• BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Someone who’s so ignorant of geopolitics that they don’t know about the fall of the USSR should not be so arrogant

    • Alloi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      28 minutes ago

      well, we are talking about modern russia, mainly. however the USSR operated under a hybrid system of marxist-leninism, with some very key changes. it was dubbed “Stalinism” a system which did not reflect in action, the ideals of marx, nor lenin, and was a system built for beaurocratic and state ownership of the means of production, not the proletariate as defined by marx or lenin. again, this is a form of state capitalism. not marxism in action or by defintion, nor leninism.

      it still operated under a form of state capitalism under stalin, and through changes in leadership after stalin, had some ideological back and forth changes between stalinism and more liberal marxist leninist policies during the kruschev thaw, which then, under new leadership after kruschev, fell back on neo stalinist policies, before being dismantled by gorbachev during his resignation in 1991, thus ending the USSR, or the soviet union.

      during this entire period, and through into today, it is more accurate to define russia and the USSR as a state capitalist society with power being held by beaurocrats and oligarchs. they were never able to create a marxist or leninist, socialist, communist society by the original definition, merely the ruse of one. the proletariate never ended up owning the means of production at any stage.

      please refrain from using insults during discourse, this isnt reddit. this is a place of learned doctors and scholars! lol.

    • Alloi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 hours ago

      i really shouldnt have to explain to you the difference between marxism, marxist leninism, and stallinism, and how those differentiate, and how the bastardisation of marxism lead to a different form of “communism” and the beaurocratic centralisation of power in the USSR, and how that corruption lead to the fall of the USSR. the very fact that they did not operate under the pure principals of marxism, but used it as a cover to centralise power, using it as propaganda for the people to feel united, drives my point further.

      the USSR did not operate off of pure marxism. please read into this before making swathing statements about my “ignorance”

      marx wanted the means of control, controlled by the proletariate, not the state. which is what happened in the USSR. so, not marxist communism, just a bastardised alternative to convince the people to hand over power to the state.

      however we are talking about modern russia. not the USSR.

      • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Given your demonstrable lack of knowledge about the basics, you shouldn’t be trying to opine on that kind of thing.