once you understand why that term even exists you’ll understand why socialism or communism in any form was never really allowed to be attempted fully without existential threat by basically illegal foreign government intervention
Are you attempting to claim that the Soviet Union was prevented from fully existing because of US intervention? Didn’t the Soviets forcibly take over a dozen or so of their neighbours?
On a somewhat related tangent, isn’t funny how most of the ex-Soviet Block countries now want to be allies with the US and absolutely hate the motherland of communism now known as the ruzzian federation? It’s almost as if communism was not the panacea they claimed it was!
Do you think the citizens of Soviet Russia had power over their country and money, in terms of how it was used to benefit them and their society?
No I absolutely do not.
Do you think any revolution that kills off the existing government and elites would result in anything different? Do you really think the people leading the revolution are suddenly going to give up their new found power and fairly distribute all of the wealth they now find themselves in control of? Only a naive fool would believe that. But it will be different the next time right?
lol bro you’re exposing your ignorance of history.
first yes, your argument is the same shit monarchists said and guess where the french king is now? or do you just wanna forget that? let’s move on no problem.
The start of Soviet Russia wasn’t terrible, Stalin’s rise to power (see fascism) can and does happen in any version of government. Donny tried it in America and he’s not the first. It also required him to kill off the people who weren’t operating like him in fact those originally in power had distrust for Stalin on this exact issue, he was power hungry. I’m sure you’ve heard of Lenin and Trotsky?
So yeah, I do believe people can have a revolution and create a better system. It has literally happened in history, a lot. This is why we no longer have god-kings or emperors. This is why we had democracy in the first place silly.
Now only an ignorant weenie would be unable to understand how the very notorious American Intelligence Apparatus works to disallow any form of the lower class gaining power. We had the Red Scare here, we had Pinkertons, we have a whole history of established governments refusing to change and being forcefully dismantled to form better systems of government.
Now back to the term Banana Republic. Most of those countries(so we are no longer stuck on Soviet Russia) weren’t allowed self autonomy and had foreign interference from capitalists through their very corrupt, often illegal intelligence apparatuses that worked to disallow any socialism from taking root. We have literally fought in wars over it and the government funds foreign agents to keep out socialism and what did that cause? ISIS, the Taliban, likely the South American cartels although that’s messier but we know the CIA had their fingers in crack and cocaine so.
And to wrap this all up, your arguments are all assumptions. You assume people will just always be corrupt and hold onto power, you assume the elites are needed to keep the system in tact and you know what they say about assuming.
Your response is like the text equivalent of the gish gallop. Spewing out an endless stream of marginally related information in a condescending manner is arguing in bad faith.
My point was simple and (in my humble opinion) irrefutable:
The leaders of a violent revolution are not going to give up their new found power and share the wealth they suddenly find themselves in control of.
Rambling on about Trump, the red scare, banana republics, ISIS, the CIA selling crack, etc, etc, does not refute my point. Whether Trump, the red scare, and banana republics, etc are right or wrong does not refute my point. Bringing up atrocities committed by capitalism does not refute my point. Even the entire sum of all the horrible atrocities committed by capitalism does not refute my point. Peppering your comment with petty insults does not refute my point.
The leaders of a violent revolution are not going to give up their new found power and share the wealth they suddenly find themselves in control of…
google banana republic
once you understand why that term even exists you’ll understand why socialism or communism in any form was never really allowed to be attempted fully without existential threat by basically illegal foreign government intervention
And you need to Google “The Soviet Union”
were they never interfered with by the US?
Are you attempting to claim that the Soviet Union was prevented from fully existing because of US intervention? Didn’t the Soviets forcibly take over a dozen or so of their neighbours?
On a somewhat related tangent, isn’t funny how most of the ex-Soviet Block countries now want to be allies with the US and absolutely hate the motherland of communism now known as the ruzzian federation? It’s almost as if communism was not the panacea they claimed it was!
Everybody knows what Karl Marx famous thing is “seize the means of production”
By that he is saying those who generate the money should have power over their country and money.
Do you think the citizens of Soviet Russia had power over their country and money, in terms of how it was used to benefit them and their society?
No I absolutely do not.
Do you think any revolution that kills off the existing government and elites would result in anything different? Do you really think the people leading the revolution are suddenly going to give up their new found power and fairly distribute all of the wealth they now find themselves in control of? Only a naive fool would believe that. But it will be different the next time right?
lol bro you’re exposing your ignorance of history.
first yes, your argument is the same shit monarchists said and guess where the french king is now? or do you just wanna forget that? let’s move on no problem.
The start of Soviet Russia wasn’t terrible, Stalin’s rise to power (see fascism) can and does happen in any version of government. Donny tried it in America and he’s not the first. It also required him to kill off the people who weren’t operating like him in fact those originally in power had distrust for Stalin on this exact issue, he was power hungry. I’m sure you’ve heard of Lenin and Trotsky?
So yeah, I do believe people can have a revolution and create a better system. It has literally happened in history, a lot. This is why we no longer have god-kings or emperors. This is why we had democracy in the first place silly.
Now only an ignorant weenie would be unable to understand how the very notorious American Intelligence Apparatus works to disallow any form of the lower class gaining power. We had the Red Scare here, we had Pinkertons, we have a whole history of established governments refusing to change and being forcefully dismantled to form better systems of government.
Now back to the term Banana Republic. Most of those countries(so we are no longer stuck on Soviet Russia) weren’t allowed self autonomy and had foreign interference from capitalists through their very corrupt, often illegal intelligence apparatuses that worked to disallow any socialism from taking root. We have literally fought in wars over it and the government funds foreign agents to keep out socialism and what did that cause? ISIS, the Taliban, likely the South American cartels although that’s messier but we know the CIA had their fingers in crack and cocaine so.
And to wrap this all up, your arguments are all assumptions. You assume people will just always be corrupt and hold onto power, you assume the elites are needed to keep the system in tact and you know what they say about assuming.
Your response is like the text equivalent of the gish gallop. Spewing out an endless stream of marginally related information in a condescending manner is arguing in bad faith.
My point was simple and (in my humble opinion) irrefutable:
The leaders of a violent revolution are not going to give up their new found power and share the wealth they suddenly find themselves in control of.
Rambling on about Trump, the red scare, banana republics, ISIS, the CIA selling crack, etc, etc, does not refute my point. Whether Trump, the red scare, and banana republics, etc are right or wrong does not refute my point. Bringing up atrocities committed by capitalism does not refute my point. Even the entire sum of all the horrible atrocities committed by capitalism does not refute my point. Peppering your comment with petty insults does not refute my point.
The leaders of a violent revolution are not going to give up their new found power and share the wealth they suddenly find themselves in control of…
… AND… anybody who believes that is a fool.
Marginally related information?
Government, revolution, history. That’s not marginally related that’s the same topic buddy.
But again, you’re wrong. This happened in history. Often. Hence democracy