92% Of Polled Russians Want To Return To The USSR

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,419
@Lenin Well I dont agree with Huerta de Soto's position on Gold as money. Money is a public utility to facilitate commerce based on actual productivity. Having Gold in a vault doesn't make a country rich, having ability to work together with the natural resources of a country and technology this country develops/inherits makes a country rich. I can agree with HdS on the absurdity of the Fractional Reserve banking system but I find pegging the currency to Gold is an odd way of trying to foolproof Money into something which it is not.
 

MatheusPN

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
547
Location
Brazil
Thanks mate. This is actually disgusting to read such a propaganda here, in this "anti-authoritarian" forum. These guys are so indoctrinated they deny economic principles and even the most OBVIOUS things that actually happens everyday in those countries. As I said to a Chilean commie few months ago: let's do something, lets switch, I'll get you a house to live there, and you'll get a house for me to live here, and obviously he didn't even think about it. I am a capitalist advocate, and I live in the most capitalist country I can, I would even love to move to an even more capitalist country, like New Zealand or Switzerland, but I seriously doubt any of them would love to live in North Korea or Cuba or Venezuela, even thou is pretty cheap to move to those hells.
Socialism doesn't need to be a State, neither State controlled. Don't know Communism? Only remains to you say that communism is also statism.
Argue with Proudhon about Free market socialism.

What country the State doesn't control the territory/ economy? What State have a non-market? Venezula is a non-market economy?

Arrogantly you say ppl don't know nothing about economics even considering that you say you lived in a socialist State, said you were a lefitst and don't even know what is Socialism.
 
Last edited:

MatheusPN

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
547
Location
Brazil
Thanks for your comments. I agree, the US gov't and its NATO allies are responsible for nearly all of these regime changes. Correct me if I'm wrong, looking at the history of CIA-sponsored coups in Brazil it seems this has been going on since as early as the 1960s with the overthrow of President João Goulart. And now apparently Brazil may be becoming a member of NATO as well. A true sign that the country is under such corrupt leadership as if more was needed: Brazil Is About to Become An "Unofficial" NATO Member - Global Research

This ever-growing list reflects the true nature of capitalism / imperialism. I don't think any capitalists in this thread could provide a reasonable defense of this endless predatory behavior. After all, imperialism is the logical end result of capitalism so it's not too surprising for those of us who understand the biggest war-mongers are where the ideology of capitalism and capital accumulation took hold to the most extreme degree, bolstered by an ever-growing military-industrial complex.

Though forms of it have existed to certain degrees in world history for centuries, never has it been more "refined" by the notion of "greed is good", extreme individualism, Malthusian Social Darwinism "survival of the fittest" (the barbaric idea of having to justify your right to exist economically), capital accumulation, people like Margaret Thatcher who championed the "free market" (the same "free" market that produces the big tech corporate monopolies) and backed by such a large military industrial complex. List of US "Regime Changes":


The length of this list alone is disturbing.

“US-Gate”? Overthrowing Other People’s Governments: The Master List of U.S. “Regime Changes”

Another interesting article outlining many of the CIA's Color Revolutions and their strategies for creating these conditions:
C.I.A. Color Revolutions



The decorated US marine corps major general, Smedley Butler, described war as


What better economic system and ideology for war-profiteering than that of capitalism backed by the force of the US Empire?
Thanks man, the US power since 1945 is impressive!
Yeah, you're right, it's more clear in 64.
Some crucial people in the Coup of 64, like Geisel and Castelo Branco, were trained by the US way before 64 Dictatorship happening.
Thanks to the nationalistic approach it backfired in some sense, at least the pro-left and anti US alliance didn't take control. The revolutionaries Brasilians were a substantial militancy, killing oppressors and liberating unjustly imprisoned people.

The anti-communist and anti-semitic (Now most don't even know what is a Jewish) propaganda were very apparent in 1937 and with the Cohen Plan, a clearly manufactured propaganda. Funny how the Presidents, who liked centralization of power and hegemony, were hostile to the communists.

João Goulart thanks to some leftist proposals and pro-China talks was overthrown to anti-communist conspiracy. Yep Brasil history keeps being repeated since Brasil was The United States of Brasil.

The Nato aspect only strengthens how vastly Bolsonaro is selling the country...

What's better than misery for a capitalist? War is exceptional at creating misery. Misery is good for rich capitalists and oligarchs. Some freedom is only good for them when useful for their benefit, as "education" can be
Very good points about the psychopathic, predatory philosophies, while our culture is like that, "greedy is good", the oligarchical systems will prevail.
 
Last edited:

Lenin

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
20
@Lenin Well I dont agree with Huerta de Soto's position on Gold as money. Money is a public utility to facilitate commerce based on actual productivity. Having Gold in a vault doesn't make a country rich, having ability to work together with the natural resources of a country and technology this country develops/inherits makes a country rich. I can agree with HdS on the absurdity of the Fractional Reserve banking system but I find pegging the currency to Gold is an odd way of trying to foolproof Money into something which it is not.
No, what he says is simple: money have being chosen the money by excellence in lots of regions and in several centuries. It's an institution that borns in an evolutionary way, not by a state decision or by a social engineer decision. Silver sometimes coexists with gold. He's mainly against fractional reserve because it violates the deposit contract, which is one of the most basic contracts and it applies not only to money, where the state world wide let it be violated, but also to deposit other goods, like cereals, etc. He says this widespread violation started mainly because of the church chasing people earning interests, so, they made a false deposit contract to avoid it's consequences... He doesn't say gold and gold standard must be imposed, because that would require violence from, let's say, a state.
 

Lenin

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
20
Socialism doesn't need to be a State, neither State controlled. Don't know Communism? Only remains to you say that communism is also statism.
Argue with Proudhon about Free market socialism.

What country the State doesn't control the territory/ economy? What State have a non-market? Venezula is a non-market economy?

Arrogantly you say ppl don't know nothing about economics even considering that you say you lived in a socialist State, said you were a lefitst and don't even know what is Socialism.
How do you maintain a socialist economy if two individuals decide to trade freely without respecting, let's say, communitarian property of the means of production?
What if they start to trade in their own currency and terms? This if you aren't advocating for state ownership of means of production, because if you are, man, this is so 1917...

Man, I read most of that crap, I know left wing "anarchists", I knew commies, I knew their arguments, I've being there, done that. And I was a miserable being, like most of the leftists.

"What country the State doesn't control the territory/ economy?"
Well, that's why there's no 100% free and capitalist country, we only know right now that there are a bunch of countries pretty close to that, and they do pretty well, and there's a bunch of other countries where the states interferes with many aspects of human life, and they do pretty badly. Google economic freedom index and you will get it right away, few milliseconds before your ideology blinds you again.
 

MatheusPN

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
547
Location
Brazil
How do you maintain a socialist economy if two individuals decide to trade freely without respecting, let's say, communitarian property of the means of production?
What if they start to trade in their own currency and terms? This if you aren't advocating for state ownership of means of production, because if you are, man, this is so 1917...

Man, I read most of that crap, I know left wing "anarchists", I knew commies, I knew their arguments, I've being there, done that. And I was a miserable being, like most of the leftists.

"What country the State doesn't control the territory/ economy?"
Well, that's why there's no 100% free and capitalist country, we only know right now that there are a bunch of countries pretty close to that, and they do pretty well, and there's a bunch of other countries where the states interferes with many aspects of human life, and they do pretty badly. Google economic freedom index and you will get it right away, few milliseconds before your ideology blinds you again.
How would you abolish feudalism?
If you're bringing ancap/ right "libertarianism", known my opinion here: Deliberation Makes People Consistently Selfish
I will stop hijacking here.
 
Last edited:

alephx

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2018
Messages
131
No_Energy said:
It is incredible how a new generation has been so deeply indoctrinated with all this Socialist Neo-Marxist Garbage. It is very Sad. You either believe in Freedom or all this Socialist Garbage , can't have both.

It is utterly disgusting. Think it most have a psychological root for it to be so widespread. Is it some Messianic complex where the Energizers will lead us to a new world or is it rooted in envy of the elites of the capitalist world? Buhu it's unfair? I mean it's not perfect but at least most people can eat everyday.

I mean FREEDOM, in many ways, not only speech. But even in this form, taking away your freedom of speech, you can see this Leftist Marxist Socialist Garbage operating.

