Two countries have a socialist revolution,
country A goes through capitalist reforms and becomes the furthest thing from communism, however there is little to no poverty, crime, no one is obese and no one is worthless lumpen, life is good.
Country B has absolutely no capitalist reforms and publicly executes anyone who tries to introduce an even slightly
Liberal idea into the peoples government/dictatorship of the proletariat, however, 17 million people die in the span of 5 years and life is miserable for everyone living in country B
Is country A good because there are no negative aspects but isn’t really socialist or is country B good because it’s the purest form of socialism in history fishier the fact that it’s a shithole?
youd have to analyse why that happened in the first place. did country B implement shitty policies that held it back or was it the victim of historical circumstances largely outside of its own control?
Not enough context, and I'm not reading an appropriate amount of context when I could just pick up a book.
>>817127>"What if socialism but consequentialistically bad thing happen">"What if capitalism but good thing happen"What's your point here? Marxists generally accept that capitalism is itself a stage in a material historic process and it's not like we here are idealists.
thought experiments are bad theory.
if shit tasted like chocolate and smelled like roses and didn't come out of an asshole and wasn't the product of digesting food and wasn't poisonous and in fact it was nutritious and we didn't even call it shit, would you eat shit? if you say yes you are a gross disgusting shit eater and don't ever talk to me again i spit on you disgusting fuck you
>lust provoking image
>irrelevant, time wasting hypothetical