capitalist countries who were “relieved from extreme poverty” during their industrialisation period
Uh… Have you opened a book in your life at any point? Have you ever heard of these things called “British Empire”, “Portuguese Empire”, “Spanish Empire”, “Colonial Africa”, or “British Raj”? How about child labour in Britain during industrial development? Bengal famine, Irish potato famine, genocide of Latin Americas, slave trade… The list of actually enforced hunger and genocide is absolutely endless, and much more harrowing than the consequence of (admittedly disastrous) uninformed ecological policy in the mid-20th century.
Ends the justify means thinking. “why improve the process or experience, when my way already works far better than simply stomping on them to get them to open up?”
“because the taste of shoe doesn’t pair well with many flavors”
“My way has 85% less shoe licking”
“Ok, I can think of at least 3 ways you could remove the shoe entirely and it would almost certainly still work (unless of course people intentionally misuse the tools required for the solution)”
“You just want to go back to stomping on them, don’t you!”
If you lack scientific understanding of the material world, or you are wanting to use cynicism and disregard as proof, just say so.
Yes, industrialisation is what lifts people from poverty, that’s exactly why the West has prevented the almost entirety of Africa, South America and Southeast Asia from industrializing, and the greatest industrial developments in the previous century (other than US-sponsored military bases like South Korea or Japan) have happened in, you guessed it, communist countries, whether we refer to the heavy industrialisation of USSR under state-planned economy or the industrialisation of China through Dengism and the attraction of international capital investment. Why didn’t Peru industrialise too? Why didn’t Philippines? Why didn’t Zambia? You’re talking of industrialisation of the West and imperialism as two isolated phenomena, when they’re very much not.
Also are you going talk about Soviet invasion and genocide in eastern Europe
You mean when the Soviets lost 27 million people in order to save Europe from Nazism? We can talk about that, yes
I mean yeah capitalism and imperialism go hand in hand.
But you’re willfully ignoring when “communist” countries do the same. Do you think the soviet oppression of eastern Europe is fundamentally different than the European oppression of Africa
And no, I’m talking about ww2, I’m talk about Holodomor and the Great Chinese Famine. I’m sure you’ll try and find excuses for them like a capitalist would for the bengal or Irish famines.
Do you think the soviet oppression of eastern Europe is fundamentally different than the European oppression of Africa
If you don’t think they’re fundamentally different it means you’re not what you’re talking about. To this day, university students in Morocco and Algeria study in French, ask a Polish graduate from the 70s what language they used in university.
Look at the material exports not just during the colonial era but today in countries like Burkina Faso, whose 70% of exports are precious metals and 80% of exports go to Switzerland, and compare that to the Soviet Union providing raw goods and fossil fuels at international market prices to countries in the COMECON and importing manufactured, high value-added goods therefore subjecting itself to the short end of the stick of unequal exchange and mercantilism, in an effort to subsidise the industrialisation of said countries.
Look at educational outcomes, life expectancy, working rights in Communist Estonia and compare them to the Belgian Congo genocide or to Spanish invasion of Morocco and the status of moroccan citizens in occupied zones.
The Soviet Union was forced to sacrifice 27 mullion human lives in the war against Nazism, and it successfully rid Eastern Europe of it, saving it from being a German colony subjected to genocide and extermination, slavery, de-industrialization and resource exploitation, and instead industrialised its entire area of influence, eliminated landlords and serfdom, instituted huge unions, and did this all without resorting to the exploitation of people in the Global South. Come on, find a 60 year-old person from the Baltics or from Eastern Europe and ask them about worker rights, healthcare, education, pensions or access to housing during communism. And now go to fucking Libya and ask the same to someone who endured Italian colonisation.
You literally have no idea what you’re comparing.
As for “Holodomor” (a word propagated in this century with the intention of creating a nationalist russophobic propaganda of genocide), it was a disastrous hunger episode that affected wide regions of Russia, Central Asia, Ukraine and Belarus, consequence of the first successful large-scale land collectivisation project in human history. It caused a lot of suffering and deaths due to unforeseen effects of collectivisation policy that didn’t take into account how much resistance the landowners would put to the process, coupled with unfortunate weather conditions and bad crops.
Ultimately though, it enabled the successful and unprecedentedly fast-paced industrialisation of the Soviet union that managed to repel the Nazi offensive 10 years later and saved tens if not hundreds of millions of lives from Nazi genocide under projects like the Generalplan Ost and the Hungerplan, which targeted among many others the hundreds of millions of slavic people considered “Untermenschen” by the Nazis.
