• Praise Idleness
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1387 months ago

    A communist nation that can really provide all that is as realistic as capitalistic utopia.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      687 months ago

      Not a tankie, but the USSR had mostly solved this problem, despite all its other issues. There did exist some homelessness, but nowhere near the extent of current USA.

      • pelya
        link
        347 months ago

        Sure, you could get a piece of land in Siberian tundra at any time, I would not call that housing.

        Moving to a city was way more complicated than in capitalist US. You could not simply buy an apartment. You had to be allocated an apartment by the government. And you needed connections for that. Or bribes. Ideally both. If you think your local rabid Republicans do not care for little wage slave men, you never experienced USSR, it was like that but 100x worse.

          • pelya
            link
            47 months ago

            Yup. And networking would inevitably involve vodka. All major decisions would eventually involve vodka in USSR.

            • GrayoxOP
              link
              fedilink
              47 months ago

              One of Stalin’s failures almost any tankie won’t deny.

              • @AngryCommieKender
                link
                1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Vodka had been linked to the Russian economy under multiple Czars. I’m not sure that Stalin could have separated the two even if he had wanted to. Admittedly it doesn’t appear that he wanted to.

                I’m pretty sure that the USSR was screwed the moment that Lenin returned from exile in Germany, or when Wilson was elected. Take your pick.

                The Menchaviks would have been a better government.

                • GrayoxOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  17 months ago

                  I just find it ironic that Stalin was everything that the party worried about Trotsky becoming.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -3
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  The mechaviks literally wanted to continue ww1 and have a psuedo democracy where the bourgeoisie were literally guaranteed a majority of seats, wtf are you talking about?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        07 months ago

        Well, I’m from a post-USSR country and a substantial part of this was the criminalization of homelessness. Can’t have homeless people, if you lock them up (be it in a prison or asylum).

        Then again, just about anyone, who did not conform to the party’s message got locked up. Getting your place bugged at the slightest hint you might be up to something disagreeable and all that good stuff. The secret police could disappear and or beat you up without any real justification.

        I hate late-stage capitalism as much as you, but coming from a country that’s been through this, I am extremely reluctant to give the rotten and frankly repugnant USSR regime any credit.

      • SloganLessons
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        637 months ago

        This is a trick question, the real answer is that there weren’t real communist countries

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -17 months ago

            It’s the final refuge for tankies. That and the old “social democracy only works by exploiting the global south” canard.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              17 months ago

              “social democracy only works by exploiting the global south” canard.

              Yeah, I could see finding this unconvincing if you haven’t read theory, history, or were just cool with benefiting from imperialism

      • Praise Idleness
        link
        fedilink
        English
        177 months ago

        I mean even in the case of USSR they had to wait for more than a decade to actually get a livable apartment, not to mention severe lack of infrastructure…

        But of course, better than people just kicked out to the streets. But then again, less is not none. The housing situation definitely didn’t do USSR’s overall economic status any favor.

        People at least had somewhere to go

        that’s just moving the goal post, isn’t it?

      • Dr. Moose
        link
        English
        87 months ago

        Soviet Union? It was uncommon for a family of 6 to live in a small apartment. You can even see it in old soviet movies where apartments would be separated by curtains (common comedy trope).

      • probablyaCat
        link
        fedilink
        47 months ago

        I’m sure there were extra houses after all those people that starved to death.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          In Communist countries people starve to death because of famine, in Capitalist countries people also strave to death because of famine while still starving to death after famines are over because they cant afford groceries.

        • probablyaCat
          link
          fedilink
          57 months ago

          Woohoo both systems suck. You can actually believe that just because one system is bad, what is considered the opposite is also bad. Marx was not some omniscient doctor manhattan. He had some ideas. Some were good critiques on capitalist culture. Others were fantasy that do not function in the real world.

