umeronuno

Can i keep you on speed dial? I work with adults with Developmental Disabilities, and having someone with insight could really come in handy now and then

Stalin was an evil force of nature, who was also a bad-ass on a level that few people could ever even imagine. I'm supposed to just believe that anyone else would have not been less repressive and given communism less of a bad name? I am not advocating for any particular dogma versus another, but Trotsky was a completely different type of character. To say that they would have produced similar results is falling back on the "communism is inherently bad" trope. That is not scholarly. The line about " communism always ________when it has been tried to be implemented" always leaves out one important factor: communism has always been tried in a world where capitalism has been actively threatened by and working against it. i.e., criticizing Castro while ignoring the conditions that existed in Cuba at the time of the revolution, and dismissing the active role that capitalist governments played to undermine the Cuban revolution (looking at you, USA), is being very selective and privileged in one's viewpoint. On the spectrum of preferable systems, communism represents a damn-sight better option than the crony feudalism we are fast sliding into, and it will, without a doubt, rise again when people a few generations from now have to try to clean up this god-awful mess we are making right this minute. Stalinism was not communism. It was stalinism. If you don't understand the difference then I don't know what to say to you...

So, when America accused Russia of being fascist...?