It really feels like it's jut the same Chomsky stupidity. Like "oh no the bourgeoisie was able to paint communism as a foreign enemy and maybe that would be different without the USSR!" They literally turned Jews living in their own countries into scary foreign enemies too, it would be extremely easy to do that no matter what. You basically have to believe the "big foreign communist enemy" thing to think it actually meant anything. Everything is a foreign enemy to imperialists and capitalists! They would be able to find an equally effective way of demonizing communism without the USSR existing. Heck, they could literally just wait until any other country did the first communist revolution and use that instead! There's even a point Matt literally says "the creation of the Soviet Union splits the labor movement!" Like no it didn't. Capitalists split the labor movement by using the USSR as the bogeyman. Any sane person would have solidarity with the USSR. Anything else is just the "our noble knights vs their evil barbarians" meme.
It was entirely the failure of white :farquaad-point: people to do communism that made things end up the way they did. White people too comfy! Which they point out in the episode. A lot of the left-wing leaders were lame comfy people who didn't care enough.
And they say "people saw the USSR do stuff like the Moscow Trials and Molotov-Ribbentrop and lost interest in communism." But like, that was those people's faults. They thought they were going to take power and do a heckin' wholesome utopia communism instead of like, building an army, purging enemies, and having state power (which is stuff all the communist theorists sort of wrote about!). That's on those ignorant white Americans and Germans and whatever for not doing enough political education and stuff in terms of what to expect. Geopolitics is going to be a thing no matter what! Even heckin' wholesome Cuba (omg they met Obama!!!) and Vietnam (omg they met Obama!!!) and North Korea (omg he met with Trump!!!) do that stuff. And aren't they wrong about the "oh the international left lost solidarity" thing? Like, Hollywood people were still infatuated with the USSR into the 50s, and further on there were all sorts of movements in solidarity with the USSR later on, like the Black Panthers and Cuba, etc. And East Germany. The USSR just wasn't big enough on it's own.
And what has 30 years of the USSR not existing gotten us? Oh, nothing. How much progress has "trust us we aren't big evil gommulists like soviet union :powercry-2: " gotten anyone? Oh, none! All that does is mint more little social fascists who want healthcare for white people or Americans.
Imagine seeing Stalin as the figurehead of internationalism and anti-imperialism he actually was, and being like "no, that's too scary!" and thinking he needed to be replaced with some "soy" loser who would fellate white people. Two of the communist countries that still exist basically had leaders handpicked by Stalin's people (Ho Chi Minh (okay he wasn't hand-picked but you get it) and Kim Il-Sung). "Without the [USSR] there would be no new [communist movement]"
I've only made it halfway though because the "AES is good , BUT" statements are so thick. It's not really disappointing though because it's not surprising. Thanks for the effort comment!
Saying that the creation of the USSR split labor also seems anachronistic to me. A lot of labor movements were already split by 1917 because there was lots of in fighting over to what degree WW1 should be either supported or opposed. The Australian Labor Party split in 1916, for example.
Here in the USA the comintern played a constructive role by requiring the consolidation of the CLPA and the CPA in the early 20s. The resulting organization, the now-liberalized CPUSA, had an enormously positive role in the labor struggles of the following decades through its CIO and ILD mass organizations, among others.
It really feels like it's jut the same Chomsky stupidity. Like "oh no the bourgeoisie was able to paint communism as a foreign enemy and maybe that would be different without the USSR!" They literally turned Jews living in their own countries into scary foreign enemies too, it would be extremely easy to do that no matter what. You basically have to believe the "big foreign communist enemy" thing to think it actually meant anything. Everything is a foreign enemy to imperialists and capitalists! They would be able to find an equally effective way of demonizing communism without the USSR existing. Heck, they could literally just wait until any other country did the first communist revolution and use that instead! There's even a point Matt literally says "the creation of the Soviet Union splits the labor movement!" Like no it didn't. Capitalists split the labor movement by using the USSR as the bogeyman. Any sane person would have solidarity with the USSR. Anything else is just the "our noble knights vs their evil barbarians" meme.
It was entirely the failure of white :farquaad-point: people to do communism that made things end up the way they did. White people too comfy! Which they point out in the episode. A lot of the left-wing leaders were lame comfy people who didn't care enough.
And they say "people saw the USSR do stuff like the Moscow Trials and Molotov-Ribbentrop and lost interest in communism." But like, that was those people's faults. They thought they were going to take power and do a heckin' wholesome utopia communism instead of like, building an army, purging enemies, and having state power (which is stuff all the communist theorists sort of wrote about!). That's on those ignorant white Americans and Germans and whatever for not doing enough political education and stuff in terms of what to expect. Geopolitics is going to be a thing no matter what! Even heckin' wholesome Cuba (omg they met Obama!!!) and Vietnam (omg they met Obama!!!) and North Korea (omg he met with Trump!!!) do that stuff. And aren't they wrong about the "oh the international left lost solidarity" thing? Like, Hollywood people were still infatuated with the USSR into the 50s, and further on there were all sorts of movements in solidarity with the USSR later on, like the Black Panthers and Cuba, etc. And East Germany. The USSR just wasn't big enough on it's own.
And what has 30 years of the USSR not existing gotten us? Oh, nothing. How much progress has "trust us we aren't big evil gommulists like soviet union :powercry-2: " gotten anyone? Oh, none! All that does is mint more little social fascists who want healthcare for white people or Americans.
Imagine seeing Stalin as the figurehead of internationalism and anti-imperialism he actually was, and being like "no, that's too scary!" and thinking he needed to be replaced with some "soy" loser who would fellate white people. Two of the communist countries that still exist basically had leaders handpicked by Stalin's people (Ho Chi Minh (okay he wasn't hand-picked but you get it) and Kim Il-Sung). "Without the [USSR] there would be no new [communist movement]"
Okay, I'm done :gaddafi-happy: :dancing-roach:
I've only made it halfway though because the "AES is good , BUT" statements are so thick. It's not really disappointing though because it's not surprising. Thanks for the effort comment!
Saying that the creation of the USSR split labor also seems anachronistic to me. A lot of labor movements were already split by 1917 because there was lots of in fighting over to what degree WW1 should be either supported or opposed. The Australian Labor Party split in 1916, for example.
Here in the USA the comintern played a constructive role by requiring the consolidation of the CLPA and the CPA in the early 20s. The resulting organization, the now-liberalized CPUSA, had an enormously positive role in the labor struggles of the following decades through its CIO and ILD mass organizations, among others.