Communists acknowledge that excess deaths have occured under socialist systems governed by communist parties. It’s reality, after all. However, we also acknowledge that these excess deaths pale in comparison to the systemic murders and genocides propogated by capitalism, as well as the fact that socialist systems have been responsible for doubling life expectancy in many cases such as Russia and China, along with huge material gains in quality of life.
It’s true that excess deaths occured, but it’s even more true that socialism has been responsible for preventing far more deaths than it has ever caused. Deaths due to unintentional famines were common in early socialism, and systemically ended by socialists when they used to be prevalent under previous semi-feudal conditions. Communists have consistently been the ones most responsible for uplifting living standards and metrics in the last century.
Socialist states have had excesses, but they pale in comparison to the killings systemic to capitalism, and moreover socialist states have been responsible for the largest uplifting in living standards in history.
All socialist states will have to use authority, though, in order to disempower capitalists and fascists, and protect the gains of the revolution. Capitalists will see this as authoritarian, but it’s also liberating for the working classes. States don’t just wield power for the sake of it, they are thoroughly connected to class struggle and as such class analysis needs to be at the core of understanding authority.
well sry i dont know what i mean. I mean authoriatarianism as in, using the power of the state and laws and whatever to keep a select few in power, who are above the laws, while also using the power of the state to fullfill whatever intrestest some group of people have.
like a dicatorship or a kingdom
while i dont mean like democratic authority (whitout it beeing opression/ more then nessasary opressing)
Okay, sure, but we aren’t talking about capitalism but existing/formerly existing socialist states like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. That doesn’t apply to those.
It was a dictatorship of the proletariat, ie the proletariat was in control and oppressed capitalists. For the working classes, ie the proletariat and the peasantry, it was a dramatic expansion in democratization, and society was oriented around fulfilling their needs. The gap between the richest and poorest was about ten times, compared to the hundreds of thousands to millions in the Tsarist and capitalist eras.
So, we just ignoring the tens of millions of deaths under communism?
I mean we are ignoring the tens of millions of deaths under capitalism, so why not?
Compared to the shitload of capitalism only this year?
Communists acknowledge that excess deaths have occured under socialist systems governed by communist parties. It’s reality, after all. However, we also acknowledge that these excess deaths pale in comparison to the systemic murders and genocides propogated by capitalism, as well as the fact that socialist systems have been responsible for doubling life expectancy in many cases such as Russia and China, along with huge material gains in quality of life.
It’s true that excess deaths occured, but it’s even more true that socialism has been responsible for preventing far more deaths than it has ever caused. Deaths due to unintentional famines were common in early socialism, and systemically ended by socialists when they used to be prevalent under previous semi-feudal conditions. Communists have consistently been the ones most responsible for uplifting living standards and metrics in the last century.
authorian regime kills its citizen
“guys working together just does not work” ^^ this guy
Socialist states have had excesses, but they pale in comparison to the killings systemic to capitalism, and moreover socialist states have been responsible for the largest uplifting in living standards in history.
My point was more like that authoriatarianism and socialism/ communism does not habe to be connected
All socialist states will have to use authority, though, in order to disempower capitalists and fascists, and protect the gains of the revolution. Capitalists will see this as authoritarian, but it’s also liberating for the working classes. States don’t just wield power for the sake of it, they are thoroughly connected to class struggle and as such class analysis needs to be at the core of understanding authority.
well sry i dont know what i mean. I mean authoriatarianism as in, using the power of the state and laws and whatever to keep a select few in power, who are above the laws, while also using the power of the state to fullfill whatever intrestest some group of people have.
like a dicatorship or a kingdom
while i dont mean like democratic authority (whitout it beeing opression/ more then nessasary opressing)
Okay, sure, but we aren’t talking about capitalism but existing/formerly existing socialist states like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. That doesn’t apply to those.
how was the Ussr not a dictatorship
It was a dictatorship of the proletariat, ie the proletariat was in control and oppressed capitalists. For the working classes, ie the proletariat and the peasantry, it was a dramatic expansion in democratization, and society was oriented around fulfilling their needs. The gap between the richest and poorest was about ten times, compared to the hundreds of thousands to millions in the Tsarist and capitalist eras.