Quote:
If your first instinct as a westerner is to criticize and lecture 3rd world communist movements, instead of learning from their successes, then you have internalized the patronizing arrogance of the colonial system you claim to oppose.
This l find a general attitude among the Westerners.
Dang I didn’t know there were successful communist nations in developing countries.
Dang I didn’t know there were successful communist nations in developing countries.
Funnily enough, two started off as developing and ended up as world superpowers.
I’m assuming your talking about Russia and China I think it very fare to criticise them, considering they are both totalitarian nations which don’t respect the needs of there citizens.
The USSR (Soviet Union) and the PRC (China). The USSR is not Russia, and it doesn’t exist anymore.
And of course it’s fair, and in fact important to criticize them. We have the benefit of hindsight and can see how some of their decisions were serious mistakes. On the other hand, it’s also important to analyze what they did good and learn from that too. Neither was perfect, both were improvements, and the terrible fates of Russia and Ukraine after the fall of the Soviet Union is proof of how much good the SU was for its citizens.
which don’t respect the needs of there citizens.
They both inherited countries plagued with regular famine and have both eliminated it. In fact, in 1983 the CIA documented the SU as having a better typical diet than the USA. Clearly they respected the food security of their citizens.
The SU managed to rapidly build low-cost housing after repelling a HUGE invasion of extermination from Nazi Germany. The “commieblocks” were critical in housing people after war. China has also made huge strides in home ownership and elimination of poverty. Meanwhile, poverty and homelessness is increasing under capitalist countries, with them doing little to resolve their housing crises. Clearly they respected the need for shelter of their citizens.
Keep in mind, that both these countries were devastated by world wars and civil wars. Their countries started off in serious crisis and had already had revolutions. If they didn’t respect the needs of their citizens, they would have ended up failed states overthrown by their desperate population or quickly collapsing to invasions.
As for China, the government, despite censorship and political repression, still remains popular among its citizens, according to censorship-resistant US studies[1]. It’s largely avoided war, hugely reduced poverty, and has become a world leader in technology.
There are many valid reasons to criticize these countries and it’s important we do that. But they clearly respected the basic needs of their citizens. There are few other countries which have done more to reduce poverty and homelessness than them.
Thank you for telling me that. I never really thought that communist nations have done good things in the past, I suppose I already knew that about china. But I did not know that about the USSR. There is no education about any good thing communist nations have done well, at least in the curriculum I grew up with. And communism is therefore ingrained in people essentially as a synonym for bad.
Glad I could help :) My curriculum was similar, mine didn’t really talk about communist countries at all, and since a lot of our media like movies come from the US during the Cold War, when their government’s biggest enemies were the Soviet Union and the worker labor movement fighting for more worker rights, those movies often chose communist countries or communists as an easy choice for villains, so there’s a shallow but very widespread and normal idea that those countries are just simply evil, and ours is good. On top of that, most newspapers and television channels are owned by the richest people (mega-millionaires and billionaires, not just middle-class money), rich enough to own or invest in them, and funded by large companies advertising, and usually the people with that much money love how capitalism is working and are threatened by socialism or communism, so they have a self-interest in highlighting all the mistakes of those countries and all the wins of their own. I was amazed that a few years before, the US government was putting out posters like these during World War II, where Russian and Chinese soldiers are celebrated as allies alongside Canadians and English!
On a related point, it’s also important to remember that many people instinctively compare these countries to rich, developed countries like Britain, the USA, and others, instead of comparing them to how they were before and after. I used to do this too, but countries are so different, with different histories, resources and neighbors that it’s usually unfair to simply compare them like that. This short 3 minute clip from a Michael Parenti lecture gives some good examples of this, focusing on their experience talking to Cubans.
What do you call Cuba, China, Vietnam, Laos, the former Burkina Fasso under Sankara, or the former USSR? Do you sincerely believe those countries had a better standard of living for all people, especially workers and peasants, under capitalism? Isn’t the great fall from grace of the USSR proof that the benefits their people had received were indeed the fruits of socialism and not the “rising tide” of global capitalist development (which was actually exacerbating poverty in the global South outside of the socialist countries)?
