734
“Communism bad”
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
734 points (85.0% liked)
Comics
5825 readers
7 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:
- If possible, give us your sources.
- If possible, credit creators of each comics in the title or body of your post. If you are the creator, please credit yourself. A simple “- Me” would suffice.
- In general terms, write in body of your post as much information as possible (dates, creators, editors, links).
- If you found the image on the web, it is encouraged to put the direct link to the image in the ‘Link’ field when creating a post, instead of uploading the image to Lemmy. Direct links usually end in .jpg, .png, etc.
- One post by topic.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
In what way were the gulags of the USSR propaganda?
The USSR did indeed have prisons, and criminals were put in prison. I never said the USSR was a wonderland with no prisons.
So are you saying it isn't propaganda? Because the west depicts the gulags as forced labor camps, not just prisons. They are depicted as places where people starved to death through neglect, who were summarily executed upon failure to work, threatened with starvation. They are depicted as places where millions of people where held and died. They are also depicted as places where not just criminals were sent, but political prisoners as well.
I'm not saying the west has perfectly depicted it. The west is absolutely rife with propaganda. But there being even a kernel of truth to this is downright horrifying, and cause to call out the USSR as being authoritarian.
Prisons in the US are also often forced labor camps. Prisons in the USSR, like most nations, were highly varied in intensity and quality.
The bulk of this comes from WWII, when the Nazis invaded Ukraine, the USSR's breadbasket. Famine increased and prisoners were not prioritized, leading to many dying.
Fascists and Capitalists were indeed also sent to prison, yes.
By your logic, every state that has ever existed is authoritarian. Looking at the metrics, the USSR has been more progressive for its time, both with respect to contemporary states and with respect to Tsarist Russia. As an example, they were far more leniant than the Tsar:
This is a whataboutism. The USSR doesn't get a free pass just because the U.S. is shitty too.
Do you have a source? And given that you say "the bulk" and not all, what accounts for the remainder?
Again, do you have a source?
To varying degrees, pretty much yes.
I was not giving the USSR a "free pass." I was putting it into context. For its time, it was progressive.
It's well known among Soviet Historians that famine occured during WWII and Prisoners were forced to take the brunt of the impact, rather than the average citizen or soldier.
What do you believe constitutes a "Political Prisoner" in the USSR? There were numerous Nazi Collaborators, Tsarists, and Bourgeois elements that attempted to destabilize the State. What would satisfy you as evidence, just examples, or what?
Then, genuine question, do you believe that making progressive, positive reductions in mortality rates is an authoritarian thing to do?
Force labor is still forced labor even if it is better than what the past was.
The graph you have attached to this statement doesn't have a source listed. And sorry, but I'm no historian, so I would like something better than "it is well known".
Ideally a primary source would be preferred.
This question at it's core is a whataboutism and therefore invalid. Being a progressive authoritarian still means you're an authoritarian.
Referring to the part of the conversation about the cause of starvation in gulags being the result of the nazis invading Ukraine, your second graph definitely helps support it, with the caveat being correlation does not imply causation.
Never said otherwise. I have not once said I wish to emulate the prison system of the USSR, just that they were progressive compared to their peers, and would have continued to remain progressive compared to its peers had the USSR not been illegally disbanded.
Is Wikipedia too Communist of a source?
Primary source of what, exactly? Here's a pretty good article on the history of Nazi collaborators in the USSR being punished and imprisoned. There's also this Wikipedia page on the White Terror, where Tsarists slaughtered people until their defeat by the Bolsheviks and the Red Army.
You said all countries are authoritarian, why stick specifically to being upset at the USSR if they were less authoritarian than their contemporaries? Wouldn't a reduction in authoritarianism be a good thing?
But this is just a whataboutism. I don't care how progressive they were. What matter is them being authoritarians.
No, of course not. However I don't see your white graph anywhere on that article.
The makeup of people held in the gulags. The reasons why they're there, whether they had trials, whether they were de facto considered innocent/guilty, etc. While interesting, neither of the links you use explain it. How many of those 'criminals' where put there for something non-violent?
Here's the thing, even in comparison to it's contemporaries I don't think the USSR was less authoritarian. On the basis of prisoner populations, even the US as grossly authoritarian as it has been had a lower prison population (obviously only up until Regan).
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2016/12/29/bjs2016/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag#/media/File:USSR_custodial_population_in_1934-53.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#/media/File:US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg
Authoritarianism is still authoritarianism. Here's the thing, if you want to argue for socialism/communism, I'm all for it. But for the most part it is probably a terrible strategy to defend the USSR, and other countries that are portrayed as authoritarian dictatorships, because there is a great deal of truth to those portrayals from what it seems. You're just gonna scare off anybody even slightly closed minded.
It's probably a far better use of everybody's time to show that capitalism is a failure, that it's impossible to be paid the value you make under capitalism, that capitalism is just dictatorship in the workplace, etc. Those are the seeds you plant to get people to break out of their support for capitalism. Those are the ones that grow.
You don't seem to care about much of anything. If progressing and improving systems isn't enough for you because it isn't immediately paradise for everyone and Utopia for all, then you're deeply unserious and purely serve as a contrarion for nobody's benefit.
Where are you getting the idea that large percentages of people were locked up without trial? Don't you have to provide evidence for your claims as well?
"Authoritarianism" as admitted by yourself is a buzzword descriptor for every state, and is just a vibe. You don't care how countries compare to their peers or their previous conditions, just vibes.
Additionally, it is important to accurately depict and defend the USSR. While there were numerous issues, there were numerous resounding successes as well. Defending the real merits of AES is important, because if one is a Socialist, presumably they want Socialism!
What makes you think I don't do that as well?
You don't need to personally attack me.
That wasn't my point. The point is, you can't point to the soviet gulags and say it wasn't authoritarian, not without evidence.
You've made the implicit claim that those held in the gulags were held there with good, justified reasons. And then when you were asked to provide a source for it you gave me articles about the various places nazis went to after the war. Do you have evidence or not?
No, it's a scale. Most societies/countries are on it, but not all. Additionally, it is not an inherent part of a society/country. No part of that is vibes based. Subjective, partially, but that's the nature of unquantifiable definitions whether you like it or not.
A state that controls people's speech is more authoritarian than one that does not. A state that controls people's movement is more authoritarian than one that does not. There are a million different ways that a state can be unquantifiably authoritarian, but it is still comparable, discussions on it can still be based on facts, and so on. No vibes are needed.
You can stop with the personal attacks.
You seemed to have missed the "It’s probably a far better use of everybody’s time " part.