8 ms·

While in some places Communism has definitely been responsible for atrocities, in many countries (especially Western Europe, Asia and South America) Communist p

While in some places Communism has definitely been responsible for atrocities, in many countries (especially Western Europe, Asia and South America) Communist parties have been on the frontline of liberation movements, indigenous rights, human rights, workers’ conditions, etc. That’s why for many Communism != atrocities.

socialismisok 4y ago
100% this. Socialist and communist critiques of our current and historical modes of production identify some systemic issues. It's worth engaging with those critiques more deeply than "communism bad!"
- mc32 4y ago
  Oh, no doubt they had lots of bright "promise" exemplified by the fists of virile men and fecund women reaching the mountain top having vanquished capitalist evil, triumphantly raising the hammer and sickle and little Ivan joins in the parade... But it was all illusion and never delivered. They always ended in oppression, regression and failed experiments (social, economic, environmental, etc.)
  - socialismisok 4y ago
    I think there's a healthy discussion to be had about, for instance Cuba. Yes, poverty is still high but sanctions are still oppressive. They have higher literacy rates than Canada or the US, they have solid medical care, and they've started from a much, much worse position. Similar story with Vietnam. There's a discussion to be had about where they started, where they are now, and what happened in the interim. To be clear, I'm not saying these countries have done no wrong. They aren't shining beacons, but it is worth examining them in a thoughtful way. It's not like the US (where I live) is a shining beacon either. Also, I'd argue there are degrees and varieties of both socialism and communism. Is Mondragon socialist? Is Sweden? Is France? What about small council communism and Anarcho communism?
    - mc32 4y ago
      There may be some aspects of life and society where social cooperation helps in certain realms under some circumstances (Kibbutz too?). Exporting medical expertise for Cuba at least then was an "in" for subversion into other countries. That said, two observations. One Cuba was hugely subsidized by the CCCP and still traded with lots of Europe, they were not isolated. Second, all else suffered --it's like time stood still in all other aspects of society, infrastructure, economy, etc.
      - socialismisok 4y ago
        I think it's totally fair to hold up Cuba against, for instance, Costa Rica or Panama. Both those countries receive substantial subsidies from the US. I think one could argue that Cuba is not out of line with its peers and might actually be ahead in some ways. It's not perfect, but regionally it's doing pretty alright from what I can tell.
        mc32 4y ago
        Panama and Costa Rica are pretty protective (usually foreigners get actual seconds, unless they are rich), but if not, if a Cuban had a choice between staying in Cuba or moving to Panama, if I were that Cuban, I would take Panama. On the other hand it's a fair critique, LatAm has a history of being run by strongmen and run poorly, with some exceptions. However, that includes the Castro brothers.
        alehlopeh 4y ago
        Given the choice between Cuba and anywhere else, most Cubans would without a doubt choose anywhere else. Why else would so many choose to risk death trying to escape their country on overcrowded ramshackle boats? Literally hundreds of Cuban refugees are picked up by border patrol every single month in Miami and the surrounding areas. Also, it’s not clear whether you meant to say the Castro brothers are included in strongmen or exceptions, but I assume it’s strongmen.
    - tomcam 4y ago

socialismisok 4y ago

100% this. Socialist and communist critiques of our current and historical modes of production identify some systemic issues. It's worth engaging with those critiques more deeply than "communism bad!"

mc32 4y ago
Oh, no doubt they had lots of bright "promise" exemplified by the fists of virile men and fecund women reaching the mountain top having vanquished capitalist evil, triumphantly raising the hammer and sickle and little Ivan joins in the parade... But it was all illusion and never delivered. They always ended in oppression, regression and failed experiments (social, economic, environmental, etc.)
- socialismisok 4y ago
  I think there's a healthy discussion to be had about, for instance Cuba. Yes, poverty is still high but sanctions are still oppressive. They have higher literacy rates than Canada or the US, they have solid medical care, and they've started from a much, much worse position. Similar story with Vietnam. There's a discussion to be had about where they started, where they are now, and what happened in the interim. To be clear, I'm not saying these countries have done no wrong. They aren't shining beacons, but it is worth examining them in a thoughtful way. It's not like the US (where I live) is a shining beacon either. Also, I'd argue there are degrees and varieties of both socialism and communism. Is Mondragon socialist? Is Sweden? Is France? What about small council communism and Anarcho communism?
  - mc32 4y ago
    There may be some aspects of life and society where social cooperation helps in certain realms under some circumstances (Kibbutz too?). Exporting medical expertise for Cuba at least then was an "in" for subversion into other countries. That said, two observations. One Cuba was hugely subsidized by the CCCP and still traded with lots of Europe, they were not isolated. Second, all else suffered --it's like time stood still in all other aspects of society, infrastructure, economy, etc.
    - socialismisok 4y ago
      I think it's totally fair to hold up Cuba against, for instance, Costa Rica or Panama. Both those countries receive substantial subsidies from the US. I think one could argue that Cuba is not out of line with its peers and might actually be ahead in some ways. It's not perfect, but regionally it's doing pretty alright from what I can tell.
      - mc32 4y ago
        Panama and Costa Rica are pretty protective (usually foreigners get actual seconds, unless they are rich), but if not, if a Cuban had a choice between staying in Cuba or moving to Panama, if I were that Cuban, I would take Panama. On the other hand it's a fair critique, LatAm has a history of being run by strongmen and run poorly, with some exceptions. However, that includes the Castro brothers.
        alehlopeh 4y ago
        Given the choice between Cuba and anywhere else, most Cubans would without a doubt choose anywhere else. Why else would so many choose to risk death trying to escape their country on overcrowded ramshackle boats? Literally hundreds of Cuban refugees are picked up by border patrol every single month in Miami and the surrounding areas. Also, it’s not clear whether you meant to say the Castro brothers are included in strongmen or exceptions, but I assume it’s strongmen.
  - tomcam 4y ago