Maybe it’s just capitalist propaganda but from what I’ve heard, China is a mass surveillance state which doesn’t protect any of the citizens rights for privacy and has lacklustre working environments which is why everything is so cheap to be made there. Cuba is stuck with a poor economy, but I guess that’s all developing nations so i don’t know much other than that. For Vietnam my source is a friend who’s family mostly live in Vietnam, he says people in Vietnam dislike communism but can’t say it out loud. And I don’t know much about Laos or Burkina fasso.
To be clear I do consider myself a leftist and anti capitalist but I don’t believe there have been many properly successful socialist nations outside of Europe really.
don’t believe there have been many properly successful socialist nations outside of Europe
???
China is a mass surveillance state which doesn’t protect any of the citizens rights for privacy and has lacklustre working environments
It is a mass surveillance state, but it’s definitely not any more mass surveillance than any developed country. Maybe one important difference is that in China the government has fewer restrictions for how they will spy on you, but in the US for example the NSA will do blatantly illegal things that aren’t even allowed under the Patriot Act and no one can do anything about it, so the extent to which surveillance is legal or not is irrelevant IMO. I would understand your criticism if China was actually a very repressive country where dissent wasn’t allowed and a huge portion of the population was jailed, but I think the quick response to the anti-lockdown protests and the fact they jail far fewer people than the US (while having 4x the population) means that it’s not a very reasonable criticism. Especially not when you consider the Western countries built up their stability while exploiting others, and China had to go through a hard process of occupation, civil war, and then many mistakes during the Cultural Revolution which still breed resentment at the state, even if things have gotten better.
As for the working environments, you’ll always see the worst of the worst in negative coverage of China (the suicide nets in Foxconn factories, for example, which to my knowledge have been debunked). Still, it is undeniable that China has had pretty bad working conditions. I think the key element to understand why working conditions are poor, yet more than 80% of Chinese people approve of their government, is that Chinese people understand that their government is committed to improving things and they consistently see those improvements. They also have a much more responsive political system that listens to their individual concerns very well, so whatever problems they have are more likely to be dealt with than if they had a situation in a western liberal democracy, where you write a letter to your representative and your representative has been paid off by 3 different lobby groups to ignore your concerns.
Cuba is stuck with a poor economy, but I guess that’s all developing nations so i don’t know much other than that.
That’s a huge understatement. Cuba faces a horrible, economy-stifling blockade from the US that essentially shuts them off from the entire global economy because they can’t access the global banking system or buy a huge number of basic goods. Despite that, they’re a global leader in medicine, have a far better education system than the US at all levels, have sent revolutionaries to assist in decolonizing countries in Africa, and were leaders of the NAM.
And I don’t know much about Laos or Burkina fasso.
Laos is honestly quite similar to Vietnam.
Burkina Fasso had a very successful few years of developing infrastructure and improving living conditions for the people under Sankara. It’s a very tragic story because he was assassinated and replaced by a regime that reversed much of the good he had accomplished. Nowadays, Ibrahim Traore is essentially just playing it back with many of the same ideas Sankara had, and he has been massively popular and successful for it (look no further than the fact his security team have had to stop many assassination attempts already, much like Castro).
To be clear I do consider myself a leftist and anti capitalist but I don’t believe there have been many properly successful socialist nations outside of Europe really.
What has been successful in Europe? Yugoslavia and the Warsaw Pact countries were great, but could only exist because of the pressure of the USSR on the capitalist bloc. All the social democracies are only social democracies, they have never put the workers in charge of their own destiny and are therefore not socialist at all.
Ok, first of all you clearly know a lot about this than I do and I would love to learn more, where do you find information related to socialism and socialist nations? Obviously I cannot expect to learn all of this from you.
What has been successful in Europe? First of all many European nations such as Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have a progressive multi party system which prioritize good urban planning and privacy laws (the latter I am not 100% sure about but believe to be true) And the European union as a whole regularly enforce regulations ensuring fare practices among big companies such as recently they enforced apple to require side loading and meta to remove the consent or pay advertising model. As well as when apple was required to use usb-c on there iphones. This is just my limited knowledge so feel free to prove me wrong and two examples may not be enough evidence.
