• -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    I believe led to their army gaming an outsized power that allowed them to seize control with a strong man and turning the government against what it should have been.

    Stalin was elected. Want sources/information? We have entire threads on this if you’re curious to actually entertain the thought of an alternative viewpoint.

    Stalin was a monster by all accounts.

    Most of us are Stalinists.

    As to the Democratic conventions, it was all fixed. There was some degree of voting at the beginning right after the revolution, the Bolsheviks got elected and then they got voted out the next Congress or whatever they called it and they kept power. Very few if any of their elections were honest to my knowledge.

    Sources?

    • hector@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      More of a trotsky fan myself. I do like fidel castro though.

      Cuba has the same dynamic, you got held up on the definitions and missed my point.

      By being attacked every which way cuba had to have robust secirity services and keep a close watch on everyone because of fuckery from without, and that leads them to having a less free society, further alienating the world from forms of state control of key industries the private sector cannot be trusted to run to meet society’s needs.

      But what do you care what I think? I never would have argued if I knew you were not super sensitive/cynical politically correct liberal democrat sheep in the US. In that context it was my duty to tell them off. As it is, not my duty or business and I see how the comment would upset in ylur context.

      Long story short, who gives a shit? Flippant comment on a subject we both agree on, that us polits are p’s os, let us leave it at that.