How come Energizer disparages the comments of everyone even people who were born there. Sorry but that is delusion.
I'll just leave this picture of Yeltsin visiting a Texas supermarket. You can see his eyeballs almost popping. He is said to have cried afterwards for what they did to their people.
yeltsin-19890916_HC-03-22.jpg


Well, if you don't make much money in America, your quality of life is probably gonna be pretty low. You can find all kinds of ways to minimize your cost of living and forego having a family and other things, but it doesn't change the fact. No matter what word you use for it. That is a reality.

And it would still be leaps and bounds better than whatever socialist country which exists or has existed has ever provided for the majority of its citizens.

@Lenin, I'm sorry about what happened to Venezuela, and the suffering Venezuelans have been going through because of socialism. Socialism/Marxism destroying yet another south american country.

Energizer, and the other marxist here whose name I forgot, nothing new, indoctrinated little socialist Marxist pieces of ***t. useful idiots. enemies of freedom. Go live your Socialist dream in Venezuela or Cuba you little ***t! You don't know what Socialism is. You are just another blind indoctrinated idiot who can't see the obvious in front of you. nor all the poverty, suffering and violence caused by this garbage of a ideology! Go preach this trash you were indoctrinated with to someone who has lived under this marxist\socialist garbage. you kids need to be Slapped until you get some sense !

I would pitch in for their ticket. NOT ONE of my Venezuelan or Cuban friends, wealthy or poor, would go back when given the choice between their country and practically. Here's how Energizer pictures his life would be in Venezuela:
iu

Here is how it really is for most:
iu
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
How come Energizer disparages the comments of everyone even people who were born there. Sorry but that is delusion.
I'll just leave this picture of Yeltsin visiting a Texas supermarket. You can see his eyeballs almost popping. He is said to have cried afterwards for what they did to their people.
yeltsin-19890916_HC-03-22.jpg




And it would still be leaps and bounds better than whatever socialist country which exists or has existed has ever provided for the majority of its citizens.



I would pitch in for their ticket. NOT ONE of my Venezuelan or Cuban friends, wealthy or poor, would go back when given the choice between their country and practically. Here's how Energizer pictures his life would be in Venezuela:
iu

Here is how it really is for most:
iu

What a ridiculous, ignorant comment. Do you realize Venezuela and Cuba are under US sanctions? Do you realize both countries have been under nearly constant strife and war? I'm aware that they are poor. I'm aware, in fact, that the vast majority of socialist countries are poor. Anyone who understands socialism, realizes that most of the socialist countries today, are poor for multiple reasons reason, and it has nothing to do with socialism. What it has more to do with is their geopolitical history, their history of war, etc. It also has to do with the fact that 90% of the world is dominated by the military industrial complex of the US empire, the remaining countries that don't cowtow to the imperialists, face constant military and CIA pressure to conform to the global capitalist agenda. Do you realize the CIA has been targeting Cuba and Venezuela for color revolutions and regime change? Do you realize the amount of money spent on anti-communist propaganda is billions of dollars every year? There's a reason why there's such an active effort to suppress any and all dissent.

Please think before you reply, I have little patience if you are just going to post pictures and ignore historical context with a low effort post. I was critical of some of the commenters for a reason, just because you claim to be an emigrant from a country doesn't mean you know everything and can't be wrong. Especially when the reality is, most people who would say nothing positive about the Soviet Union are probably seeing the glass half empty. Know why I think that? Because I read about the perspectives of those that are old enough to have lived under most of it and they aren't so overly negative about everything. They have a mixture of opinions and things to say. It isn't a onesided thing with them. But on a forum, it is, because you only get the most extreme opinions. As you can see from this thread, the minute anyone questions the narrative that everyone in the world hates communism, you get a lot of vitriol and push back from people that are very angry.

It doesn't take a neurobiologist to realize there were positive things that came out of that period in history, so if anyone suggests otherwise, I have to ask them, was the space race or soviet science (especially neuroscience and psychology) a positive? To me it is, of course. The fact that you are posting that PR photo-op of Yeltsin to me suggests you are not very well educated and are trying to chime in on a topic in which you accuse me of knowing nothing about, but you clearly know even less about. Yeltsin was one of the worst presidents in Russian history, hardly someone to be praising as you seem to be doing here. Yeltsin was a complete lapdog for the US regime.