Also I read your other arguments but I simply don’t have enough knowledge to have anything to say about them, but I very much go by the quote “absolute power corrupts absolutely” and therefore find it difficult to believe that any dictator can be better than a democracy.
Ok, first of all you clearly know a lot about this than I do and I would love to learn more, where do you find information related to socialism and socialist nations? Obviously I cannot expect to learn all of this from you.
I learned a lot of the history from Michael Parenti’s Blackshirts and Reds and Vijay Prashad’s Darker Nations. You don’t have to read the entire books, they have lots of lectures on YouTube. Here’s Parenti’s Yellow Lecture.
You can also could read China Has Billionaires, it’s a good essay that explains why China is the way it is and why socialists should understand it.
First of all many European nations such as Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have a progressive multi party system which prioritize good urban planning and privacy laws (the latter I am not 100% sure about but believe to be true) And the European union as a whole regularly enforce regulations ensuring fare practices among big companies such as recently they enforced apple to require side loading and meta to remove the consent or pay advertising model. As well as when apple was required to use usb-c on there iphones. This is just my limited knowledge so feel free to prove me wrong and two examples may not be enough evidence.
Those are good things, but they’re really just regulations. The urban planning is clearly miles ahead of NA, but it’s still comparable to Japan and we could probably all agree Japan is not a socialist country.
The main difference between those countries and a socialist country like Cuba or China is that in Europe, owners of industry, financiers, real estate moguls, and other capitalists have a lot of influence and political power as a function of the capital they own. They move the capital around to where it will make them more money. They will move capital across borders to colonies and neocolonies where labor and resources are cheap. The state responds to their needs.
Meanwhile, in socialist countries, the state takes the capital under its democratic control. In China, for example, the state is growing its control of private companies and steadily implementing more measures to reduce the power of their capitalists. Even when Deng liberalized their economy a great deal, they never stopped regulating the flow of capital, still having strict controls on investments.
“absolute power corrupts absolutely” and therefore find it difficult to believe that any dictator can be better than a democracy.
I think there’s 2 levels to this quote. First, how could power be held non-absolutely? Through a constitutional republic with a balance of powers where each branch of government keeps the others in check? What Marx shows us is that, make the political system how you will, if the state remains a bourgeois state the ruling class will keep using political power to protect the interests of capital. There is no way around that, all regulations will be stripped away as the rate of profit falls and the capitalists go hungry. They’ll descend into fascism if their profits are threatened enough. So ask yourself, doesn’t capital already hold absolute power?
Secondly, if I take it at face value that the way a state is organized makes a big difference and it matters how much control any given individual has (which I think is true, even though it kinda contradicts the previous point that all power is class power) that’s still not a reason to say European and North American democracies are less dictatorial than any socialist democracy. Check the link I put in my first comment to see how China’s system works. The USSR had a similar system with soviets making up the democratic structure, with democratic power over each workplace and each community, which would go up in levels up to the CCCP. People think that these countries aren’t democratic because they’re one party states, but the truth is that they just make their limitations on what ideologies are not allowed to take control explicit, instead of implicit like they are in the liberal democracies.
What are some succesful 3rd world communist movements? Asking for a friend
China, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, DPRK
deleted by creator
According to some theories, China.
The obvious one is China. But if you wanna learn a little something, read about Sankara. If you want a whole book of histories of the third world national liberation and socialist movements, read The Darker Nations by Vijay Prashad.
Man I’m just here for the memes :(
The lemmy.world version of this community has politcs banned
in first world nations we are insidiously brainwashed to believe that there WERE NO SUCCESSES among Communist movements.
awareness of those successes must be promoted.
start with “hey this really successful thing happened” AND THEN reveal “btw that was communism”
This.
