The majority of those who lived in socialism regret its fall. Cool anecdote, but it disagrees with consistent polling from those who actually lived in it. Looking at countries like China, socialism clearly does work today, hence why it is increasingly relevant.
It does support it, check the “polling history” section. With few exceptions like Estonia, those with living memory of socialism support it. Socialism as it exists in the real world is a transitional system towards communism, the USSR was socialist, and did not reach communism as communism is a global system.
Fine. I’ll do it for you. From your source. Checks support your assertion, Xs do not.
✅A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 66% of Armenians thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, the highest of any country surveyed
❌A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 31% of Azerbaijanis thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 44% who thought it was beneficial.
✅Belarus is complicated but currently leans your way
❌In a 2017 survey, 75% of Estonians said the dissolution of the USSR was a good thing, compared to only 15% who said it was a bad thing
❌A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 33% of Georgians thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 37% who thought it was good… Other polls mentioned, same results
🟰2013 Gallup survey showed that 25% of Kazakhs thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 45% who thought it In a 2016 survey, around 60% of Kazakhs above the age of 35 believed life was better under the USSR.
✅2013 Gallup survey showed that 61% of Kyrgyz thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 16% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ In a 2017 Pew survey, 30% of Latvians said the dissolution of the USSR was a bad thing, while 53% said it was a good thing.
❌In 2017, Pew survey showed that 62% of Lithuanians believed the dissolution of the USSR was a good thing, compared to 23% who said it was a bad thing.
✅ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 42% of thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 26% who thought it was beneficial.
✅ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 52% of Tajiks thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 27% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that only 8% of Turkmen thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, the lowest of any country surveyed, compared to 62% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ A September–October 2022 poll by the Razumkov Center found that nearly 90% of Ukrainians did not want to restore the USSR.
❌ However, in 2016, only 4% of Uzbeks believed life was better under the USSR.
Cool, now break it down by population totals rather than pretending each country has an equal population. Further, it’s important to separate those raised before and after the dissolution of socialism, not just looking at population totals, where later polls have more people born after the dissolution and more people who lived in it dead and no longer able to answer.
You set the terms, you delivered the source, I just parsed it in exactly the way you originally started it should be. Move your own goalposts and do your own math.
You did not actually follow the terms, though. It’s trivial to extrapolate the data and compare to population sizes. Using the latest data and napkin math, over 51% of people total disapprove of the dissolution of the USSR, and we also know that those who lived in socialism tend to rate it higher based on separate polling targeting age groups, so it’s logical to assume this number is a lowball.
Imo, the capitalist economy isn’t fair for the majority, communism doesn’t work as intended but if you do true socialism it works best. Still have to deal with have and have nots but it should be way less in theory then what we got now
Why would it not be? Social ownership is the principal aspect of its economy, and the working class controls the state. In Marxist terms, it’s pretty clearly socialist.
State ownership isn’t socialism (Engels explicitly pointed out that nationalized industry under a capitalist mode of production just turns the state into a collective capitalist). China’s economy still runs on wage labor, commodity production, capital accumulation, and a massive billionaire class extracting surplus value from workers. Plus, you can’t claim the working class controls the state when independent unions are banned, strikes are suppressed, and private CEOs literally sit in the national legislature. It’s state capitalism.
Also, obligatory, I’m calling my sandwich I’m about to eat Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, so it must be a socialist sandwich. Can’t refute that.
nationalized industry under a capitalist mode of production just turns the state into a collective capitalist
Besides the fact that Engels saw “state capitalism” as he defined it as a positive, final stage of capitalism (he was wrong on that since the transition to socialism has always occurred in feudal countries, not in the core countries where capitalism is strongest, but that discussion is better suited to lemmygrad or hexbear), as Lenin and later socialist leaders noted, state capitalism has different potential definitions:
“For socialism is merely the next step forward from state-capitalist monopoly. Or, in other words, socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people and has to that extent ceased to be capitalist monopoly”
Marx
“The state capitalism, which is one of the principal aspects of the New Economic Policy, is, under Soviet power, a form of capitalism that is deliberately permitted and restricted by the working class. Our state capitalism differs essentially from the state capitalism in countries that have bourgeois governments in that the state with us is represented not by the bourgeoisie, but by the proletariat, who has succeeded in winning the full confidence of the peasantry.“
Lenin
None of these socialist thinkers meant the term to be used in the ultraleft definition you’re using, as a tool to demonize actually exist socialist states and decry them as “not socialist enough”.
China’s economy still runs on wage labor, commodity production, capital accumulation,
Good, developing the productive forces, building a thriving socialist market economy and putting that capital to use to serve the whole people, is the goal of every current socialist state.
massive billionaire class extracting surplus value
As I linked below, the PRC is a mixed economy, where the publicly owned and planned sector predominates, and there is also a restricted private / capitalist sector. I don’t expect an ultraleft to be familiar with the “bargain” strategy, but having a capitalist sector within an overall planned economy, has resulted in the export of tech and production to China, with it becoming an economic powerhouse and primary trading partner for most of the world, and real wages rising 4x in the past 30 years alone. The limited and short term wage exploitation in the private sector (in reality, its a small expense to buy off private capital and keep them operating within the socialist legal framework), has under a socialist government resulted in those incredible economic gains, whereas the capitalist 3rd world is still writhing in poverty, and completely at the mercy of western finance capital.
