Regular wrote:Hahaha, are you sure? Communist societies did have elite. This was politburo, important party members, generals, engineers, scientists. They were much better off than rest of the people. Have you seen dachas in Crimea and Latvia?
VHS and colour TVs were only available for few.
Your twisted understanding of communism came from the simplified thinking of "USSR = communism".
First and foremost, USSR never claimed that it reached communism. Except for a very short period when a certain mental patient named Khruschyov claimed that he could built communism in 20 years, none of the Soviet leaders claimed that they finished socialist stage to reach communist stage.
You can reach the official Party documents for verification, as you have better condition of approaching Russian documents than me.
The USSR and allies called themselves Socialist Bloc, not Communist Bloc.
Second, after the dead of Stalin, the USSR deviated further and further from socialism and communism, due to the rise of "privileged class" inside the Party and Government. This is completely against the principles of socialism and communism, and that lead to the collapse of the USSR from inside.
Regular wrote:Yes, like Tsarist elite stopped Dostoevsky, Chaikovsky?
How many people in Tsarist Russia can reach the level of Dostoevsky, Chaikovsky ?
Regular wrote:Majority of people are just that - statists. They like stupid sports, stupid TV shows and only care about sex, food and drink. North Korea or America, averages are generally the same. Do you think you are interested in military and other things you like because of education or just your curious nature?
I agree that general education is a good thing, but don't pretend it's forge of intellectuals.
This is the proof that ruling class want to keep their "elite" status and prevent the mass from reaching higher end of knowledge, by telling you to believe that, only a small number of people can reach the higher level of understanding.
Do you try to ask why the mass "like" the "stupid sports", "stupid TV shows" "sex", "food" and "drink". Is that their inherent nature ? Or because the media is full of sex, violence, and bullshit things ? Media is full of nonsense and bullshit like evil Putin invade the world, games is full of stupid like Red Alert portrays evil Stalin invade the "free West", what do you expect the mass to think ?
Especially when they have their full hand and head in factories and offices with few times to think for themselves about the right and wrong of the news ?
It is because the elite push down the information full of craps that you deformed the minds of the people, and then they blame the people for their own ignorance, that because the people are a bunch of ignorant low lifes, can't be compared with the elites. A disgusting hypocrisy from the Western ruling class.
I see you and many others on the Internet blame the people this and that, but does that change anything ? Most of this society is comprised of the people that you blame.
Regular wrote:Sure, but wasn't Soviet education very specific and targeted not a whole population, hence schools/prof schools and universities? Some nations like kavkazoids and uzbeks had no access to most education that was accessible to Muscovites, nor do they needed as generally they were far less intelligent people.
Then that was a weakness and that should have been fixed but not fixed.
Regular wrote:Yet even with failures of Tsar Russia was one of the biggest economies in the world and it was going through it's industrial revolution. Most of the peasants even in west were illeterate too, except for few nations.
That "big" economy is highly backward comparing with contemporary Western capitalist countries, if not among the most backward ones in the imperialist countries and was in huge debt borrowed from the Brits and France.
Proletariats only comprised of 10% of the population, and the workers in industrial sector was even lower. 4/5 of the population were farmers and much of the farmers were in poverty. Land concentration was high, 2/3 of arable land was in landlords and the Church.
Regular wrote:It wasn't easy transformation, plenty of failed dead ends and own Russian villager skulls had to crushed more than once to help the progress (With fucking Latvian communist hands ofcourse)
Was any transformation easy ? Especially when the transformation came into conflict with certain classes in the old society ?
The reactionary classes used violence to react against revolution and why should the revolution could not use violence to protect itself ?
To eradicate slavery, the United States need a Civil War, hundred of thousands were killed to force the slave owners to surrender. Try blaming Lincoln for repressing the "free will" of slave owners.
Regular wrote:Putin said it that even if he likes ideals of communism it was implemented with greatest repressions and brutality
Have you ever heard about Enclosure in the Brits ?
Have you ever heard about what Western imperialists did in Asia, America and Africa ?
Have you ever heard about the brutality that imperialists impose on black slaves ?
Repression, killings, brutality that the French and American imperialist imposed on my country is something that you can't imagine.
Putin is a good leader but he can be wrong in many occasions. And he can intentionally say wrong things to appease various factions for the sake of unity.
Regular wrote:Russia lost it's vast gold reserves and Finland, Baltics, Poland and dwarfed under communism.
Are you sad that Soviet Russia acknowledged the independence of nations oppressed by the Tsarist regime ?
Are you trying to turn Russia into an warlike country thirst for land from other nations ?
Do you see that you are one step closer to the racist Aristides ?
Regular wrote:Russians performed very very well in Brusilov charge. It gave birth to Blitzkrieg. But thanks to Tsar Russia gave up. This was biggest mistake and it's mentioned by Putin in video I've posted above.
Militarist and Western historian only focus on the military side of the war, that war is simply two forces in certain battlefields.
But without soldiers follow him Brusilov could not perform the shock offensive.
Without soldiers enlisted Brusilov could not carry out his military plan.
With our food, guns and ammo soldiers could not fight.
Germany and Russia lost in the WW1 because deteriorating conditions inside their home, that lead to revolutions. People did not want to fight and die in a meaningless war, what they need is bread and peace.People get sick of the war and want peace. What would that war provide them when it was just the fought between different ruling oligarchs for lands and profits ?
You have to understand that war is an effort of the whole society, not just battles, just Brussilov, Jukov, or military generals.
You never focus on the needs and wills of the people who build the country so you put the blame of nonsense things.
Piotr he Great defeated the Swedes war because he managed to armed and feed 100000 soldiers and made these soldiers fought for him to the very end, and made the society maintain these army to the very end.
Russia defeated Napoleon because Russian peasants were armed and fought Napoleon to very end, and Russian society loyaly maintain the armed forces, while Napoleon army was rotten gradually thanks to no supply and no support.
Russian defeated Germany because the whole Soviet society stood together in the most bitter years of the war, because Russian society managed to churned out 50000 tanks, 4000000 PPsh, many Yaks, ILs... to support the armed forces to the very end.
Russia-ness didn't help unless it was attached to the interest of the ones who feed this society, that is the working class. And actually, Russian identity has been formed by the commoners who form the bulk of the population, not the self-proclaimed "elites" who are actually the most Westernized ones.
Russia-ness helped to defeat Mongols, Teutons, Turkish, French and many other enemies of Russia. Communism created Ukraine and other monstrosities. Guess who created Ukrainian alphabet and grammar to counter so called - Russian chauvinism?
Do you simply believe that only Russia-ness, independent of class interest, can force Russian peasants to throw their life away and follow the leadership of the ruling class ?
Do you notify that, the patriotic education documents always clarify clearly how the invader will harm the peasants ? That the invaders are brutal, they will kill the people, rob the villages, burn the house, rape the women, and destroy everything dearful of the people ?
That is class-interest. Something close, clear and detailed to the workers and farmers, not some ephemeral sense of Russia-ness.
Patriotism begins with the love for what close to you. Your father. Your mother. Your sibling. Your house. Your neighbor. Your river. Your mountain. Your field. Your daily life.
The nation is built by workers and farmers, culture and other else are closely related to their life and daily interest.
Regular wrote:My opinion about Soviet Union is similar to Putins - Кто не жалеет о распаде СССР, у того нет сердца. А у того, кто хочет его восстановления в прежнем виде, у того нет головы.
Who doesn't miss Soviet Union has no hearth, who wants it back has no brain.
What he means is the Soviet Union in its fault form, nobody wants it back, but they want a new regime which can materialize the ideas that of communism that the USSR had not completed.