Removed by mod
I’ve always assumed communism works really well the smaller the group but at the scale of hundreds of millions it becomes very difficult logistically and also of course all those people need to agree with it so they’re not actively trying to sabotage it. I don’t see any danger in smaller nations being communist and never understood why people do consider it dangerous, outside of the obvious capitalist reasons and of course the dictators who used it as a front
Unless the example is similar in size and scope to the country I live in I struggle to find true relevance in the subject of communism as a national government
I think you’re confusing decentralized communes with Marxist Communism, a fully publicly owned and planned global economy run democratically (oversimplified, of course). Communes can only work at small scale, perhaps with some level of federation, but the Communism Marxists aspire for is an extremely global and industrialized mode of production. Further, “dictators using it as a front” are relatively small in number, such as Pol Pot.
I don’t know why they even left Reddit. Were they really that mad about app development?
Depends which wave of newcomers. Some in more recent migrations just got banned for criticizing musk or endorsing Luigism, which is pretty milquetoast stuff any old lib can do.
Reddit is not even “liberal” anymore. The people on the conservative sub will say that it is but its been shifting rightward for years. There are a lot of people getting permad over things that in the past would have had broad agreement.
Removed by mod
It’s shifting from center “left” to libertarian right to match up with the ceo, and pretty soon will just be as bad as Twitter
Ex Can’t be critical of musk or any of his terrible products, that earns a ban
reddit already censored all the times I said “elongated muskrat”
Most of us have started from the default programming. I didn’t get a lot of what I get today when I moved from Reddit. I know it can feel shitty to keep repeating the same things and make the same arguments over and over again but that’s the process of teaching.
Yep, seems over time stances do change.
I know it can feel shitty to keep repeating the same things and make the same arguments over and over again but that’s the process of teaching.
For what it’s worth, it’s important to have ways to do this efficiently, like linking to other resources or having copypastas. Otherwise the infinite influx of ignorant noobs will eventually cause burnout or just waste too much time.
I am not only on .world (actually started out there and moved over here), but yeah, for me that was the last straw. That official app is just an affront.
i’m not sure there’s any metric by which the soviet union could be called a success but go off king
deleted by creator
I remember watching a documentary about North Korea and one of the guides was talking about how people in NK and Asia more broadly don’t necessarily want to live under the same liberal-democratic capitalist system that the west tries to impress on them.
How arrogant are we to act like we have it all figured out and that countries outside of Europe and North America are backwards shitholes?
There is absolutely a discussion to be had here.
Of course people should be allowed to have their own government setups and authorities. It would be wrong to assume that we in the west have it all figured out.
However there are still questions of fundamental human rights. In many places of the world a woman can legally be raped, it’s the woman’s responsibility to always have a male relative with them. If we were to ask women what they thought about it they would probably say that there is no problem with it, that’s just how it works. These women have been so indoctrinated by it that they don’t question it.
We could also use slavery in America as an example. Many slaves probably accepted the argument that they had a better living standard as slaves, or some other argument that made them accept the status quo. Should Europe just have accepted that that is the way life goes over there?
Where does the line go between fundamental human rights and respecting other ways of life go? Western fundamental rights such as equal rights, right to a trial, right to life, etc. are just that, western.
Liberals desperately need to read Losurdo - Liberalism, a counter-history.
Even the liberal equality before the law, (ie, the illegality for the rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges and beg for food) was denied to colonized peoples and peoples of colonial origin.
Every one of your liberal ideologues was extremely racist, and didn’t think colonized peoples deserved any of the rights they proclaimed for the white community. John Locke, and the first 5 or so US presidents owned slaves. Tocqueville pushed for the decimation of civilians in Algeria at the hands of the french imperialists, and wrote a book on the US that ignored slavery, lynchings, and native eviction. There are too many more cases to cover.
… And a swing and a miss
Why? What’s your wisdom you’d like to share with us socialists outside of the imperialist countries?
…no? Pretty spot-on.
I just had to explain this to someone the other day lol. Figure ur gonna get lots of hate from libs about this post so wanted to just come in and say hi. 你是很好老师同志。Your posts in response are nicely done. I hope people take the time to read them.
No probs comrade, thx!
trying to remember the whiteboard in that show
Yeah that’s so true there are only 2 politics forever and when one lose the other gain that is so true not
socialism or barbarism baby, and you’re on the side of the barbarians
I am? How is that true?