Also, since you totally misrepresented my position, creating a strawman by insinuating that I was romanticizing communism to the point that I would move to a poor communist country, shows you have made little effort or faith to even debate from a reasonable position. Please do not reply again if you are going to engage in ad hominem and strawman.

“US-Gate”? Overthrowing Other People’s Governments: The Master List of U.S. “Regime Changes”


vb64opclkyz41.jpg


Howabout I pitch in to fly you to Rwanda then, since your almighty god is capitalism --- same logic you are using, falsely equating poverty to socialism. Newsflash: there are poor countries that practice capitalism too. Countries that either have a monarchy, so-called two-party "Federal Republic" with "representational democracy", etc. Most of these distinctions, are just language distinctions, as Haidut said in an earlier livestream, most governments are just the haves vs havenots, all the more apparent in many pro-capitalist countries in which the ruling elite don't even attempt to hide their disdain for the poor.

It's interesting how all the knee-jerk reactions express their desire to fly me to a poor country as if that's their linchpin argument against communism, just senseless vitriol. The quality of negative responses to this thread is so low I'm not sure if I even want to check back on this thread again. I'm honestly not too surprised, but nevertheless disappointed. I think I would probably be more encouraged if there were any signs of intelligence from my critics in their responses, but I'm not seeing much of that so far in this thread.

Sanctions Programs and Country Information
 
Last edited:
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
@Energizer I think a reply to this in your thread, 92%, would be more adequate.
Thanks, man, after you alerted me and presented some works. I am unsure how the SU operated. Maybe Kropotkin wasn't very aware of what was happening in the SU.
Anarchists and Communists love these chats, started nicely then become harsh. Nice to know about Bookchin, didnt know much about him...

Anarchist organization? Take a look at platformism/ especifism, platformism was very improved by Makhno a incredible work! So much that it become the principal strategy employed to this day. The Bolsheviks, thanks to Trotsky propaganda and with support and some orders from Lenin, destroyed the Ukranian anarchists right after Mahknovia defeated the White Army.
Mahkno a peasant semi-illiterate, sucesfully organized an effective army of peasants.

"hostility to the city nourished the movement of Makhno, who seized and looted trains marked for the factories, the plants, and the Red Army; tore up railroad tracks; shot Communists. Of course, Makhno called this the anarchist struggle with the state. In reality, this was the struggle of the infuriated petty property owner against the proletarian dictatorship". This is only one of the hostilities against Mahkno by Trotsky.

Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, Sverdlov and Stalin were extremely critics of Kropotkin and anarchism.
Kropotkin is very critic of Marxism, Stalin, the bolsheviks and of Lenin.
Kropotkin was a hero, he had everything to have a nice and tranquil life as a noble prince, but he fought.
My Visit to Kremlin by Mahkno, when he encountered Lenin and Sverdlov, sums incredibly well the tough relation between the Bolsheviks and the anarchists.

Kropotkin,
On Lenin: "Lenin is not comparable to any revolutionary figure in history. Revolutionaries have had ideals. Lenin has none. He is a madman, an immolator, wishful of burning, and slaughter, and sacrificing."

On SU: "Unhappily, this effort has been made in Russia under a strongly centralized party dictatorship. This effort was made in the same way as the extremely centralized and Jacobin endeavor of Baboeuf. I owe it to you to say frankly that, according to my view, this effort to build a communist republic on the basis of a strongly centralized state communism under the iron law of party dictatorship is bound to end in failure. We are learning to know in Russia how not to introduce communism, even with a people tired of the old regime and opposing no active resistance to the experiments of the new rulers."

Stalin: "The third "accusation" of the Anarchists consists in denying that Social-Democracy is a popular movement, describing the Social-Democrats as bureaucrats, and affirming that the Social-Democratic plan for the dictatorship of the proletariat spells death to the revolution, and since the Social-Democrats stand for such a dictatorship they actually want to establish not the dictatorship of the proletariat, but their own dictatorship over the proletariat."
Evidently, anarchists were right, Stalin.

