- cross-posted to:
- chat
You must log in or register to comment.
It would make OP actually read theory for once to support his arguments.
"I don't care how smart you think you are, I'm not going to fuck you old man."
"Professor Dude,
But have you considered this?
Regards,
WhyEssEff"
Yugoslavia. Cuba. Vietnam.
Don't let him pin you on command economies either. Marx, Trotsky (I know but it's pre 1925) and others all support limited markets, shadow pricing, or similar in an egalitarian framwork as an option during the transition to higher stage socialism.
Point out that there is in fact no such thing as a Communist country (and indeed there cannot be such a thing), only Socialist countries ruled by a Communist party.
Write about how the Allende government improved literacy, infrastructure and productivity, and then how the CIA couped the shit out of Chile and installed a brutal dictator that did lots of murders.
Cuba is such an easy answer to this.
Compare whichever quality of life metric you want against everyone else in the Caribbean and they'll be in the top 10% despite a decades-long embargo from the world's largest economy.
tell him that he's a liar and a nazi and that you don't associate with Nazis, but rather, you give them the opportunity to stare at the wall or wear a sack on their heads
he is an economics prof after all, so you really can’t say much and have it stick.
dude has stewed in the Kool Aid of “neoclassical econ” prion disease for decades. So you definitely have a low probability of actually getting through to him either of these ways, because he is baiting you after all. If this is a personal message and not on publicly viewable social media, I would say disengage, but if you value his opinion or are feeling edgy…
you can go one of two routes imo
https://youtu.be/CMDj19DQncY https://youtu.be/ObD9OGsh498 Grover Furr says that according to his research, Stalin never committed any crimes, and he goes through most of them with aplomb and zeal. Furr is based, but not really “accepted” among the liberal elite nor taken seriously by most other historians in academia. You can use Furr’s evidence without naming him, and you can see what makes Furr a practically lone voice in a sea of easily swallowed anti-communist propaganda
https://youtu.be/cGNjniz5zzU?t=2478 or you can go the RD Wolff “classical Marxian” route of co-ops and “economic democracy”, then say what you want to about “state capitalism” and the transition period without ever using the phrase “not real communism”… just watched that video last night btw. Wolff is a boss, but also off in his own corner of the sandbox for the most part.
I think you can even use arguments from both, but try not to let this dolt’s BS about “100 million dead” dissuade you. If he is making those claims, he has to prove them lol. So, this “economics professor” idiot should be able to demonstrate his knowledge to you, rather than the other way around. gl hf
This is always such a stupid argument. China (criticize if you want, hell it might even be revisionist, it's still socialist) took 50 years to nearly catch up to the US which had 500 years of brutal exploitation behind it. China has even surpassed the UK, which undoubtedly killed more people than either the US or China. Similarly the Soviet Union was able to go from a failing backwater to the second strongest state in the world in 30 years. Cuba and Vietnam are both doing excellent for their size and regions and if you compared their economic growths to countries that remained "capitalist" or rather victims of imperialism, it is obvious which model is superior.
if you compared their economic growths to countries that remained “capitalist” or rather victims of imperialism, it is obvious which model is superior.
The exceptions being the regions the USA needed to build up as bulwarks against communism: South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, West Germany, etc.
Just ask him which one got to experiment and try out their principals without harassment and coup attempts by capitalist nations
Read The People's Republic of Walmart and learn you some economics and incredibly basic history of the Soviet Union. TLDR markets only make things that are profitable, but planned economies can make things that fulfill other objectives, like say not obliterating the biosphere or ensuring everyone gets a house. The Soviets didn't have the computing power to plan an economy but we do, and the examples are the logistical miracles of Walmart and Amazon and their algorithmic economic planning to deliver dildos most efficiently around the world.
I thought we were pro-deliver-dildos-most-efficiently-around-the-world (for free)?
My ass would have just lied. Your professor is just bullshitting. Is she even in college? It was AP gov, right? I wouldn't want to justify myself to a singlular unreceptive person who will have to forget my name to make room for the 300 new students they get next year. I have always been keen to pick my battles. School, and this goes quintuple for high school, seems like the place where you regurgitate information in exchange for an accreditation. You can learn critical thinking and research skills, sure, but they seem incidental to the process. A punk rock leftist gets the same diploma as a straight-laced, quiet immigrant.
I would have just dismissed the issue as my friend playing up my support for single payer healthcare, kept my nose down, and avoided direct eye contact for the semester. I'm not Mr. Congeniality, I wouldn't be here posting if I was. So take it with a grain of salt.