          • GrayoxOP
            link
            fedilink
            -67 months ago

            Notice how the folks arguing in favor of Communism have sources and receipts, while the folks arguing against it have done nothing but regurgitated Capitalist propaganda. Also note folks who are opposed to Communism and Marx’s philosophy are always forced to admit that it only works on paper, because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

            • Praise Idleness
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -27 months ago

              No one is going to deny that making perpetual motion device is good. How are you going to do that?

              Do you have source and receipts for real life communism solving housing problem? Not being better than capitalism. Solving. Being better than capitalism is kinda low bar you know. There are plenty of other things that real life capitalism does better than real life communism, hence communism failure. No one is going to show up with receipts and sources because obvious.

              You show us tents as a capitalist solution. That’s not a capitalist solution. That’s the problem itself. You’re misleading.

              because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

              Can you at least try to sound less douche about things?

              • GrayoxOP
                link
                fedilink
                -17 months ago

                The joke is that Capitalism DOES NOT have a solution to homelessness because there is zero profit motive to solve it. And facts dont care about your feelngs, you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest. Capitalist Economists study Das Kapital because Marx was so fucking spot on.

                • Praise Idleness
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  Yes, that’s why there is no pure capitalist country anywhere.

                  you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest.

                  Why are you keep doing this? I said I don’t disagree with Marx. It’d be nice if communism can happen. Facts don’t care about your feelings either and all the shitty attemps of communism failed due to human being shitty. If you have to kill off people to keep the ideology, only to fail after about few decades, it has some reality problems.

                  And again, I cannot stress this enough, can you please stop sounding like a 16 year old kid who just read few paragraphs of Marx going iamverysmart about it?

                • @WhiteHawk
                  link
                  07 months ago

                  No need to refute Marx, reality has already proven time and time again that communism doesn’t work in practice.

                  Btw your argument only applies to “pure” capitalism, without any government interference. Homelessness is not really an issue in many European countries.

    • GrayoxOP
      link
      fedilink
      -167 months ago

      Yeah that’s called late stage Communism, which we have never achieved as humanity. Late stage Capitalism is currently pushing more and more folks into dangerous housing situations like the bottom right quadrant of this meme. Capitalism and Utopia are oxymorons while Communism and Utopia are synonymous.

      • Praise Idleness
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Communism and your concept of utopia are synonymous. Communism and utopia are not synonymous.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          fedilink
          -9
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Call me old fashion but no one living on the streets and having their basic needs met sounds pretty utopian to me.

          • xerazal
            link
            fedilink
            English
            27 months ago

            There were still people that lived in the streets in the USSR. Also, the housing the USSR provided wasn’t really that… great… I watch a Russian YouTuber (NFKRZ) who has talked about Soviet architecture in not just Russia, but other former USSR countries and shows that yes it’s good they were built, they weren’t very well built.

            The USSR had many problems, and bureaucracy was a big problem. I never understood why tankies love the USSR so much when the USSR didn’t truly get rid of class. Those in the government lived like kings compared to the common man, who yes lived better than they had before but still not that well due to the bloated and mismanagement of the government.

            Idk, the fact that they even had a centralized government like that seems like… the opposite of communism to me.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I think what people don’t fully understand is that Marxism is meant to be scientific. That means that there will likely be many imperfect and failed attempts at building a socialist society before one comes along that is stable enough to outlast outside interference from capitalist states.

              As such, most people I know who like the USSR are also it’s biggest critiques. Unfortunately, there is so much misinformation about the USSR that most discussions about it online are just about delineating truth from propaganda.

          • @GrapesOfAss
            link
            2
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Ah yes because there was no one living on the streets, yes because a propaganda told me that it must be true.

            I guess killing literal millions of your own citizens is better than being homeless, huh?

      • probablyaCat
        link
        fedilink
        37 months ago

        Yeah those soviets sure got rid of the homeless problem. Can’t be homeless when you were intentionally starved to death.