There are two classes, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. There’s myriad bourgeois ideologies and myriad proletarian ideologies. When the proletarians come to power, the bourgeoisie oppose their ideology and their state. That’s true of third world communist projects.
Nope, there are as many people and they are different. The buregoise are a plague a systematic plague and you help them by having a class war that they become desperate to win. We can have beneficial policy and support each other while dismantling the oligarchy without being feral assholes ourselves
What are you talking about? The “peaceful” status quo is already a class war. Capitalism is devouring the planet by creating conditions that will inevitably displace hundreds of millions of people as ecosystems collapse over the next ~20 years. I don’t even want to imagine how many people are going to die of starvation, heat stroke, or gunned down at the borders by the fascist stormtroopers. That is a level of violence that no socialist state has ever unleashed on the world, not even in WW2. There is no “beneficial policy.” Capital only responds to profit, that’s why workers strike instead of appealing to the good nature of their employers. Don’t you think the same applies to the whole system? The capitalists, executives of energy companies for example, have known they were destroying the world for decades. In the early 2000s they were writing letters to the Bush admin asking the government to put stronger regulations on them, because capital is entirely incapable of stopping itself from the race to the bottom, to make the most profit possible out of the exploitation of labor and natural resources. You should seriously consider how possible it is to stop these processes without revolution.
Why should I consider that when I haven’t expressed that standpoint? What do you mean there exists no “beneficial policy”? There is a class war yes and I aim to win it. You seem to want to attack random people with facts you absorbed about how bad capitalism is. Rage bait consumer is just another hook in capitalism you eat greedily. You give nothing to improve or develop an actual communist uprising except hatred. Why should I be lashed you imagine as if I am a pig of the greediest cunts? You have zero interest in actually growing political movements and culture, and an intense fire at breaking society down. It is symptomatic of capitalism and you will most likely not be freed from it by dismantling anything but will carry this hate your life out and point it to new things until it kills you. Your hate is manufactured and consumed just like any capitalist product
The buregoise are a plague a systematic plague and you help them by having a class war that they become desperate to win.
These were your words from the previous comment. Are you against class war or not?
And when I say there’s no beneficial policy I mean you won’t ever get lasting reforms by electing better politicians, you’ll just get temporary concessions that will be taken away the next time there’s a crisis. I think looking at the fall of European social democracy since the dissolution of the USSR should prove my point: European workers opted for just getting “beneficial policy” instead of revolution, and now the benefits are gone.
Against class war? What does that matter for our discussion? There is a class war going on right now.
If there is no benificial policy, you should not argue or fight any revolution. Why do you keep talking about cases where there is concession with hyper capitalist corpos as if that is what defines beneficial policy? What are you smoking?
I thought when you were talking about fighting for beneficial policy what you meant was running electoral races trying to elect progressive candidates. IMO the better way to describe a revolutionary state is that it’s a whole new system with a different structure, it’s not just a matter of “policy.” Talking purely in terms of policy is missing the forest for the trees.
It seems like you think I want some kind of idiotic peaceful revolution? Or why post that?
You never explained what you believe in. You just came here with a kneejerk reaction to the meme that criticizes the way westerners often do want an idiotic peaceful revolution, when we explained why we disagreed with your reaction you have just been on a tirade against “hate” which is deeply anti-materialist. If you agree with the revolutionary agenda then by all means, I’m sorry for dogpiling you, but you shouldn’t spend so much energy arguing against people who also agree with you on the broad strokes?
How can you possibly read what amounts to “consider the context of your beliefs” and decide to leave this sarcastic, nonsense comment?
My beliefs is that capitalism is an abhorrent apocalyptic cult. The text says I should consider so I considered. I realised I don’t care about fucking bickering about “the other side” because it’s childish. I want to only talk about benefits of policy that is fully opposing capitalism
So what does any of this have to do with the OP? You’re the one bickering and being childish here. You’ve not said anything of substance and simply left a sarcastic comment.
Nope, I am engaged in political debate. Only you have chosen to bicker and that shit you care to focus on instead. Want to answer or is this just another walk over?
