No democracy that actually reflected the will of the people

So what exactly was the difference between the Tzars Russia and Soviet Union?
It seemed worse with all the artificial famines, mass killing of intelligentsia, party politics, exploitation of the proletariat with mandatory quotas and corruption.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=W-OnFpWSv_g
youtube.com/watch?v=u3WH79my90s
youtube.com/watch?v=s5axVunzQSA
youtube.com/watch?v=9PoYzPfguJc
youtube.com/watch?v=Okz2YMW1AwY
b-ok.org/book/1270081/23128c

...

youtube.com/watch?v=W-OnFpWSv_g
youtube.com/watch?v=u3WH79my90s
youtube.com/watch?v=s5axVunzQSA

It definitely wasn't. Under the Tsar, like 85% of the population were impoverished peasants and you still got to enjoy the secret police and dictatorship on top of that. At least the USSR was a social 'democracy' and provided relatively solid living standards for its population for the most part, with healthcare, housing and education for everyone. Hell, it was probably better than modern Russia, disregarding the outliers of its final collapse and Stalin's more retarded moments. The USSR was shit and the result of the failure of the post-WW1 revolutions, but it was still better than the trash it replaced.

this image still makes me kek

...

wrong, the state was overly centralized but Stalin did not have unlimited power

nigga pls

also there's nothing wrong with exiling kulaks to Siberia

an election between two neoliberals is not the same thing as comparing a tsarist and communist society

...

Funny how the people who say this are the ones who know the least about the soviet way of government

Still waiting on that revolution

The revolution in Russia was happened after decades of trying to overthrow the Tsar. People were shot, arrested, and killed by government officials constantly. Don't expect some Bordigist fantasy where everything just happens at once, we aren't even close to the goddamn beginning.
Lenin didn't even think it would happen in his lifetime, even after he constantly worked for hours and hours.

Capitalist Ideology is way too powerful and weaved into the culture for anything truly meaningful to happen now. Americans especially are just complacent. Sure they'll riot and protest but we just like to scream at each other and hit things and burn shit because we're animals. Ill wait for after the nuclear apocalypse, then we can rebuild, or whats left of us. The fash will take over while Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerburg make out and the crowd goes wild

Why do you always blame your problems on the evil capitalists?
Maybe your system was badly designed to begin with?

Why should I watch an hour of some biased armchair marxists debunking things? Give me a summary.
So you're saying that everything was heaven according to the ministry of truth until capitalism took a look at things and exposed the rotten system that it had to deal with?
Credits for supporting an overbloated state don't last forever while industrial production doesn't keep pace in quality or technology with the rest of the competition.
The rigid centrally planned economy and corruption doomed Soviet Union. It could function in a primitive industrial state with mass produced goods. But give control over the economy to a bunch of deep state bureaucrats with no checks and balances and you get lines on basic goods.


It was a dictatorship. The common people had no say in leadershipt. You had to toe the party line to even get in politics. And as in every dictatorship, it got replaced as soon as the economy went sour.
The centrally planned state did what it was needed to be done with the economy. Modernizing it. Logically that standards rose, especially with the overcrowded cities gone due to WW2.
But when it came to develop that economy with the new technology, they were caught with pants down.


He had control over the Red Army, ergo he had unlimited power.
Holodomor was a retribution for Ukrainians declaring independence and constantly revolting. The harvests were good in those years but everything got shipped to the West for capitalist money.
The same happened in Commie China. The Great Leap Forward was for the pacification of the conservative peasants.

BULLSHIT. This is nothing but right winged propaganda of Ukranian nationalists who reinterpret the famines thru a nationalist lense. People of all nationalities including georgians and russians died in the famine which was the unintentional result of collectivization and weather conditions, along with the kulaks themselves burning fields and slaughtering livestocks.

nonsense, the Politburo checked Stalin's power to an extent

no it wasn't lmao it was an unintentional famine caused primarily by drought and crop rust and when the famine hit the USSR reduced grain exports greatly to try and relieve it, not to mention it hit East Ukraine hardest which didn't have the rabid nationalist sentiment the West had

There was a democratic system, on paper, but it might've been completely undemocratic in practice. (The USA is democratic on paper but not really in practice.) I rarely hear someone explain exactly how it was undemocratic though, so explain please? I don't doubt there was a lack of democracy but I wanna know exactly how the system that was democratic in theory was made undemocratic in practice.

It was guaranteed in their constitution but might have been limited in reality, I dunno.

I hear people (mostly liberals and anarchists) say this all the time, but no one seems to be able to explain how he had unlimited power. Legally he certainly didn't have unlimited power, and he tried to step down from his position multiple times but was prevented from doing so.

Surprise, most of Holla Forums are revisionist cretins who embody the worst aspects of the left in the same way Holla Forums embodies the worst aspects of the right.

Ahahahahah.

Stalin's only mistake was trusting the Kulaks at all

you can criticize the USSR and Stalin without parroting anti-communist propaganda

haha wow
I'm so glad we have this democracy

youtube.com/watch?v=9PoYzPfguJc
here, I help
It's FInBol's video on the democracy and electoral system, as well as govt structure in the USSR

Still waiting on that reform

are you trying to say that the kurds aren't socialist?

The USSR wasn't perfect, but if you want to ask what is the difference between it and Tsarist Russia there is your answer.

whoops forgot to take off my shitposting flag.

The dude couldn't even make his own appointments, Fucking Beria was forced on Stalin by the general assembly Georgy Malenkov was his pick for the position.

I thought you were better than this leftypol

Le epic communist symbols everywhere

Of course don't take all this videos as the absolute truth, but just to have another opinion
youtube.com/watch?v=Okz2YMW1AwY

None of this is true and if it was it still wouldn't say a thing about the economic system.

Stalin was clearly despotic but the material conditions for your average worker were much better under him than the tzar.

Also, the quotas weren't really mandatory, more like guidelines, they were many incentives for high production, workers were paid per the piece they produced.

This is such a liberal parody of real events I can't even. Modern (post-cold war) historians actually argue the opposite. Post-rev and post-civil war USSR was completely chaotic and the party didn't have the necessary control over the basics of political life. Economic planning was mostly inefficient and lacking in most regards. HENCE the Stalinist purges: desperate attempts at normalizing everyday life, bringing about some kind of explanation (trotsykite sabotage, kulaks) for the failures.

Just shows how the "totalitarian" meme is the ideological equivalent of an all-explaining magic element, there to stop any critical investigation, discouraging comrades from learning past mistakes, and blackmailing those who actually want to know what happened.

b-ok.org/book/1270081/23128c

holy shit, revisionists BTFO

Except that Brezhnev left Gorby with a country completely stagnant, senile leadership, and headed straight for several civil wars.

USSR is 1980 was a dead man walking.

That is straight out untrue. Andropov was great, no matter his age. Had he have lived longer, the USSR might have survived.

It was a dictatorship. The common people had no say in leadershipt. You had to toe the party line to even get in politics. And as in every dictatorship, it got replaced as soon as the economy went sour.
The centrally planned state did what it was needed to be done with the economy. Modernizing it. Logically that standards rose, especially with the overcrowded cities gone due to WW2.
But when it came to develop that economy with the new technology, they were caught with pants down.

Social Democracy doesn't mean democracy. It means "socialism" that doesn't abbolish the accumulation of capital - ie not socialism