        • xor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          17 months ago

          The USSR and communism are separate things

  • @Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug
    link
    110
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Why is this shit always communist vs capitalist, like we’ve only got 2 answers avaliable. You fuckers never set foot in a communist country and worship this shit

    Fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens? Don’t really think showing a picture of some buildings is enough to prove that they actually solved any issues. They may have solved those issues for some who were lucky enough to get an apartment, but don’t be a hexbear and pretend they housed everyone.

    And no, I don’t want a response with a link about hurr duer capitalism bad, yeah I know, but I live in capitalism so I already know that.

    • @Katana314
      link
      English
      157 months ago

      I’m still confused and alarmed that the only alternative brought up is communism, not socialism. So far as I know, the core difference is transfer of power - one is peaceful, one is violent.

      So in communism, your home might be six feet underground because “It is necessary to achieve the revolution, comrade.” Absolutely zero chance of a leader that wants the best for their people, apparently.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        307 months ago

        That’s incorrect.

        Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production. There sre many, many forms, such as Anarcho-Syndicalism, Marxism-Leninism, Democratic Socialism, Market Socialism, Libertarian Socialism, Anarcho-Communism, Council Communism, Left Communism, and more.

        Communism is a more specific form of Socialism, by which you have achieved a Stateless, Classless, moneyless society. Many Communist ideologies are transitional towards Communism, such as the USSR’s Marxism-Leninism or China’s Dengism and Maoism.

        Whether by reform or Revolution, the form doesn’t change.

        • GrayoxOP
          link
          fedilink
          147 months ago

          Personally Star Trek is my favorite form of Communism.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            97 months ago

            Pretty sure that’s everyone’s ideal, across all forms of leftism, except perhaps Le Guin’s Anarchist societies she writes about.

            • @AngryCommieKender
              link
              -47 months ago

              Holy shit. That makes so much sense as to why I hated those books as a kid. Thanks for that insight. I knew something wasn’t working properly in Earthsea.

              • Patapon Enjoyer
                link
                37 months ago

                Wrong series though.

                Not to shit on child you, but that kid has terrible taste

        • @SaakoPaahtaa
          link
          -47 months ago

          Which political ideology is Responsible for capitalizing random Words?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        197 months ago

        Nationalise essential needs and create State corporations, let capitalism have fun with non essentials. If don’t care if private producers make wine or funky clothing or big houses, the government should make sure everyone has food to eat, basic clothes to wear and a place to live.

        On that last part, buildings with 8 living units or more should be ran by a non profit State corporation, charge people based on the cost of maintenance and the salaries required, send a check if people were charged too much at the end of the year.

        • @AngryCommieKender
          link
          27 months ago

          You left out, healthcare, education, higher education, and Internet access. While we are covering basic human rights, let’s make sure we cover all the basic human rights.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Outside of internet access these things are already nationalised in first world countries (I know exactly what’s implied by what I’m saying). I didn’t feel the need to enumerate every single thing.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          07 months ago

          But we need free markets to handle the essentials because free markets consistently provide while governments consistently fail.

          We need the systems that work connected to the most critical needs.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            17 months ago

            State corporations are private companies whose profit go to the government instead of an owner or investors. The place in North America that has the cheapest electricity is Quebec and that’s because it’s a State corporation producing it, it still makes billions in profit that is then reinvested by the government.

            So no, free markets isn’t necessary. Heck, the free market is what makes it so the US government is the one that spends the most per capita for healthcare even if it only covers part of the population.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        37 months ago

        The problem is that a leader who wants the best for their people isn’t sufficient to actually achieve that. What you need is for everyone to be making decisions about what’s best.

      • @huge_clock
        link
        27 months ago

        You’re also taking a snapshot of the most regulated industry in the US. Building high rises is illegal in huge swaths of urban areas. Before we say the free market isn’t providing an answer cab we actually try it? I’m talking removing exclusionary zoning, speeding up the permit process and reducing the power of local action committees, and reforming the broken heritage process that’s used by rich people to keep their areas from densifying.

