• duderium [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Finally reading Blackshirts and Reds, which is really fun. The chapter on the fall of the USSR basically blames it on a lack of treats. Parenti argues that workers were kind of lazy since the USSR was a workers' state, and that meant that the quality of consumer goods declined—which was also a result of the USSR being forced to build shitloads of weapons to protect itself from the USA. I think Socialism Betrayed actually made a better argument for the fall of the USSR (too much petite bourgeois scum created by Khrushchev), but Parenti's point is still valid IMO.

    Also reading A Grain of Wheat by Ngũgĩ wa Thiong'o, a book about Kenya's independence recommended to me by people here when I asked for anti-colonial novels, and really enjoying it. I started before the queen ate shit but it's become even more topical since then.

    • HoChiMaxh [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I think his USSR criticisms are the best part of the book. I agree that "fun" is a good way to describe him - his books aren't serious academic tracts but are easy and pleasant to read. But I think in left spaces like here there's a pretty significant dearth of good-faith criticism of previous and current socialist regimes, and it leads to some serious :brainworms: or at least leaves us open for not being able to sound serious about communism. Like you have to spend your whole life campaigning for communism like :parenti: before we'll accept criticism of the USSR in good faith, so we definitely need those voices. He does force issues in that chapter that a lot of comrades like to shrug off, but serious leftists need to take seriously - especially the part about cautioning against idealized notions of human nature around page 65.

    • bubbalu [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      If you are interested in further principled criticism of the USSR, Stand for Socialism Against Modern Revisionism provides the clearest explanation I have found for how the USSR went from Stalin to Gorb. Central to the analysis is the idea that the party beaurocracy lost its connection to the people and became a separate class with a fundamentally petty-bourgeoise conciousness.

      FWIW the author is obviously extremely dogmatic but the framing has been a helpful tool for developing my own understanding!