this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
1336 points (98.9% liked)

Memes

49460 readers
2508 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

The vast majority of Marxists globally are either "ignorant, delusional, or worst of all, tankies" then. The idea that the Soviet Union wasn't Socialist is an extremely fringe opinion among all of Marxists, typically limited to Trotskyists, themselves limited to Western Countries and devoid of any revolutions.

Oh, you mentioned Permanent Revolution. I take it you're a Trotskyist, then? That explains your stance, but I really don't see why Permanent Revolution is relevant in any way, the theoretical basis relied on the assumption of the Peasantry as incapable of being truly aligned with the Proletariat and thus eventually would become counter-revolutionary. This ended up being false, and Socialism stabilized in the USSR, Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, and more, effectively debunking its relevancy.

In China, the Trotskyists wished to martyr China by attacking the Kuomintang and the Japanese Imperialists both, rather than allying with the KMT before overthrowing them. Had the Trotskyists had their way, China would remain a colony.

Today, the Russian Federation certainly is Capitalist and extremely Nationalist, but the PRC is still Socialist. I wrote a post on some common problems that some people run into when trying to determine Mode of Production. I also made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, if you want to check it out. I think you'd benefit, especially since you took more of an adventurist route.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

i'm not going to get into a debate about it, because i have better things to do, sorry.

i would agree that the USSR was socialist, but very quickly stopped being so, and now it is capitalist. that's not what i call a success.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Fair enough, but I would say that examining what went right and what went wrong is an imporant duty for any socialist examining the USSR not just dismissing it outright. Many of the issues and problems with Soviet Union can be applied to any country building socialism as can many of the benefits. So we must learn what to keep and what to leave aside, as it remained Socialist until the very end of its existence.

And for what it's worth, I reccommend that first link I sent. I think what I described in that could be useful for you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

i still think you're assuming what my actual, real-life views are from a silly what-if scenario! i am never gonna be in control of anything more powerful than a barbeque.

but if somehow i got to mind control the president or something, yes, i'd take advantage of that brief control to eliminate as many capitalists as possible

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You can't just kill Socialism into existence, though. That's Idealism, not Materialism. That removes the entire process of Historical Materialism, and erases the foundations of Scientific Socialism, as opposed to Utopianism. I recommend reading or revisiting Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

i wouldn't be trying to will socialism into existence, though, i'd just be having a little fun :3

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That's "tankier" than the "tankies" you demonize, though. Kinda just confused here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

and now it is capitalist.

The USSR hasn't existed for 35 years you arrogant fucking western dipshit.