Plus, you can’t claim the working class controls the state when independent unions are banned, strikes are suppressed,
False. The PRC even supports more strikes than nearly any other country, which clearly irks the western finance rag I linked. Also, people don’t have much reason to strike because of the people’s congresses in nearly every workplace, and the wages rising so much recently. They of course don’t allow US-sponsored strikes and slowdowns, which do happen occasionally.
private CEOs literally sit in the national legislature
A small number of them do, which of course is a good thing if you want to make sure that they’re working towards the betterment of the country, and to avoid them organizing an opposition. Regardless, they do not control the state, and capital has no enshrined rights, especially to organize.
If you’re going to demonize socialist countries in the future, at least post sources for your claims.
State ownership under a capitalist state is not socialism, correct. Private ownership under a socialist state is not capitalism either. You are entirely missing the point of Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. Socialism is a transitional mode of production and distribution between capitalism and communism, characterized by social ownership as the principal aspect, ie rising and dominant, aspect of the economy and the working class as in control of the state. Both apply to China right now. The path of socialist construction in China utilizes a Marxist understanding of economics that sees the material basis of markets as decentralized and underdeveloped production, and the material basis of planned economy as highly developed and centralized production.
China maintains social ownership of the commanding heights of the economy which have already reached monopoly scale, and employs controlled marketization to accelerate the development of underdeveloped industry to create the basis for social ownership through development. The CPC stands at the top, a working class party with a strong basis in Marxism-Leninism with Xi Jinping Thought, and uses this dominance of the state to restrict the capitalists from forming a politically unified and coherent class that could undermine this socialist construction and derail it.
Here’s a diagram of that “stages of socialism:”
They are currently developing towards the intermediate stage, with plans to reach it by 2049. That means they are already socialist, just developing towards higher stages of socialism.
As for independent unions, why is the independence of a union from the socialist system a good thing? There is already a massive federation of trade unions, independence from this creates a fulcrum by which the capitalists could leverage against the system. You have a liberal idea of socialism that envisions it as just as disunified and disorganized as capitalism, but socialism is a process of collectivizing. Capitalists are barred from the highest levels of the CPC, and are prevented from ever having a large presence in it.
Most people misunderstand Communism like how people misunderstand Cognitive Dissonance. They know how to act towards it and around it, without understanding that they’re very mistaken.
Removed by mod
The majority of those who lived in socialism regret its fall. Cool anecdote, but it disagrees with consistent polling from those who actually lived in it. Looking at countries like China, socialism clearly does work today, hence why it is increasingly relevant.
Your Wikipedia article does not support your point. Give it a read.
I’m not so much against socialism, as it’s commonly understood in the US, as I am communism or unfettered capitalism.
It does support it, check the “polling history” section. With few exceptions like Estonia, those with living memory of socialism support it. Socialism as it exists in the real world is a transitional system towards communism, the USSR was socialist, and did not reach communism as communism is a global system.
Fine. I’ll do it for you. From your source. Checks support your assertion, Xs do not.
✅A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 66% of Armenians thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, the highest of any country surveyed
❌A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 31% of Azerbaijanis thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 44% who thought it was beneficial.
✅Belarus is complicated but currently leans your way
❌In a 2017 survey, 75% of Estonians said the dissolution of the USSR was a good thing, compared to only 15% who said it was a bad thing
❌A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 33% of Georgians thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 37% who thought it was good… Other polls mentioned, same results
🟰2013 Gallup survey showed that 25% of Kazakhs thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 45% who thought it In a 2016 survey, around 60% of Kazakhs above the age of 35 believed life was better under the USSR.
✅2013 Gallup survey showed that 61% of Kyrgyz thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 16% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ In a 2017 Pew survey, 30% of Latvians said the dissolution of the USSR was a bad thing, while 53% said it was a good thing.
❌In 2017, Pew survey showed that 62% of Lithuanians believed the dissolution of the USSR was a good thing, compared to 23% who said it was a bad thing.
✅ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 42% of thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 26% who thought it was beneficial.
✅ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that 52% of Tajiks thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, compared to 27% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ A 2013 Gallup survey showed that only 8% of Turkmen thought the dissolution of the USSR was harmful, the lowest of any country surveyed, compared to 62% who thought it was beneficial.
❌ A September–October 2022 poll by the Razumkov Center found that nearly 90% of Ukrainians did not want to restore the USSR.
❌ However, in 2016, only 4% of Uzbeks believed life was better under the USSR.
✅ And Russians do in fact want their empire back.
Cool, now break it down by population totals rather than pretending each country has an equal population. Further, it’s important to separate those raised before and after the dissolution of socialism, not just looking at population totals, where later polls have more people born after the dissolution and more people who lived in it dead and no longer able to answer.
The USSR was not a “Russian Empire,” lmao.
How about you do it this time 🤣.