Lmao your very first comment ended in “not” like a teenager in 1992, are you sure you haven’t chosen to bicker? Also answer what? That’s the first question you’ve asked me in this grand political debate you are engaged in.
Thats literally american politics 😂
In the case of capitalism that is literally true. Capital will try to destroy any country, culture, ecosystem or set of beliefs that can’t be exploited, or that threaten it’s ability to exploit. It literally is a case of “you have to pick one, and only one can win.” Liveable planet, or capitalism. No other options, no way to avoid the choice. Not choosing is choosing.
If it wasn’t clear, I abhor this doomer mindset that benefits nobody except the class war leaders and weapons manufacturers. Not a single mention of improvement, only destructive hate and the naive intent that any of that leads to actual community in any participants. Hate binds a war like cult that has utterly forgotten about how humans can help each other and prosper from it. Choosing is choosing. Choosing a hateful side or the other hateful side and never thinking about your own ideas, needs of many, morals and ethics, or your own belief is utter disgrace and folly
That doomer mindset that benefits nobody except the oligarchs, the mindset of…pointing out that the oligarchs are oligarchs? Genuinely confused here. You seem to be interpreting physical observations are some kind of provocative personal statement. Slug and salt physically cannot coexist. Flame and gunpowder physically cannot coexist. Capitalism and a healthy, peaceful living world physically cannot coexist. Pointing this out is no more “hateful” than pointing out that 6 times 7 is 42.
Choosing a hateful side or the other hateful side and never thinking about your own ideas, needs of many, morals and ethics, or your own belief is utter disgrace and folly
The needs of the many is actually our whole thing here, and the thing about the needs of the many is that if you actually take it seriously, what usually happens is that the sideliners who have spent much less time examining the facts will call you hateful for pointing out that the hell empire built on mass-subjugation is unsurprisingly the primary obstacle to the world we want. And that a house with a rotten foundation stands no hope of reconstruction.
While bewildered, I really am trying to approach this openly, which is why ive gone back and softened a couple embarassing redditisms in the edit. So genuinely, and in a spirit of understanding: what is your critique of my assessment?
I have a cold and clear hate towards capitalism. It cuts surgically and makes a difference. Your screaming flailing buckshot is a good product for rage bait and political pundits to consume. Learn to not be an extreme capitalist creation that rolls around bouncing against it’s playground fence. The only game that wins is to not play and climb out. You afford no energy toward actual revolution or change or demand or function or policy or anything in this rant, and nobody that reads it is inspired to do it either. You benefit the status quo which is hyper capitalist. If your focus is destructive and nothing else, in an actual uprising you will not help and even hinder it’s progression. Nobody wants to dismantle only for dismantling, all persons need cause and just inspiration for the actual replacement that will stand in its place. 60% debating philosophy, 20% condemning 20% war cry. Take a small piece of policy and put it in there, and watch the change it makes. Then, swap out your statements incrementally until they are 100% policy. Replacement policy. This is a real path should you tire of trudging in this insane climate
Got it, content of critque=
Okay okay, for real. You seem to think that because I recognize the necessity of uprooting capitalism, I have nothing positive to replace it with? Cause brother lemme introduce a concept you may have heard of before;
I don’t think anything about you. I am critiquing what you are saying. It is a handful of childish statements and reveals a critical need for education
May I recommend a book: The Jakarta Method, by Vincent Bevins. Humanized Communism in a way that profoundly changed my thinking.
Idk how anyone can defend how we (the US) does shit. Especially after this year. If you weren’t already privy to how monstrous we can be now you are, and now we pulled any good shit we might have done, too.
Lemmy libs in this thread showing they have an aversion to reading
there are libs on Lemmy?
Almost every community on every instance of Lemmy is a liberal circlejerk lol
Wait lol you’re a MAGA account but you accidentally came to the right conclusion? JDPON Don does it again.
it’s always hilarious when conservatives are right on accident and they don’t even know why
Check on some .world comms and let us know what you find. Hint: it’s libs as far as the thumb can scroll.
