openmic.social is an uncensored community. You may encounter strong language, controversial opinions, and mature or NSFW material. You must be 18+ to browse. Illegal content is prohibited and removed on sight — please report it. By continuing, you accept that you may see content you personally disagree with.
Where did they work, and did they live in Moscow? Some regions or particular stores by key plants were much better supplied, but honestly I’m not sure if you could find one family in USSR that would claim stores were well supplied in the 80s.
Also I come from one of the satellite state. Food was taken out from the country, while there were protests over look of food in the stores. Kinda hard to claim it did not happen. There were rail carts welded to tracks to by workers trying to stop it…
And yeah, Russia was an absolutne shitshow both before and after, no question about it. I’m just addressing oversimplified vision of what money meant in state capitalism.
Ignoring the fact that this conversation has been steered towards an explicitly liberal/market economics/consumerist framing…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostalgia_for_the_Soviet_Union
Removed by mod
They said the line!
Removed by mod
I don’t need to have the same mindless thought terminating cliche parroted at me constantly, but you people so it anyway
Removed by mod
And that is even ignoring various other economic indicators that showed worsened living conditions after the fall.
Removed by mod
Pretending as if people in the USSR had very little compared to the rest of the world is incredibly silly.
Removed by mod
Yeah, I read your claims. And, again, a lot of families’ experiences differ from yours, and it is incredibly silly to claim that that was somehow worse than what came before/after, or worse than what the vast majority of the world was experiencing.
You are most likely saying that you do not accept any living standards as ‘good enough’ unless the state engaged in plundering of the global South.
Asking people, sadly, is not the reality check it should be. Trump was voted after all.
What does this even mean
I mean 2 things:
The liberal when presented with the prospect of democracy: “Actually no the masses are too stupid to make their own decisions.”
Removed by mod
You mean the thing that NATO admitted to?
Removed by mod
No idea why you put me in some group like that or what that accomplishes.
But in any case, yes, most people are too dumb, too easy to manipulate. Just look at the USA, wild stuff. But pretty much any other place on earth works too, perhaps we have to look at history. Germany in or before WW2 was wild too.
This is also the reason even a kingdom can be really good, simply by having a good king. That’s also the issue every(?) empire had… once the great leader is gone it all goes to shit.
We see live how the masses of easily manipulated people cause so much damage by enabling shit stains like Trump. Is that really that hard to believe?
Yeah man I don’t think having a gold plated pedophile in charge of everything while everyone else works in the mud and dies of plague every few years sounds better than sharing the fruit of human knowledge and ingenuity with everyone so that everyone uplifts one another’s ability to participate in society.
I’m sure that problem will just go away and not get way worse when you have one wealthy inbred dipshit with slaves who gets to decide what’s true and what education looks like for the entire society. Feudalism has been relegated to obscurity for a reason: it was outcompeted in the west by capitalism and extremely outcompeted in the east by socialism.
Not in Moscow. Not in any administrative centers.
“Well-supplied” compared to what? Would you say that stores in most of the capitalist world were well-supplied?
Movement of food between the republics doesn’t seem to be hard to believe, but also does not seem to be malicious.
It’s rather silly to call planned economy “state capitalism”. For most of its existence, there wasn’t even the capitalist class - i.e. a class of people that owned the means of production as private property and used other people’s labour to extract profit from said means of production.
Removed by mod
So, you can’t actually say what you are comparing the USSR to? (It is overwhelmingly likely that you are comparing the USSR to colonial metropoles, and ignore most of the world.)
And yet, people in the USSR weren’t struggling with food as much as most of the capitalist world. Hell, there is a famine in Madagascar.)
What is that “other framework”? Pillaging Africa, Asia, and elsewhere outside of Europe?
Okay. What famines are you referring to that happened during your adulthood in the USSR?
Like when?
Okay, what people did the USSR engaged in colonialism against, and which ones did it subject to genocide?
Also, I am going to point out again that no, neither what came before, nor what came after was/has been better.
Removed by mod
It’s funny how you admitted that you were not comparing the situation with any sort of actual cases, but a hypothetical case of what the Ukrainian SSR could have done. All while falling to mention that Ukraine’s agricultural output decreased between 1980 and 1990.
Also, why did you opt to lie about 1/3rd of the Ukrainian population dying in the 1930s, and also presenting that case as a famine that happened during your adulthood?
It’s pretty clear that you can’t actually explain why you think that the USSR was somehow worse in this regard than most of the capitalist world (where people die by starvation en mass even today).