Regarding the Chinese famine, it’s simply the disastrous and horrendous consequence of failed ecological policy in an era and place prior to scientific understanding of ecology. Neither of these famines was a deliberate, white supremacist, targeted hunger against a peripheral group of people considered undesirable, such as the Bengal famine perpetrated by the British on India (one of a long series of provoked policies that arguably murdered hundreds of millions in India alone).
Describing the conditions under which something happens isn’t an excuse or a denial, BTW. Both these famines happened and they were horrifying, there are just no arguments to compare them to purposefully inflicted hunger by the British Empire on the Irish or Indians, and ultimately both episodes, while harrowing, stem from projects that fundamentally saved hundreds of millions of lives.
Life expectancy in the Soviet Union was 28 years before the Bolshevik revolution, and by 1940 (before the Nazi attack, just half a decade after the hunger episode we mentioned) it was 35 years. During the Nazi invasion of the USSR it obviously dropped, but by the mid-1950s life expectancy was already above 55 years old: twice higher than before communism. The Bolsheviks saved hundreds of millions of lives through the improvements in healthcare, industrialisation, mechanisation of agriculture and colectivization of land that took place in the first 4 decades of the Soviet project.
The same can be said about China. Life expectancy grew by some 20-25 years under the leadership of Mao, which in a country with a population of around 700 million, resulted in the saving of hundreds of millions of lives. The communist project in China over the past 40 years has lifted 800 million people from extreme poverty, which would be the equivalent of eliminating poverty in the entirety of the continent of South America and then some.
Why didn’t these improvements happen simultaneously in countries at the time comparably developed? Indonesia, Argentina, Northern African countries, Thailand, Myanmar, India, Sri Lanka, all of those countries were left unindustrialised and still today suffer from much worse living conditions than China or post-soviet countries, just compare life expectancy. Why is it, if “the evil of the Soviets was comparable to Western Imperialism”, that people in Poland don’t live like people in India? Why don’t people in China live like people in Myanmar?
Oh yeah I’m sure the Polish people are so glad the soviets “saved them from Nazism” after they struck a deal with hitler and invaded their country together. And I’m sure they were even more greatful when the soviet soldiers rated their way through Poland on their way to Berlin.
I’m sure the Ukrainians appreciate the Russians brutally suppressing their independence, forcing them to die en mass against the Nazis, often times not even being armed and sent to the front lines, then having their natural resources stripped, opressed and subject to genocide.
And it’s frankly beyond telling you refuse to even acknowledge my points about Holodomor, because doing so would mean you either have to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the soviets, or go full nutjob conspiracy theorist on it to deny it happened or try and claim it wasn’t actually the soviets fault.
And as for your points about standards of counties, you only have to look at Germany. Wasters Germany still feels the effects of soviet oppression to this day, it’s falls behind the west of thr country in almost every metric. Lookup the Brehznev doctrine that the soviets used to retroactively justify it’s invasion of Czechoslovakia and their policy of “Russofication” which to anyone with eyes is blatant cultural imperialism. There deportations of multiple ethnic groups to wastelands in the east of Russia in order to cleanse those areas and replace them with ethnic Russians while also getting a defacto slave work force.
I’m sure the Polish people are so glad the soviets “saved them from Nazism”
Polish nationalists are immensely russophobic and reactionary, making that claim is like asking Spaniards (I’m one myself) about the literal golden age of Islam in Al-Andalus: you’ll get a distorted, nationalist, racist and islamophobic account based on vibes instead of the material reality. Polish people can think whatever they want after 35 years of nationalist right-wing propaganda (look at the results of their latest elections): the Soviets saved their fucking guts from genocide and Nazism, and yes I’m saying the Soviets, not just Russians: Ukrainians, Belarusians, Kazakh, Georgian… All of the people from the Soviet Union did the most immense sacrifice to rid Europe from Nazism. And liberal Nazi apologists like you will never forgive them from doing so.
