• Cowbee [he/they]
    link
    fedilink
    512 hours ago

    The three works I listed were history books, 2 written during the early Soviet Period and the third written shortly after the fall of the USSR. Theory is important, but so are history books, and in this case history books take priority because these are accounts of the ground. I am not sure where you get off believing them to be theory. You have your anecdotes, which can help guide your experiences, and I provided historical texts and analysis.

    • @LANIK2000
      link
      0
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      The first two books are theory with random anecdotes with the same citation count as my shit. If that constitutes history, than so does the Bible.

      Tho I apologize for lumping then all together as the last book is actually somewhat more interesting (like actually having fucking citations). It rightfully outlines western propaganda, highlights what good happened in the USSR and what bad in the west. Tho if you actually read the thing, you’d notice IT’S JUST AS CIRTICAL OF THE SOVIET UNION! Read it your self! It mostly defends the USSR from western propaganda, but it doesn’t do the same mistake you did and just deny the structural issues. Sadly it doesn’t say much, as it is very much focused on critiquing the west (like the first 50%), so I kinda just dismissed it at first.

      Also you completely skipped my request to provide a single example for your previous claim, sad.