Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Communism was not "so popular." It had a few adherents & advocates with loud voices on the fringe. Remember that "Bolshevik" is Russian for "minority."
Happy Festivus to all!
Happy Festivus, Guido!
"Bolshevik" is not Russian for "minority"; was that meant to be sarcasm? Just checking. The historians and the Russian speakers among us on C-D will tell you, that "Bolshevik" kind of means the opposite; they had begun with the Orwell-speak already before they'd even come to power. "Bolshevik" has it's root in the word "bolshinstrvo" or "majority", the Mensheviks--in the word "menshinstvo", or "minority". But over time according to some historians, their membership ebbed and flowed to the point that they switched roles back and forth.
It did deliver on it's promises. People had work, education, holidays, health care and were fed. That is why many were prepared to die for socialism when Germany invaded, despite the German propaganda that Germany were the good guys, and despite knowing about how dangerous Stalin and his government were.
You don't seem to remember that the Germans were originally greeted as liberators in many parts of the Soviet Union. 6% of all Soviet prisoners took up arms to fight for the Germans and something like 1.6 million Soviet citizens became collaborators. Meanwhile, Stalin's SMERSH had a network of informers in the military so pervasive that some estimate its operatives at 12% of the Soviet army. So what you write is kind of nonsense.
It was not evil it is because it keeps the nation going.
They all work together. That is why.
Right now you could be living a good life in Russia hanging out with cute Russian girls who just turn 18 right now living with next to nothing. It is literally like that. You could be an art person or programmer and live good in Russia.
The problem with Russia is when it comes to right issues or freedom of speech or even education you are going to be limited. First come first serve.
Many people go to US from Russia just for the education and goes back for a job or stays to get paid a crazy amount. You literally grow up in the same house as your grandfather as well. Point being Russia has problems but it is not bad.
Russia has a very close relationship with the United States as well. The ideal women and ideal Athletes come from Russia.
The thing about communism and how it was popular was during the Korean war era where people in the South was executing those who supported communism. That is why North Korea attacked the South. Vietnam war was Military trying to gain ground but loss again. Korea and Nam was seen as a pointless war that Military was suckered into. ex-military even had his legs run over by a train to prevent guns from reaching their. The Vietnamese was being rounded up like animals and then their was the baby-san mentality from WWII and of course Vietnam. That is why. North Korea was correct. Another reality with communism is how the people ( while forced ) was working together.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeWC9V2qH-8
Everything in this video should sum it up. In communism who barely get a fraction of the chance to be what you want to be or do what you want to do. Jewish born Russians flee from USSR due that mentality, and USSR would place unwanted people to the left of the nation.
Modern day Eastern Europe is basically what USSR is with Capitalism
You don't seem to remember that the Germans were originally greeted as liberators in many parts of the Soviet Union. 6% of all Soviet prisoners took up arms to fight for the Germans and something like 1.6 million Soviet citizens became collaborators. Meanwhile, Stalin's SMERSH had a network of informers in the military so pervasive that some estimate its operatives at 12% of the Soviet army. So what you write is kind of nonsense.
This was true in the Baltic States, which sided with Germany, hoping to gain their freedom after the war. Tragically, they paid a heavy price for that, as Stalin rounded up their population, and shipped them to Kazakhstan and elsewhere, as traitors after the war.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeWC9V2qH-8
Everything in this video should sum it up. In communism who barely get a fraction of the chance to be what you want to be or do what you want to do. Jewish born Russians flee from USSR due that mentality, and USSR would place unwanted people to the left of the nation.
Modern day Eastern Europe is basically what USSR is with Capitalism
Could you elaborate on the bolded, please? Aside from Jews, who were discriminated against in university admissions, who else didn't get to choose their profession and level of education?
The problem with socialism is that in short time it runs on inefficiencies. And the ruling class will not permit change. You will be promised better but you will never see it.
While on the other hand capitalism requires efficiencies to run or enterprises fail.
Capitalism is the better choice but taxation must be fair. Fair but not abusive. Abusive taxation discourages risk taking.
But this all moot point in a service economy which will fail anyway. A successful economy must build and make things. "What Trenton Makes The World Takes".
Could you elaborate on the bolded, please? Aside from Jews, who were discriminated against in university admissions, who else didn't get to choose their profession and level of education?
It is not about not getting into Universities but that you might be assigned as a military agent which in turn would disable your career as a professor or researcher entirely. Meaning you might have the brains, the papers to back it, but once your called you are called. Another factor is freedom of speech where somebody could literally be taken away for harvesting ideas within the student body. There is also the problem with respect where a person in such mindset might take advantage of another just because of who they are.
