Adulthood is realizing that Stalin was right about basically everything (except maybe pissing his pants when the Nazis invaded and giving bad military orders, but in the end the Fash chuds were defeated and you can't fault the man for not being both a political and military genius)
/leftypol/, suggest to me good reading material for red pilling people about /ourguy/ Stalin
Kulaks/Uyghas/Zionists fuck off
269 posts and 26 image replies omitted.look at this thread for the past hour and tell me this isnt a raid and mindless attempt at shitflinging with no regard for post quality
it starts here
>>2419884>>2419078>"revolution in one nation"it was called socialism in one country and it was not a goal in and of itself but a policy that arose out of geopolitical necessity after the failure of the german revolution to happen in 1919 and the isolation of the USSR in a capitalist world.
This is what the USSR had to deal with between WW1 and Stalin's death:
<WW1 leaves Russia less developed than it was before WW1<there is 2 revolutions in 1 years<bolsheviks take power<civil war where western powers invade with a coalition of 14 countries<country is now even more fucked<need to do things like "war communism" and "NEP" just to stay afloat<german revolution fails<internal power struggle in the party all through the 20s<rapid industrialization and purges through the 30s<climate-caused famine in ukraine which gets called a man made famine by bourgeois propagandists<purges of military officials just before nazi germany invades<operation barbarossa almost reaches moscow and kills hundreds of thousands<win WW2 but come out of it a lot weaker<Western capitalists put up iron curtain but blame you for it<capitalist ailgned countries get that juicy marshall plan money but you have to refuse it because it comes with strings attached (like privatization) >>2425563Stalin above, are we doing this again?
In scientific socialism, the socialism of the kind you are using as a definitional standard is
known to be theoretically impossible without a one world government and, therefore, is thus an aspirational term when applied to People's Republics and other Proletarian Dictatorships
Like even trots know this one because despite their deviation they are still communists
Why don't you know the basics of the science you are critiquing?
>>2425559>formeri agree, now they are Utopian liberal marxists, their entire theory is anti-ML(Communist)
Stay mad liberal.
>>2425577>Come on in scientific socialism we know by materialist analysis the USSR fundamentally could not fulfill the requirements to achieve a socialist society, therefore we need to call their failure socialism firstly based on the beliefs and desires of its founders, secondly because it makes us feel good, third because we don’t want to hurt the feelings of hypothetical people from other countriesWe’re in agreement aside from the idealism part where states = their ideals
>>2425594No, the highest of idealisms is to look at the actual material life of a society and then determining its nature on the basis of its professed ideals, which is exactly what MLs do
MLs are a perfect example of why Marxism is and must be fundamentally opposed to ideology, since only ideology can lead a person to explain why a society could not achieve socialism to explain why it was an admirable example of socialism to be revered and “followed”
>>2425622Theories are often disproved by applied science so I have high hopes for the People's Republic of China, and their win win, harmonise and drag forward the world economy; this is within wriggle room of possibility of the theory even, high hopes here
Their rapidly increasing technological advantage, and the raising of 700 million out of absolute poverty also proves scientific socialism
Then we can continue on with the high cultural development and active and successful protest culture of the Chinese people, where unlike in bourgeois dictatorships the will of the people is not ignored
What are your hopes, or fears if you have no hope?
Unique IPs: 23