1354
Steve Balmer quotes (infosec.pub)
submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

What, genuinely, is unpleasant to imagine about a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society?

That attempts to implement it invariably lead to shit, apparently.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Not everywhere, Yugoslavia is a good example of things being implemented the right way. There is always room for improvement of course, things were far from perfect... and perfect is just such a strong word, the idea is not to be perfect, to always improve it.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Didn't that thing end pretty badly?

[-] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Yes, there was a war, but there were a lot of factors that contributed to that, including the US medling in internal affairs. In general, up until the death of Tito, everything was pretty much OK. The turmoils began after his death.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's a bad example, because at that point Yugoslavia couldn't have existed without Tito – he was an extremely authoritarian figure that cracked down on any sort of controversial thought hard. Having an intelligent dictator as the unifying force isn't a particularly good strategy, and Yugoslavia was bound to fail without an authority forcing it to stay together. There were many human rights violations done to keep the peace and equality in the nation.

Yugoslavia also wasn't exactly as "communist" as other communist countries, they allowed private ownership of property and business and relied a lot on surrounding capitalist countries to have a decent standard of living and economy.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That's a bad example, because at that point Yugoslavia couldn't have existed without Tito – he was an extremely authoritarian figure that cracked down on any sort of controversial thought hard.

You obviously never lived in Yugoslavia. I have. It was nothing like that. Western media presented him like every other dictator there is out there, which couldn't be further from the truth. Benevolent dictator, yes, that one he might have been, but an iron fisted one that went after everyone that so much as whispered something he didn't like? No, that's just not true.

Having an intelligent dictator as the unifying force isn't a particularly good strategy, and Yugoslavia was bound to fail without an authority forcing it to stay together.

That might be true to an extent. Slovenia and Croatia didn't like the federation, especially Sloveina... and yes, they were kinda forced into the federation after WWII. I would agree that Slovenia might have been better off if she was allowed to leave the federation. She should never have been a part of the federation anyway.

Croatia had a different problem. They wanted to be in the federation, but wanted to lead it. Tito had to balance. He was Croatian, so he had to put the capital in Serbia and pick most of the leading figures from the Serbs.

You have to understand, these regions were always riddled with nationalst wars. This was a chance for everyone to live peacefully, compromises had to be made. And we did live peacefully... up to a point.

Yugoslavia also wasn't exactly as "communist" as other communist countries, they allowed private ownership of property and business and relied a lot on surrounding capitalist countries to have a decent standard of living and economy.

Yes, Yugoslavia was socialist, and that was also up to an extent (as mentioned, private ownership and other things).

Though, the idea was to be completely autonomous. The relying on capitalist countries part was supposed to be a temporary solution. And things were heading in the right direction (more or less... not saying things couldn't have been done better), but tides shifted when Tito died and everything started falling appart. I could elaborate in more detail if you'd like, but I feel like it's enough for this comment.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

Do you know what most of the Communist countries that "invariably went to shit" had in common? One of the most powerful, red fearing countries in the world fucking with them relentlessly, despite the "fact" that "they would have failed if left to their own devices"

[-] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

That's not the theory, though. The initial claim was that it's unpleasant to think about. Regardless of your claim that it "invariably leads to shit," that doesn't answer the initial question.

If the claim should truly have been that existing attempts at Communism are unpleasant to think about, rather than "Communism itself is unpleasant to think about," then it's just an issue with wording.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I think it's fair that what happens in real world affects how one thinks about a political theory.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

So then it's a wording issue, though it's more accurate to say that revolution itself invariably turns to shit.

this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
1354 points (97.3% liked)

linuxmemes

20776 readers
611 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS