USSR alternative

meant for

I'd rather have leftcoms to be in charge once Germany is liberated.

No idea, we used to be full of trots.

Where did they go anyways? Were they bullied out?

Democracy right away isn't even necessary, just libertarian rather than despotic government. Choose a successor, ie. not Stalin. In fact just shoot Stalin.

In Soviet Russia, Stalin shoots you.

Without Stalin Russia had no chance against Hitler. Emasculated society full of divided views ain't going to stand and protect its motherland.

youtube.com/watch?v=RkeXb7wGMSE

I'm basically a Trot, but IRL Trots are so cancerous I keep it on the DL.

Exactly why you need to kill him before he takes power.

But if course that's with the benefit of hindsight. Still, it's irresponsible to not name a successor you trust with the almost unimaginable power you have and make sure it's stuck to when you know you're dying.

my gott

Yeah, maybe if Stalin hadn't died so suddenly an actual ML successor like Molotov could've kept things running smoothly. By 1970 though the party was totally anti-Marxist, anything after that was hopeless.

The government was split between turbo-liberal Western sympathizers and state capitalist bureaucrats trying to preserve their muh privileged positions. Not much could have been done, socialism was finished.

There were plenty of genuine communists within the government at the time and by late 1952 Stalin seemed to be making moves to assure a successor. But, as I said above, his death and Kruschev's coup allowed the remarkably swift transformation of the USSR into an imperialist capitalist state.

...

Abandon commodity production, democratize planning for utility, move the best engineers for researching weapons to researching industry and consumer goods, appease the masses through raising the living standards.

Don't try to open up Soviet history, it is a can of worms and even the USSR's version of history was far better then bourgeois history books crying about Holodomor and that Lenin plotted Kornilov to break free from prison and start the civil-war (Richard Pipes seriously suggests Lenin was the master mind behind the Russian civil-war).

Stalin was manly.

The USSR was doomed the moment Stalin stated that the state capitalism they had achieved and was only ever meant to be a transition phase into a socialist economy was actually socialism. They gave up.

Redistributing the land previously held by lords into an apportionment for every peasant was a huge mistake. It's what created the kulaks and in only a couple decades it transformed into a huge obstacle towards genuine collectivization of agriculture.

...

Introduce Market-Socialism. Ban any bunker based production.

Don't fuck up the relations with Tito and don't be best friends with Kai-shek (over L-Mao).

Full investment in the space race.
Drop some H-bombs sparingly.
Bring in the Aliens.

We can't know if fascists would've been able to rise if Trosky was in charge. Stalin gave too much shit about PR.

Stalin never claimed the NEP was socialism, he claimed the planned system created in the 30's was socialism. He was correct.

The USSR already had a market economy by 1970, that is, a capitalist economy. For all the good it did them.

Why not? He was a pretty generic porky.

...

No.

Only thing worse than a stalinist is a "market socialist". At least stalinist types seem to understand that market exchange is antithetical to socialism (even if they're in denial about the wide spread existence of it in the USSR).

I'm still here :^(

Non ML leftists were part of Soviet government till 1922. Then they either joined Party or got elected as non-Party candidates.

If you ended it earlier, you'd had even more problems.

War Communism should've lasted at least half a year more. That would've reduced impact of Volga famine. %% %%

Are you nuts? Radical Right made an appearance in early 20s.

The very existence of USSR caused them.

Why not?

Yes there was an alternative. It was called Makhnovistan and it would have achieved 100% Full Communism if it wasn't for the Bolsheviks. ;(

Because the workers didn't control the means of production.

The first thing would be to isolate Stalin, remove him from politburo and shove him in some in a military or bureaucratic post.

Expand New economic policy, and use collectivization only in peripheral regions for now.

Shove Trotsky after the civil war into something like a minister of interior, where he can do social engineering since he is best at that.

Democratize Soviet Union, and establish free elections. Nominate Bukharin as my successor since I will be dead soon.

Leave Ukraine, Poland and Germany the fuck alone, there is nothing to be done with them, so the least worst is to use Makhno as an ally rather than an enemy.

Don't fuck over the anarchists, they may prove useful ideological allies.

