• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The soviet union was indeed in a constant state of turmoil and siege. From aggression by imperialists on the outside, and sabateurs and fascists on the inside that sought to reinstate capitalism, the socialists were forced to take the very real threat of infiltration seriously. In the purges, the large majority of those found guilty were expelled from the party, with executions largely reserved for those guilty of extreme crimes. Even then, excess did occur, and when the Politburo learned that the NKVD was playing it more fast and loose, they were ordered to stop.

    Do you believe that there wasn’t actually a serious threat of internal espionage and conspiracy? Do you believe that all of the ruling classes that were stripped from their Tsarist privledges simply gave up after the Russian Civil War? How do you suggest the soviets respond to such threats?

    As for it only lasting 40 years, the 1977 constitution was more of an expansion on the 1936 constitution than a complete rewrite. It’s progressive social guarantees remained intact.

    • Pissed@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Oh I believe it without a doubt but I also believe that this fueled excessive paranoia and plenty of innocent people were screwed over, the cold war was fucking stupid, and the fact that capitalist countries still can’t stand any country being socialist is also fucking stupid but the paranoia that the siege creates can definitely have negative consequences for people living in socialist countries and IMO is a huge source of the authoritarian nature of socialist States more than there being any intrinsic authoritarian nature to socialism, I’ve seen the same thing happen in small socialist orgs.

      Edit Exploiting this paranoid aspect was also a way the FBI used to wreck revolutionary groups, the black panthers come to mind.

      • DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        That’s because capitalism guarantees a certain powerful dynamic by capitalists and socialism removes the power from the select few of the population. To put it simply the power given to capitalists by capitalism is threatened by socialism which is why capitalists hate livable wages or anything that allows the sheep workers from having peace. It makes you less reliant on capitalists for everything and they can’t accept that. To make workers simple to understand they want a dependent relationship between everyone and everything and capitalists or capitalism. Kind of like a parasite but you should already know that by now.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Systems generally develop the processes to defend themselves, so you’re correct about excess happening. However, this is in the context of siege. It’s important to recognize context.

        • Pissed@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          10 hours ago

          And I did, it’s also important to not white wash everything because it harms the cause more than it helps nothing caused more disillusionment in socialism than people being betrayed by the party which promised them a utopia, I have family who were socialists since the 1890s, and the first betreyal happened when they got sent to the front in WW1 that was already enough for some people to be like fuck this shit.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            9 hours ago

            People were not “betrayed by the party,” and socialists haven’t promised “utopia” though. I’m not white washing everything, it’s important to get an accurate understanding of genuine successes and genuine faults.

            • Pissed@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              What I’m telling you now is part of my families personal history as ordinary workers who supported the Social Democratic party in the late 19th and early 20th century People did feel betrayed by the social democrats when they supported the first world war. I know that my family members thought that universal suffrage and the ability to vote for a party that said they had the workers best interests at heart would usher in a better world. For them there definitely a utopian aspect to socialism. After the first world war my great grandparents were like fuck that shit, they felt betrayed and didn’t bother joining the communist party anymore.

              Did some edits just to make my writing less shitty.

                • Pissed@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  Lol, the Bolsheviks were a faction of the Russian social democratic party. I’m not Russian.

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.mlOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    The bolsheviks supported pulling out of the war, and did. I’m not referring to non-communist parties, this meme itself is about the USSR. I’m not sure why you’re bringing in social democratic parties.