I’m sure the Ukrainians appreciate the Russians brutally suppressing their independence
This is especially funny. Ukraine literally obtained autoctonous political representation and the state of a republic for the first time in history during the Bolshevik revolution. There are literal letters between Rosa Luxembourg (whom you probably love because she didn’t actually defeat Nazis) and Lenin in which Lenin defends the right of Ukrainian self-determination and the creation of a Ukrainian republic, institutions and a sense of nationality, in opposition to Rosa claiming Ukrainian nationalism shouldn’t exist (interesting read if you truly care about the origins of Ukrainian nationalism and the people of Ukraine and you’re not just concern trolling). Ukraine industrialised thoroughly during Soviet times and had very comparable living standards to the rest of the Union, which can’t be said after the perpetual crisis that took place once the Soviet Union was illegally dissolved against the desire of the majority of Ukrainians (71% of them voted for the Soviet Union to remain in the 1991 referendum). Your analysis is vibes-based taking western propaganda as a source and not actual historical events.
forcing them to die en mass against the Nazis, often times not even being armed and sent to the front lines
Why this fucking focus on Ukrainians? Belarus lost literally 1 in 4 people in the war against Nazism, how come you don’t make the same claims about Belarusians? The answer is because your analysis is ahistorical and not based on actual events, but on anticommunist nazi-adjacent nationalist russophobic propaganda. You’re using literal Nazi propaganda of “the unarmed human wave tactics” that featured in Nazi posters during the war after the defeat in Stalingrad, YOU ARE SIDING WITH THE NAZIS.
you refuse to even acknowledge my points about Holodomor
What part did I not acknowledge? There was a hunger episode in the early 30s in areas of the Soviet Union as a consequence of land collectivisation policy, is that not enough for you? Or do you need to fabricate genocidal intent because of your obsessive victimization of Ukrainians, completely disregarding the millions of Russian and Central Asian deaths in the hunger because they don’t suit your political nazi-adjacent agenda?
Wasters Germany still feels the effects of soviet oppression to this day
Eastern Germany is less developed economically than Western Germany due to two reasons: the first is that Eastern German industry was thoroughly dismantled after the reunification in favour of Western German companies. The second is that Western Germany developed in much more favourable conditions due to the access of cheap resources and labour extraction from the Global South that western capitalist countries have no problem performing and that for some reason you don’t care about, which is frankly immensely racist. Who cards if West Germany developed, like the rest of western Europe or North America, on the backs of literal BILLIONS of exploited people in Central and South America, Africa, Middle East and Southeast Asia, right? Who cares about the west performing unequal exchange? After all it’s black people, Muslims and Asians who are being exploited, and those aren’t worthy of your attention unlike white Ukrainians or Poles who enjoyed immensely better conditions BY LITERALLY ANY METRIC thanks to socialism.
I fucking hate tankies so much.
That’s because half of your ideology and worldview is indistinguishable from that of Nazis
Uh… Have you opened a book in your life at any point? Have you ever heard of these things called “British Empire”, “Portuguese Empire”, “Spanish Empire”, “Colonial Africa”, or “British Raj”? How about child labour in Britain during industrial development? Bengal famine, Irish potato famine, genocide of Latin Americas, slave trade… The list of actually enforced hunger and genocide is absolutely endless, and much more harrowing than the consequence of (admittedly disastrous) uninformed ecological policy in the mid-20th century.
God you’re so fucking stupid.
The point is industrialisation is what lifts people out of poverty. You pointing out imperialism is bad doesn’t change that, does it?
Also are you going talk about Soviet invasion and genocide in eastern Europe or Chinese manufactured famines and child labour?
Don’t argue with tankies. Making fun of them is very much enough.
Ends the justify means thinking. “why improve the process or experience, when my way already works far better than simply stomping on them to get them to open up?”
“because the taste of shoe doesn’t pair well with many flavors”
“My way has 85% less shoe licking”
“Ok, I can think of at least 3 ways you could remove the shoe entirely and it would almost certainly still work (unless of course people intentionally misuse the tools required for the solution)”
“You just want to go back to stomping on them, don’t you!”
If you lack scientific understanding of the material world, or you are wanting to use cynicism and disregard as proof, just say so.
I genuinely can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or not, because this seems like a good argument against tankies to me.
You’re so close to understanding the concept of hypocrisy. Keep going. You’ll get there.
Yes, industrialisation is what lifts people from poverty, that’s exactly why the West has prevented the almost entirety of Africa, South America and Southeast Asia from industrializing, and the greatest industrial developments in the previous century (other than US-sponsored military bases like South Korea or Japan) have happened in, you guessed it, communist countries, whether we refer to the heavy industrialisation of USSR under state-planned economy or the industrialisation of China through Dengism and the attraction of international capital investment. Why didn’t Peru industrialise too? Why didn’t Philippines? Why didn’t Zambia? You’re talking of industrialisation of the West and imperialism as two isolated phenomena, when they’re very much not.
You mean when the Soviets lost 27 million people in order to save Europe from Nazism? We can talk about that, yes
I mean yeah capitalism and imperialism go hand in hand.
