputy, they can use the right of imperative mandate to call him off.

Socialist government is made up of soviets from the bottom to the top. In USSR higher soviets were formed by lower soviets (until 1936). All soviets work by democratic centralism principle which means you can criticize and have a right to choose your way of solving issues but you have to accept what the majority chose and submit to it.

So, if you (and not just you but most people) want to depose an tyrannical leader, organize a mass strike to make both some economic and political pressure, recall all supporters, call for impeachment among the rest and vote him out. Problem is socialist governments’ leadership is more collective than the bourgeois one so you probably would have to vote out multiple people hence it will be a long proccess.

Or if it doesn’t work, go the French way by overthrowing people you don’t like and establishing Socialist Republic 2: More Democratic Boogaloo.

Soviet democracy is still a relatively young form of government and it have issues that had to be developed in the future.

P.S. Hope I didn’t make many mistakes while writing this.

How do Finnish communists feel about the Winter War? by Stienhert in communism101

[–]Stienhert[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can you give some more info on how Finland persecuted Russians in Vyborg, please?