      • GrayoxOP
        link
        fedilink
        -2
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Real socialism leads to communism. I want to call what I am advocating for as cultural marxism, but unfortunately that term has antisemitic connotations, while also perfectly encapsulating the gradual shift in the publics perception of Marxist ideology I am advocating for with memes such as this. I am not advocating for a violent revolution, but I wont deny the fact that when the powers that be make a peaceful revolution impossible, a violent revolution is inevitable.

    • Unaware7013
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens?

      Bruh, centuries of capitalist exploitation of its citizens and treating them like a disposable commodity would like to have a word on the whole ‘citizens killed by their own country’ topic.

      How many thousands or millions of citizens die yearly because they can’t afford to live in this fucked up system?

      • @SaakoPaahtaa
        link
        -17 months ago

        So whataboutism really is the only argument for communism lmao

        • Unaware7013
          link
          fedilink
          77 months ago

          “I’m presented with a single argument that refutes this claim, better setup a strawman that this is the only argument available”

          Lmao, at least try to sound intelligent

              • @SaakoPaahtaa
                link
                27 months ago

                It’s communist innovation (not innovative)(no incentive to update that UI from the 90s)(communists find lack of progress calming)

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  27 months ago

                  It actually is a decent resource as long as it is not your only context for history and political science.

            • GrayoxOP
              link
              fedilink
              -47 months ago

              Lmfao not at all, the dude literally said whataboutisms are the only arguments for Communism, so i linked him a copy of Das Kapital. Unfortunately you clearly lack the reading comprehension to consume it.

      • @WhiteHawk
        link
        -57 months ago

        None? People don’t starve to death in western countries. And where they do the issue is lack of infrastructure. A communist government couldn’t conjure the resources needed to build that out of thin air either.

        • Unaware7013
          link
          fedilink
          137 months ago

          None? People don’t starve to death in western countries. And where they do the issue is lack of infrastructure.

          “This thing doesn’t happen, and when it does, it’s not the fault of capitalism itself” is a monumentally stupid argument. Especially when talking about the homeless population, which absolutely does have people that starve.

          A communist government couldn’t conjure the resources needed to build that out of thin air either.

          And the capitalist economy chose not to build it because it wasn’t profitable, or after it was built, it was too expensive to be used.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -17 months ago

            Where is your great communist country ?? Oh wait, it’s not there. It doesn’t exist and it never will. Capitalism works. Not perfect but it works. Your idealized version of communism is great but so is my idealized version of capitalism where everyone has a shot at the American dream!

          • @WhiteHawk
            link
            -47 months ago

            I said it doesn’t happen in the west, not that it doesn’t happen anywhere. Please learn to read.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              47 months ago

              Bullshit it doesn’t happen in the west. 12.8% of US households were considered food insecure in 2022, with 5.1% of that being considered to have VERY low food security(Source). Over 20,000 Americans died of malnutrition in 2022, more than double the number in 2018(Source).

              There’s also nearly 30 vacant homes for every 1 homeless person in the US, so there’s plenty of room, too. Nobody needs a 2nd home when over half a million people don’t even have one.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  In the west, the main cause of malnutrition isn’t a lack of calories, but a difficulty in access (from availability or price or other factors) to healthy foods with the required nutrition for a healthy life or from an excess of certain nutrients. This is often manifested as conditions such a obesity and type II diabetes. So malnutrition does impact people in the west.

              • @WhiteHawk
                link
                0
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                Maybe you should have actually read that article before linking it. It discusses in detail the reasons for malnutrition being an issue, and none of those reasons is being unable to afford food. The problems are typically due to age and diseases.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -17 months ago

                  I’ve been unable to afford food before, and I didn’t go hungry. People just gave me tons of free food.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      67 months ago

      It’s simple… If you convince the communists that the capitalists are trying to destroy them, (and vice versa), they fight each other, distracting them from the real enemy: the 1% with enough money to directly influence the folk that make the rules that keep them in the 1% club. We’re fighting culture wars so we won’t fight class wars, my friend.

      • darq
        link
        fedilink
        97 months ago

        … capitalism is the ideology that le