But you’re willfully ignoring when “communist” countries do the same. Do you think the soviet oppression of eastern Europe is fundamentally different than the European oppression of Africa
And no, I’m talking about ww2, I’m talk about Holodomor and the Great Chinese Famine. I’m sure you’ll try and find excuses for them like a capitalist would for the bengal or Irish famines.
If you don’t think they’re fundamentally different it means you’re not what you’re talking about. To this day, university students in Morocco and Algeria study in French, ask a Polish graduate from the 70s what language they used in university.
Look at the material exports not just during the colonial era but today in countries like Burkina Faso, whose 70% of exports are precious metals and 80% of exports go to Switzerland, and compare that to the Soviet Union providing raw goods and fossil fuels at international market prices to countries in the COMECON and importing manufactured, high value-added goods therefore subjecting itself to the short end of the stick of unequal exchange and mercantilism, in an effort to subsidise the industrialisation of said countries.
Look at educational outcomes, life expectancy, working rights in Communist Estonia and compare them to the Belgian Congo genocide or to Spanish invasion of Morocco and the status of moroccan citizens in occupied zones.
The Soviet Union was forced to sacrifice 27 mullion human lives in the war against Nazism, and it successfully rid Eastern Europe of it, saving it from being a German colony subjected to genocide and extermination, slavery, de-industrialization and resource exploitation, and instead industrialised its entire area of influence, eliminated landlords and serfdom, instituted huge unions, and did this all without resorting to the exploitation of people in the Global South. Come on, find a 60 year-old person from the Baltics or from Eastern Europe and ask them about worker rights, healthcare, education, pensions or access to housing during communism. And now go to fucking Libya and ask the same to someone who endured Italian colonisation.
You literally have no idea what you’re comparing.
As for “Holodomor” (a word propagated in this century with the intention of creating a nationalist russophobic propaganda of genocide), it was a disastrous hunger episode that affected wide regions of Russia, Central Asia, Ukraine and Belarus, consequence of the first successful large-scale land collectivisation project in human history. It caused a lot of suffering and deaths due to unforeseen effects of collectivisation policy that didn’t take into account how much resistance the landowners would put to the process, coupled with unfortunate weather conditions and bad crops.
Ultimately though, it enabled the successful and unprecedentedly fast-paced industrialisation of the Soviet union that managed to repel the Nazi offensive 10 years later and saved tens if not hundreds of millions of lives from Nazi genocide under projects like the Generalplan Ost and the Hungerplan, which targeted among many others the hundreds of millions of slavic people considered “Untermenschen” by the Nazis.
Regarding the Chinese famine, it’s simply the disastrous and horrendous consequence of failed ecological policy in an era and place prior to scientific understanding of ecology. Neither of these famines was a deliberate, white supremacist, targeted hunger against a peripheral group of people considered undesirable, such as the Bengal famine perpetrated by the British on India (one of a long series of provoked policies that arguably murdered hundreds of millions in India alone).
Describing the conditions under which something happens isn’t an excuse or a denial, BTW. Both these famines happened and they were horrifying, there are just no arguments to compare them to purposefully inflicted hunger by the British Empire on the Irish or Indians, and ultimately both episodes, while harrowing, stem from projects that fundamentally saved hundreds of millions of lives.
Life expectancy in the Soviet Union was 28 years before the Bolshevik revolution, and by 1940 (before the Nazi attack, just half a decade after the hunger episode we mentioned) it was 35 years. During the Nazi invasion of the USSR it obviously dropped, but by the mid-1950s life expectancy was already above 55 years old: twice higher than before communism. The Bolsheviks saved hundreds of millions of lives through the improvements in healthcare, industrialisation, mechanisation of agriculture and colectivization of land that took place in the first 4 decades of the Soviet project.
The same can be said about China. Life expectancy grew by some 20-25 years under the leadership of Mao, which in a country with a population of around 700 million, resulted in the saving of hundreds of millions of lives. The communist project in China over the past 40 years has lifted 800 million people from extreme poverty, which would be the equivalent of eliminating poverty in the entirety of the continent of South America and then some.
Why didn’t these improvements happen simultaneously in countries at the time comparably developed? Indonesia, Argentina, Northern African countries, Thailand, Myanmar, India, Sri Lanka, all of those countries were left unindustrialised and still today suffer from much worse living conditions than China or post-soviet countries, just compare life expectancy. Why is it, if “the evil of the Soviets was comparable to Western Imperialism”, that people in Poland don’t live like people in India? Why don’t people in China live like people in Myanmar?