Just to expand you would be keeping multiple budgets ( black books ). Where you would have to report to the tax collectors and then actually have another book for yourself. Even the ideas of IP is nonresistant where everything is for the party. People have had raids at their homes to even raids at works where computers was taken away and short-sighted of being returned, to people not being given a fair share of the pie of progress that goes into the state. Just that you have a job and no matter how much wealth accumulated the state collects.
My question would be how did people stay good looking and wealthy "looking" outside of investments internationally. As with the post 1800's rush to the Americas where immigration was blocked for a time, to the post Berlin-wall rush of the early 1990's. Outside of officers being in charge of different departments of industries ( simular to an business company but we are talking about USSR/Russia ) in terms of individuals. You see in Russia today we have many brands being sold to the US alongside illegal activity ( even if casual ). However while it might appear ghetto it also appears to be productive in-comparison of onot making that investment.
If a person would do what they did before interaction with capitalism nations a good chance they would not thrive at all. A good example is Tetris, Bacardi, VK, and many other properties. in the capitalist world from a communist nation, or area related to communism. A more illegal activity would be is white-slavery ( human trafficking ) or selling of nuclear technologies ( where some ex-criminals are hiding out in areas like Hawaii and Israel ).
If it was a capitalist nation at the time of the USSR, you would be able to study what you want to study, and go where your practice takes you, without concerning yourself of funds being collected by the goverment overhead.
Communism isn't 'evil', in fact in theory it is the exact opposite!! The idea of Communism is a good one - the problem is human nature and human greed, people will ALWAYS take more than their 'share' if they can and that is the biggest single reason why Communism doesn't work.
You can GIVE each person an equal amount. But once it's in their hands, anything can happen.
Just look at the resulting corruption in jails practically everywhere. People hustle, EXTORT, and smuggle contraband to have greater number of possessions, or trade at a later time without experiencing any scarcity themselves.
The bigger problem is that USSR and USA have a close relationship as with China and Sadi-arabia.
Another problem is how England ( among other nations ) literally still have royalty. In a nutshell all royalty should be the leaders but they are not even trying
I went back to the sources used by WIKI and based on: https://ourworldindata.org/search?q=RUSSIAN+BIRTHRATE
A nice chart popped up. I could be wrong but it appears that BEFORE the 1917 revolution, birthrates were HIGHER, than after the 1917 revolution.
In fact, the overall curve / trend was downward.
"...period fertility (the conventional total fertility rate) exhibits strong fluctuations against the backdrop of a generally declining trend. The fluctuations in period fertility reflected particular societal events: catastrophic changes in the socioeconomic environment (World Wars I and II, the 1918–1920 civil war, massive repressions during the 1930s, famines in 1932–1933 and in 1947) and the intrusion of the government into the demographic sphere (e.g. adoption of new family policy measures in the 1980s), all of which caused major changes in birth timing."
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
They were.
You need to remember that pre-revolutionary Russia was mostly rural and agrarian, so having 5-7 children per family was nothing unheard of.
Sort of like typical third world country.
However once Russia got industrialized, and practically all women were expected to be employed along with men, ( plus a lot of families moved in the growing cities) - of course this brought the birth rates down somewhat, which is only logical.
Quote:
Back to the WIKI article - the life expectancy during the 1930s was shocking.
Life expectancy
YEAR MALE FEMALE
1927 33.7 37.9
1928 35.9 40.4
1929 33.7 38.2
1930 34.6 38.7
1931 30.7 35.5
1932 30.5 35.7 1933 15.2 19.5
1934 30.5 35.7
1935 33.1 38.4
1936 30.4 35.7
1937 30.5 40.0
1938 31.7 42.5
(massive repressions during the 1930s, famines in 1932–1933 certainly contributed to population drop, but that's not socialism's fault - or is it?)
I have no idea why the life expectancy was so shockingly low specifically in 1933. Famine of 1932-1933 may be?
But then why such difference between 1932 and 1933?
Doesn't make much sense.
The repressions hit the hardest in 1937-1938, and yet the life expectancy was higher during those years, comparably to 1933.
Now as far as mass famine goes - it was again nothing unheard of during Tzarist times as well.
Looking at "socialism" in Russia exclusively through the prism of the thirties is the same as looking at American capitalism exclusively during the times of the Dust Bowl.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
