this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
720 points (84.7% liked)

Comics

5782 readers
276 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine 🇵🇸 . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml -3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

So large increases in literacy rates, life expectancy, home ownership, education access, healthcare access, and democratization of society is "devolving into a shitshow?"

Do you think Russians were better off under the thumb of the Tsar? Do you think Cubans were happier as slaves in Batista's US-backed slave-state? What point are you genuinely trying to make?

[–] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

What you’re talking about here are results of industrialization. The same can be said for capitalist countries during the Industrial Revolution.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

Not really, given that USSR managed to achieve the levels of industrialization that took a century under capitalism in mere decades while tangibly improving the lives of the working majority as opposed to exploiting the workers for the benefit of a small capital owning minority.

Today, we only need to look at the difference in development between China and India. Both started roughly in the same place in 1950s, with China taking the communist route and India taking capitalist one.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

They were not. The USSR had free healthcare, education, incredibly cheap housing, all while it was far less developed than Western Countries. Development helped, yes, but what helped the most was Proletarian control and direction, not Bourgeois.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works -3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

All while draining its member states of their wealth and human capital…

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago

If that was true then we'd have very different result here

[–] Soulg@sh.itjust.works -1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

First part is a result of industrialization.

Second part, no they weren't, but that just means that they were worse off before, not that they were great afterwards.

I genuinely think the idea of communism is great, but human nature will ensure that it will never be successful. There will always be someone who gets greedy and takes more for themselves in the pursuit of wealth and power.

[–] Edie@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago

human nature will ensure that it will never be successful

Human nature is to be kind and helpful. Humans are social creatures. We wouldn't have survived for thousands of years if everyone said "fuck you got mine".

Even if that were true, you are saying we should continue with the system that rewards stuff like greed, rather than try to have a system that doesn't. "Human nature" is an argument for socialism/communism.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago

First part is a result of industrialization.

Partially, the other huge part is that the products of production were funneled into safety nets and state projects like railways and universities, providing free education and healthcare, and not corporate profits.

I genuinely think the idea of communism is great, but human nature will ensure that it will never be successful. There will always be someone who gets greedy and takes more for themselves in the pursuit of wealth and power.

What's considered "Human Nature" changes alongside Mode of Production. It isn't Human Nature to be greedy, greed is more often expressed within Capitalism.

Additionally, wealth disparity went way down in the USSR. It wasn't a case where some few individuals profited massively and others lived in squalor, wealth disparity skyrocketed after it collapsed.

Are you familiar with Marxist Theory? You have a decidedly Idealist take, rather than Materialist.