Oh yeah I’m sure the Polish people are so glad the soviets “saved them from Nazism” after they struck a deal with hitler and invaded their country together. And I’m sure they were even more greatful when the soviet soldiers rated their way through Poland on their way to Berlin.
I’m sure the Ukrainians appreciate the Russians brutally suppressing their independence, forcing them to die en mass against the Nazis, often times not even being armed and sent to the front lines, then having their natural resources stripped, opressed and subject to genocide.
And it’s frankly beyond telling you refuse to even acknowledge my points about Holodomor, because doing so would mean you either have to acknowledge the atrocities committed by the soviets, or go full nutjob conspiracy theorist on it to deny it happened or try and claim it wasn’t actually the soviets fault.
And as for your points about standards of counties, you only have to look at Germany. Wasters Germany still feels the effects of soviet oppression to this day, it’s falls behind the west of thr country in almost every metric. Lookup the Brehznev doctrine that the soviets used to retroactively justify it’s invasion of Czechoslovakia and their policy of “Russofication” which to anyone with eyes is blatant cultural imperialism. There deportations of multiple ethnic groups to wastelands in the east of Russia in order to cleanse those areas and replace them with ethnic Russians while also getting a defacto slave work force.
I fucking hate tankies so much.
Polish nationalists are immensely russophobic and reactionary, making that claim is like asking Spaniards (I’m one myself) about the literal golden age of Islam in Al-Andalus: you’ll get a distorted, nationalist, racist and islamophobic account based on vibes instead of the material reality. Polish people can think whatever they want after 35 years of nationalist right-wing propaganda (look at the results of their latest elections): the Soviets saved their fucking guts from genocide and Nazism, and yes I’m saying the Soviets, not just Russians: Ukrainians, Belarusians, Kazakh, Georgian… All of the people from the Soviet Union did the most immense sacrifice to rid Europe from Nazism. And liberal Nazi apologists like you will never forgive them from doing so.
This is especially funny. Ukraine literally obtained autoctonous political representation and the state of a republic for the first time in history during the Bolshevik revolution. There are literal letters between Rosa Luxembourg (whom you probably love because she didn’t actually defeat Nazis) and Lenin in which Lenin defends the right of Ukrainian self-determination and the creation of a Ukrainian republic, institutions and a sense of nationality, in opposition to Rosa claiming Ukrainian nationalism shouldn’t exist (interesting read if you truly care about the origins of Ukrainian nationalism and the people of Ukraine and you’re not just concern trolling). Ukraine industrialised thoroughly during Soviet times and had very comparable living standards to the rest of the Union, which can’t be said after the perpetual crisis that took place once the Soviet Union was illegally dissolved against the desire of the majority of Ukrainians (71% of them voted for the Soviet Union to remain in the 1991 referendum). Your analysis is vibes-based taking western propaganda as a source and not actual historical events.
Why this fucking focus on Ukrainians? Belarus lost literally 1 in 4 people in the war against Nazism, how come you don’t make the same claims about Belarusians? The answer is because your analysis is ahistorical and not based on actual events, but on anticommunist nazi-adjacent nationalist russophobic propaganda. You’re using literal Nazi propaganda of “the unarmed human wave tactics” that featured in Nazi posters during the war after the defeat in Stalingrad, YOU ARE SIDING WITH THE NAZIS.
What part did I not acknowledge? There was a hunger episode in the early 30s in areas of the Soviet Union as a consequence of land collectivisation policy, is that not enough for you? Or do you need to fabricate genocidal intent because of your obsessive victimization of Ukrainians, completely disregarding the millions of Russian and Central Asian deaths in the hunger because they don’t suit your political nazi-adjacent agenda?
Eastern Germany is less developed economically than Western Germany due to two reasons: the first is that Eastern German industry was thoroughly dismantled after the reunification in favour of Western German companies. The second is that Western Germany developed in much more favourable conditions due to the access of cheap resources and labour extraction from the Global South that western capitalist countries have no problem performing and that for some reason you don’t care about, which is frankly immensely racist. Who cards if West Germany developed, like the rest of western Europe or North America, on the backs of literal BILLIONS of exploited people in Central and South America, Africa, Middle East and Southeast Asia, right? Who cares about the west performing unequal exchange? After all it’s black people, Muslims and Asians who are being exploited, and those aren’t worthy of your attention unlike white Ukrainians or Poles who enjoyed immensely better conditions BY LITERALLY ANY METRIC thanks to socialism.
That’s because half of your ideology and worldview is indistinguishable from that of Nazis