Thanks I will check it out. While doing a little digging I found this interesting quote:

“In January 1920 [Trotsky] received a telegram from the Ukrainian Anarchist military leader Nestor Makhno, explaining why he, Makhno, was not willing to go to the Polish Front. While continuing ‘peace talks’ with Makhno, Trotsky maintained contact with the Revolutionary Military Committee through Stalin, to whom he cabled: ‘Do you think it would be possible to encircle Makhno right away and carry out a complete liquidation? It would probably be possible to destroy his artillery base if we sent some entirely reliable people there posing as anarchists. Makhno uses hardly any security measures, so we could most probably destroy his ammunition stores.’ Stalin replied: ‘The encirclement of Makhno was started a few days ago and will be accomplished by the ninth. The order [for him] to move against the Poles was issued with the intention of collecting extra material against Makhno.’ Thus, even while Makhno was still an ally, his termination was being planned and executed.”

(Volkogonov, Dimitri. Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary. 1st ed. New York: Free Press, 1996., p. 158.)
Apparently Trotsky may have been trying to rope Mahkno into fighting the Red Army and playing both sides against each other. I double-checked the quote, it is indeed what Dmitri Volkogonov is claiming in his book. It seems like Kropotkin and Stalin/Lenin definitely had some differences but it's hard to really ascertain how close they were personally beyond their meetings and letters. Some of these quotes seem a little suspicious, maybe Kropotkin did indeed say them, but for example, I checked Wikiquote for this one,

"Lenin is not comparable to any revolutionary figure in history. Revolutionaries have had ideals. Lenin has none. He is a madman, an immolator, wishful of burning, and slaughter, and sacrificing."

The source it claims is:
  • Peter Kropotkin : From Prince to Rebel (1990) by George Woodcock and Ivan Avakumovic, p. 407
We don't know where this biographer is quoting this from. Was it in a letter? I'll have to search through this book to find out. I definitely sense a strained relationship in some of the letters, but it's difficult to tell without more context what is going on here.

 
Last edited:

MatheusPN

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
547
Location
Brazil
@Energizer
Yeah, this quote from Kropotkin I extracted from his book in Marxism dot org, he scarcely mentions Lenin...
Perhaps it was altered, the original was different, perhaps...
Very interesting quote from Volkogonov!
 
Last edited:

JohnHafterson

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
288
Location
Chicago
Interesting. There definitely seems to be a point of pride about it. Understandably so, since the Soviet Union achieved quite a lot in such a short time.



"80% of Russians consider important and support Putin's amendments to the Constitution" (2020)

80% россиян считают важными и поддерживают поправки Путина в Конституцию

"Putin won the presidential election with 76.69 percent of the vote" (2018)
Путин победил на выборах президента, набрав 76,69 процента голосов
The Soviet Union was a failure. Don't delude yourself.
 

JohnHafterson

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
288
Location
Chicago
In a public TV poll, asking people if they wanted to return to the Soviet Union, 92% said "Yes."

92% россиян хотят вернуться в СССР. Мнение Медведева: "идеализировать Советский Союз не надо".

"In support of their opinion, respondents expressed various arguments. Here are the most frequent arguments:

  • There was confidence in the future. People were not afraid of the future. They were not afraid of losing their jobs, earnings, etc.
  • In the Soviet Union, there was affordable and free medicine.
  • There was free and high-quality education.
  • Relations between people were different, they were better. They were not afraid to leave the key under the Mat, there was no such social inequality and income gap."
You must be watching a lot of RT news.

Broaden your information sources.
 
OP
Energizer

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
The Soviet Union was a failure. Don't delude yourself.

I'm aware. I think the newest livestream gave me some clarity on that, Ray talked about communism and stuff like that. I am leaving my posts up for posterity, not everyone can be right all the time and I definitely have been wrong about things before. Though Karl Marx and Lenin have had some valuable insights into things, I am ultimately more sympathetic to Kropotkin's views as far as anarchism.

Yes now that they've had a chance to make a decent living abroad, they can return to Russia with good savings and if they've been living in the US additional social security savings according to a Russian I know.

Of course, why not. May as well use whatever they can while its still around... We'll see if they keep SS here I doubt it's gonna be around forever, considering how much debt the country is in I'm not sure how they can keep that program around.
 
Last edited:

JohnHafterson

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
288
Location
Chicago
In a public TV poll, asking people if they wanted to return to the Soviet Union, 92% said "Yes."

