Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

USSR was a blasphemy because of it's communist nature. It was an abomination born in blood.

Slavs were never for communism.



Was the economic structure of USSR the real problem? I thought it was the power structure (dictatorship) and general lack of accountability of management.


The economic structure wasn't great, but people can disagree as to whether it was due to the power structure (a militarism and imperialism-obsessed dictatorship), and how much of it due to the fundamental problems of... The weird, state-capitalism flavour of 'communism' that was used in practice in the second world.

Then you get into no true Scottsman arguments about what is, and what isn't communism, and whether or not state capitalism is guaranteed to be a failure, or whether it was state capitalism, as practiced by the Eastern Block is guaranteed to be a failure. And then you can further split hairs as to whether or not having some aspects of state capitalism in your economy are better than having no aspects of it, and where the optimal line is.

And then you find that you've wasted hours of time arguing, but haven't actually convinced anyone, or learned anything new.


> Slavs were never for communism

i disagree to some extent. historically slavic culture tends to be much more communal than rest of europe. even in eu you can see this manifested in thr resistance to liberalism that comes from all (?) slavic countries


I think Slavs historically tended more towards decentralized structure. So maybe communal in a small community structure.


Decentralized structures and communism are not mutually exclusive.


What does resistance to liberalism manifest about being more communal or communist? Is resistance to privatisation a "resistance to liberalism" or "communist"? I don't think so. It is nationalistic, conservative and social democratic.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: