this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2025
603 points (93.5% liked)
Memes
53346 readers
1036 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- 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
view the rest of the comments
They were. The large majority of people who lived in the soviet union regret its fall. The introruction of capitalism and the destruction of the socialist system caused metrics like life expectancy, home ownership, quality of life, and more to plummet while poverty, starvation, prostitution, and drug abuse skyrocketed.
do you perhaps know the specifics of the "socialism" fall in now-post-ussr region? Because it was more of introduction of total anarchy and rule of the strongest than it was the introduction of capitalism.
Of course USSR was better than the crysis which consequences we're suffering to these days.
sorry, it's not really related to the discussion you had with the lad, i'm just in a rambling mood ig :D
The chaos of the introduction of capitalism, labeled "shock doctrine," was intrinsically linked to capitalism and private plunder. There's no real way to compare what happened to a theoretical possibility where socialism was dissolved, and not capitalism but another system took its place.
bro, the 90s of the post-ussr region was literally ruled by gangs and otherwise criminal mob. It had nothing to do with any doctrine, as the politicians didn't matter much.
And yes, i wholeheartedly agree, we can't compare any two countries from two different times, even if they occupied the same territory, as we'd inherrently ignore lots of historical context that way.
Yes it does happen when capitalism is introduced, it's a feature of expanding capitalism, either colonial or imperialist.
i fail to see the connection. Literally the same kind of chaos occured when the revolution happened in 1917. Not to mention, that for capitalism to be "introduced" it should be foreign in the first place. USSR, especially late one was quite capitalistic itself, albeit with it's own uniquie flavor.
Seriously you don't see any difference in popular revolution overthrowing centuries long tyranny and literal foreign agents overthrowing a state contrary to people wishes and establishing comprador tyranny?
I am starting to suspect you see history not as dialectical process but as set snapshots.
Considering the above, it does not surprise me anymore.
i'm not talking about the overthrowing itself, but rather about what came after. Before leninists established their rule, there was a period of anarchy, just like there was in the 90s, not to mention that for people of a less internationalist view, USSR rule was just as tyrannical.
you'd have to explain to me how my words you quoted made you think what you thought. The way USSR was at the end of it is a result of dialectical process.
What i said there is, while (after NEP) the banking system was nationalized and even small enterprises shut, enterprise is still an enterprise, even the nationalized one. USSR before perestroika is basically a country-wide corporation, and after perestroika it's just a plain capitalist country, so i don't see why you oppose ussr to capitalism, when saying that "capitalists came and forced ussr to crumble". I know that soviet propagenda would claim otherwise, but capitalists were inside all along, they just had monopoly on everything, and were referred to as government.
Call me dumb or whatever for all i said, but i think that eversince people understood that money should circulate rather than be hoarded and kept, anything we do is inherently and unavoidably capitalistic, thus categorizing a subset of people as "capitalists" in opposition to other subset is inherently wrong.
If you don’t even know what capitalism is, then maybe you should sit this one out.
how about you explain to me than? What a certain term means is a matter of agreement rather than discussion. The same word could have different meanings in different contexts after all.
I'm rather more curious about your thoughts on my USSR = state-wide corporation take tho.
I'm aware of how chaotic it was, but it was also capitalist with foreign plundering from western countries.
Have you tried reading the primary sources for that article? It implies that the people who think their country is worse off since the fall of the USSR want a return to the USSR. However, the questions that the article doesn’t discuss has a majority of people saying that they value the institutions of democracy very highly, which doesn’t suggest that that’s the case.
The USSR was democratic, so it isn't in contradiction. I'd prefer more surveys to be taken that directly ask questions on preference for socialism vs capitalism, ie a return to the soviet system directly rather than simply asking if they are better or worse off. What we do know is that in countries like Russia and Belarus, there is a strong resurgance in soviet pride and communist party registration.
Again, I can only suggest reading the primary data, rather than relying on openly biased reporting. One of the key democratic principles which is so highly valued is “honest multiparty elections”.
I do read the primary data, and it's also true that in many formerly socialist countries there's surging sympathies for socialism and surging communist party membership.
I mean, you clearly didn’t read the primary data in this case, because if you had you wouldn’t have believed it to support the idea that the people surveyed wanted to return to the soviet era.
I did, and I believe it's a strong indicator of wishing to return to socialism, especially when combined with other metrics like huge increases in communist party membership and soviet pride.
You're an idiot
People love getting high on nostalgia when things aren't looking up well in the present moment. Even many of those who were under fascism are nostalgic of it. That's the point of nostalgia: only remembering the good parts of the past while pretending the bad never happened.
"sure, the people living there say that it was better under communism, but obviously they're too stupid and foreign to know what they think. Only I, the enlightened westerner, can truly judge if things are better, which I will do based on vague vibes that I can't identify the source of"
"People hated living under communism just ask them"
Actually you'll find most people preferred living under communism
"They're just blinded by nostalgia"
So you can't just ask people about what it was like under communism?
"No you can, if you did you'd find they all hated it"
"I like to say I love communism without under duress."
"I love communism not because I am a card-carrying party member."
"The fact that more people fled from communist countries than coming in means those people are crazy."
Least incoherent anti communist
I mean, sure, those who clawed their way out of the Berlin Wall, vault poled over electric fences in the DMZ, defected with a top secret Soviet plane as insurance to be allowed to stay in the West, and swam the Caribbean to desperately leave communist countries surely love communism.
You don't even remember what the point of discussion was, lol.
I do. You are talking about how communism is so great, that I am vindicating you how Westerners were desperately risking their lives to get to communist countries.
Nope, that wasn't it.
That's literally the opposite of what happened here, you dumbass
BrainInAWesternerBox larping as BrainInAnEasternerBox.
Most intellectual anti communist
That doesn't explain the rise of communist party membership, nor can you wash away the fact that quality of life metrics were higher in the soviet union for the most part than they are today in post-soviet countries.
The metrics probably doesn't include those who were in gulags and died of famines.
The rise in communist party membership you speak of maybe increased by 100%, when two new members joined an already two member communist party.
Wake me up when communist slogans are getting viral on Tiktok and Instagram, and if communists are getting elected in huge numbers on national level across the world.
They do. For starters, famine was ended after the 1930s (outside of World War II), and prison death rates weren't astronomically high nor were prison populations particularly high either.
As for increase in communist party membership, over four years, more than 63,000 people have become CPRF members, with most of the new recruits being young people under 30 and “people of prime working age.”.
“We are now seeing not just nostalgia for the past, but a conscious choice by millions of citizens in favor of the socialist path of development,”
We restored all ties with the Communist Parties of China, Vietnam, the DPRK, with India, with the Arab countries, with Latin America, with Cuba, with Venezuela, with Nicaragua.
The expansion and astronomical growth of grassroot movements like the Inmortal Regiment. This movement grew so large that plenty of countries around the world organized a similar march. It started small until it grew in a international movement.
There are other examples, but it's clearly on the rise.
Yes they do, you confidently incorrect, arrogant moron.