92% россиян хотят вернуться в СССР. Мнение Медведева: "идеализировать Советский Союз не надо".

"In support of their opinion, respondents expressed various arguments. Here are the most frequent arguments:

  • There was confidence in the future. People were not afraid of the future. They were not afraid of losing their jobs, earnings, etc.
  • In the Soviet Union, there was affordable and free medicine.
  • There was free and high-quality education.
  • Relations between people were different, they were better. They were not afraid to leave the key under the Mat, there was no such social inequality and income gap."
Yes now that they've had a chance to make a decent living abroad, they can return to Russia with good savings and if they've been living in the US additional social security savings according to a Russian I know.
 

Lenin

Member
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
20
This guy is so dilusional it's amazing, almost a miracle he stills alive:
"What a ridiculous, ignorant comment. Do you realize Venezuela and Cuba are under US sanctions?"

ahahahha Venezuelan economy as well as Cuban economy started to collapse years before US sanctions, toiler paper and milk disappeared from the legal markets years before Maduro or any US sanction, they take something that happens AFTER economic collapse and use it as a excuse for it, they even lost ANY touch with reality, because they don't wanna think, they just wanna be right all the time, I don't lose time with such people that even can't keep track of time properly, there's people that has doubts or are sincerely wanting to learn more, this kind of people is worth dealing with. Sincerely, I think that radical leftists are the least you want to lose your time with, if they just want to IMPOSE their point of view violating your natural rights, the best way for me to deal with them is putting bullets in them. That's why they don't take that step on the US, because they know there are thousands of armed people that have a line, and when they step on it, they are gonna defend themselves. Sadly, Venezuelans were disarmed gradually before they imposed lifelong oppression and misery on them.
 

bk_

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2018
Messages
356
Wow all the sick communist lies. A simple observation is the state censorship, suppression of freedom of speech and thought, and the overwhelming authoritarianism that was ever present in the USSR (гла́сность doesn’t count). Any system that has this makes life brutal and has its stooges to lie for it whether paid or unpaid.
 
Z

Zsazsa

Guest
@Max23

I don’t call God gay. I call the transhumans by the Species Name „Homo Deus“ instead of „Homo Sapiens“. It’s a term coined by Yuval Noah Harari, one of his books is called that, where he describes this possible or consequent next step in human history.

I don’t do smart talk to impress or what. I don’t want to sound defeatist either. I like what you wrote about picturing the worse case and stiring people to resist that way.

At the same time I do believe it’s hopeless. They can only beat themselves now - but they will crush billions up until that day, of it ever comes
We have news from Harari, now about the war:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQqthbvYE8M
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Now I realize everything I grew up believing, including about politics, was a lie because I have been trying to read everything I can get my hands on regarding Russia and the Soviet Union. It doesn't mean I necessarily glorify communism -- I'm just willing to examine alternatives and keep an open mind about politics.

I would consider myself more of an anarchist in theory, but that's even more radical than communism, which as you can see from this thread, rubs people the wrong way because they have an emotional reaction about it.
Lol, those terms are about as far away as you can get from each other on the spectrum.

Anarchy, by definition, is the complete absence of government. Communism, by definition, is where the government owns literally everything (including your mind, body, and soul). Marx even stated such in the second section of the Communist Manifesto, where he said communism can be boiled down to one sentence... The abolition of private property. Private means absence of government.
 

Demyze

Member
Joined
May 21, 2015
Messages
460
Lol, those terms are about as far away as you can get from each other on the spectrum.

Anarchy, by definition, is the complete absence of government. Communism, by definition, is where the government owns literally everything (including your mind, body, and soul). Marx even stated such in the second section of the Communist Manifesto, where he said communism can be boiled down to one sentence... The abolition of private property. Private means absence of government.
What a load of bull**** you're spewing

Its called communism because the property of the society is owned by the community of the society. Youre projecting the capitalist state like we have in the united states which is the iron fist of capital onto the community system of governance that exist in socialism

BTW the soviets had a billof rights almost identical of the one we have in the united states

Maybe you should hit the books and look up the difference between private property which leads to the concentration of a societies wealth into the hands of a few people and personal possessions
 
Back
Top Bottom