You set the terms, you delivered the source, I just parsed it in exactly the way you originally started it should be. Move your own goalposts and do your own math.
You did not actually follow the terms, though. It’s trivial to extrapolate the data and compare to population sizes. Using the latest data and napkin math, over 51% of people total disapprove of the dissolution of the USSR, and we also know that those who lived in socialism tend to rate it higher based on separate polling targeting age groups, so it’s logical to assume this number is a lowball.
Imo, the capitalist economy isn’t fair for the majority, communism doesn’t work as intended but if you do true socialism it works best. Still have to deal with have and have nots but it should be way less in theory then what we got now
Why doesn’t communism “work as intended?” What is “true socialism?”
For the love of god China is not socialist
Why would it not be? Social ownership is the principal aspect of its economy, and the working class controls the state. In Marxist terms, it’s pretty clearly socialist.
State ownership isn’t socialism (Engels explicitly pointed out that nationalized industry under a capitalist mode of production just turns the state into a collective capitalist). China’s economy still runs on wage labor, commodity production, capital accumulation, and a massive billionaire class extracting surplus value from workers. Plus, you can’t claim the working class controls the state when independent unions are banned, strikes are suppressed, and private CEOs literally sit in the national legislature. It’s state capitalism.
Also, obligatory, I’m calling my sandwich I’m about to eat Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, so it must be a socialist sandwich. Can’t refute that.
Besides the fact that Engels saw “state capitalism” as he defined it as a positive, final stage of capitalism (he was wrong on that since the transition to socialism has always occurred in feudal countries, not in the core countries where capitalism is strongest, but that discussion is better suited to lemmygrad or hexbear), as Lenin and later socialist leaders noted, state capitalism has different potential definitions:
None of these socialist thinkers meant the term to be used in the ultraleft definition you’re using, as a tool to demonize actually exist socialist states and decry them as “not socialist enough”.
Good, developing the productive forces, building a thriving socialist market economy and putting that capital to use to serve the whole people, is the goal of every current socialist state.
As I linked below, the PRC is a mixed economy, where the publicly owned and planned sector predominates, and there is also a restricted private / capitalist sector. I don’t expect an ultraleft to be familiar with the “bargain” strategy, but having a capitalist sector within an overall planned economy, has resulted in the export of tech and production to China, with it becoming an economic powerhouse and primary trading partner for most of the world, and real wages rising 4x in the past 30 years alone. The limited and short term wage exploitation in the private sector (in reality, its a small expense to buy off private capital and keep them operating within the socialist legal framework), has under a socialist government resulted in those incredible economic gains, whereas the capitalist 3rd world is still writhing in poverty, and completely at the mercy of western finance capital.
False. The PRC even supports more strikes than nearly any other country, which clearly irks the western finance rag I linked. Also, people don’t have much reason to strike because of the people’s congresses in nearly every workplace, and the wages rising so much recently. They of course don’t allow US-sponsored strikes and slowdowns, which do happen occasionally.
A small number of them do, which of course is a good thing if you want to make sure that they’re working towards the betterment of the country, and to avoid them organizing an opposition. Regardless, they do not control the state, and capital has no enshrined rights, especially to organize.
If you’re going to demonize socialist countries in the future, at least post sources for your claims.
State ownership under a capitalist state is not socialism, correct. Private ownership under a socialist state is not capitalism either. You are entirely missing the point of Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. Socialism is a transitional mode of production and distribution between capitalism and communism, characterized by social ownership as the principal aspect, ie rising and dominant, aspect of the economy and the working class as in control of the state. Both apply to China right now. The path of socialist construction in China utilizes a Marxist understanding of economics that sees the material basis of markets as decentralized and underdeveloped production, and the material basis of planned economy as highly developed and centralized production.
China maintains social ownership of the commanding heights of the economy which have already reached monopoly scale, and employs controlled marketization to accelerate the development of underdeveloped industry to create the basis for social ownership through development. The CPC stands at the top, a working class party with a strong basis in Marxism-Leninism with Xi Jinping Thought, and uses this dominance of the state to restrict the capitalists from forming a politically unified and coherent class that could undermine this socialist construction and derail it.
Here’s a diagram of that “stages of socialism:”
They are currently developing towards the intermediate stage, with plans to reach it by 2049. That means they are already socialist, just developing towards higher stages of socialism.
As for independent unions, why is the independence of a union from the socialist system a good thing? There is already a massive federation of trade unions, independence from this creates a fulcrum by which the capitalists could leverage against the system. You have a liberal idea of socialism that envisions it as just as disunified and disorganized as capitalism, but socialism is a process of collectivizing. Capitalists are barred from the highest levels of the CPC, and are prevented from ever having a large presence in it.
Wrong.
Is China State Capitalist?
yeah people who were born and lived in a country without communism and going through capitalist plunder sure do think it’s communism’s fault.
I think it’s capitalisms fault, and I said as much. 🤷♂️
Your CIA anti-communist playbook is really easy to see through.
Lmao
Most people misunderstand Communism like how people misunderstand Cognitive Dissonance. They know how to act towards it and around it, without understanding that they’re very mistaken.