Lessen the politburos powers, use a system of various ministries and departments that would be free interference.

Focus on industrialization in the military and goods, but use a mixture of war communism and collectivization rather than one or the other. Do something more like Proudhons mutualism and justify by saying, that untill we industrialize we are not full communism yet.

If he had done those things, Russia would have been a first world nation by the 1960's, and not ostracized and shunned by the western powers.

This is so stupidly naive it hurts. Even worse, it delves into straight up apologetics for capitalism.

I hope the Nazis have fun with their new colony.

This is a daydream. It would've only been possible if Stalin, at the height of his prestige, made some serious moves towards it after the war.

Anarchism is a waste of everyone's time, especially Makhno's little joke. If they were kept around they'd probably just develop some market economy then collapse after a while.

Not only would this slow down the industrialization process, you would actually just abandon socialism entirely in favor of private property. Great.

The USSR did they best they could with what they had. The revisionists had already established a state capitalist market by the end of the 60's yet it sure as hell didn't lead to the remarkable growth rates you claim.

What a joke. Do you honestly believe this nonsense? The West couldn't tolerate the Soviet Union even after it became a capitalist imperialist state, do you honestly think they'd make friends a genuinely revolutionary country?

This board is so right-wing it's fucking painful. We should just make Proudhon and Bakunin it's patron-saints already.

It would be easier to use the industry of Germany and Poland rather than build everything from scratch tbh

How the fuck can you have socialism without industrialization? Even during 1928 the Soviet Union was mostly a peasant agricultural economy.

There was nothing wrong with NEP, in as much it would save the Soviet Union the brutal Stalinist collectivization, that caused numerous famines in Russia and the Ukraine.And they weren't even that effective since they lacked technical expertise and foreign investments. This delusion shared by Stalin and Mao that you can jump directly to communism and industrialization, without an already established industrial proletariat was not shared by Lenin, and it was in fact this rush to collectivization that led to the totalitarian state capitalism of Stalin, where the state controlled all of the economy. Had Lenin listened more closely to Bogdanov instead of antagonizing him, he would have realized this, namely, that you cannot arrive to communism with just a "peasant revolt".

Conquering Germany and Poland was militarily impossible, and the only thing the intervention at Poland did was make the Polish hate Russians even more, and the Western powers view the Soviet Union as an imperialist power. (it wasn't, but that's beside the point)

This reads like a parody of what 90% of this board has been indoctrinated into believing. State capitalism is an accurate term for the economy of the USSR as it existed in the last few decades, but under Stalin a socialist planned economy properly existed. There was no monopolization of the means of production by one element of society against another, social property relations were completely dominant over private property. I'd really prefer if you don't pull any nonsense about the red bourgeoisie as a new ruling class exploiting the workers please, I've had to debunk that five times in the last week. Just look into actual Marxism so you can rid yourself of this board's deification of Proudhon.

There was no Stalinist collectivization, just workers coming together to fight the agrarian bourgeoisie with the state on their side. That the kulaks decided to mass murder peasants is the fault of no one but them.

Literally an Infantile Disorder

quite revisionist tbh

State capitalism was how Lenin himself described the implementation of his new economic policies. In the '20s, not in the '90s.

And even still, the industry was still owned by the state, and its production planned by the state. In the '20s. The NEP pertained to agriculture - while being subject to the planning of the state.

Explain, fag.

Not really, Poland wasn't in a good position when USSR was invading back in 1919, it's quite impressive we actually managed to defeat them. Assuming the Soviet leadership wouldn't make the same dumb mistakes in some alternate reality, Poland could indeed fall. And without it, Spartacist uprising could've been aided as well.

Is it bad that I don't know what trotskyism is? I'm sorry, I'm still new to this.

The USSR was completely and utterly fucked from the start, for a million reasons internal and external. Without Germany, socialism was dead in the water. Instead, we got this horrible chimera, an ad hoc system built out of potatoes and desperation in order to get a country to survive while keeping some bells and whistles of socialism.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it were better that the Russian Revolution failed. The left might still exist for once.

You shouldn't even have a flag if you don't know enough variety of beliefs to actually declare your's

Reactionaries should kill themselves tbh