Ultimately that's the rub, a lot of harsh things happened in that time, and there were other paths that could have less troublingly been followed to build socialism, but those always run up against this: could that version have survived the nazis/ whatever lapdog of imperialism was unleashed upon them. And looking at how bad things went the first years of the war, and then the complete reversal, a successful alternative is hard to imagine. Stalin certainly made mistakes here too but hindsight is 20/20. If the revolution in Germany had succeeded or at least an opposition to fascism there had been more effective, or really any number of changes that would result in the USSR's neighbors being less hostile, maybe we could talk. But that was the terrain to be navigated, and it does seem to come down to supporting what was done, perhaps with critiques but still with understanding, or saying you're fine with genocide and a far worse Holocaust.
The process of industrialization has been brutal in every instance. There is no counterexample in history. The Industrial Revolution in England, and particularly in the United States was marked with incredible exploitation and violence, up to and including open warfare between organized labor and the Capitalist state. Industrialization in the USSR and China also brought about incredible hardship. The hardships of Communist industrialization are wielded for propagandistic reasons, while the hardships of Capitalist industrialization lie comfortably outside of living memory. Unless we want to be vulgar luddites about it, a more important question is, what did people get in return? What purpose did this hardship serve?
Perhaps the USSR and China could have industrialized more gently, more humanely, or forgone it completely and driven towards some sort of agrarian Communism. But is that even a realistic possibility? When you have imperialism spreading like a cancer to commoditize every nook an cranny of the globe, when you have industrial and military superpowers doing everything in their power to pull the rug out from under you?
Ideally, Communism would look like what the Hippies were trying to do. Just run some communal farms, vibe, and enjoy life. But what do you do when these fucking guys with nukes, tanks, and aircraft carriers say no? Shit gets a lot more complicated.
Perhaps the USSR and China could have industrialized more gently, more humanely, or forgone it completely and driven towards some sort of agrarian Communism. But is that even a realistic possibility? When you have imperialism spreading like a cancer to commoditize every nook an cranny of the globe, when you have industrial and military superpowers doing everything in their power to pull the rug out from under you?
Had the USSR and China tried a slower, gentler, path to infustrialization the best case outcome would be ending up like big versions of Cuba and the DPRK - desperately trying to eke out what little quality of life is possible while trying to protect oneself from captialist siege while being unable to fight back on anything approaching equal terms.
This is why I don't really get the fascination of Revolutionary Ukraine. They 100% would've been rolled by the Nazis in WWII, or even worse, actively collaborated with the Nazis in order to not get rolled. How is a peasant army and society supposed to stand against a mechanized military?
Even the Bolsheviks experimented with measures like abolishing military rank and troops voting on orders. That was quickly dealt away with when idealism came up against the realities of battle. While you're being shot at, you don't have the luxury of voting on orders.
Ultimately that's the rub, a lot of harsh things happened in that time, and there were other paths that could have less troublingly been followed to build socialism, but those always run up against this: could that version have survived the nazis/ whatever lapdog of imperialism was unleashed upon them. And looking at how bad things went the first years of the war, and then the complete reversal, a successful alternative is hard to imagine. Stalin certainly made mistakes here too but hindsight is 20/20. If the revolution in Germany had succeeded or at least an opposition to fascism there had been more effective, or really any number of changes that would result in the USSR's neighbors being less hostile, maybe we could talk. But that was the terrain to be navigated, and it does seem to come down to supporting what was done, perhaps with critiques but still with understanding, or saying you're fine with genocide and a far worse Holocaust.
The process of industrialization has been brutal in every instance. There is no counterexample in history. The Industrial Revolution in England, and particularly in the United States was marked with incredible exploitation and violence, up to and including open warfare between organized labor and the Capitalist state. Industrialization in the USSR and China also brought about incredible hardship. The hardships of Communist industrialization are wielded for propagandistic reasons, while the hardships of Capitalist industrialization lie comfortably outside of living memory. Unless we want to be vulgar luddites about it, a more important question is, what did people get in return? What purpose did this hardship serve?
Perhaps the USSR and China could have industrialized more gently, more humanely, or forgone it completely and driven towards some sort of agrarian Communism. But is that even a realistic possibility? When you have imperialism spreading like a cancer to commoditize every nook an cranny of the globe, when you have industrial and military superpowers doing everything in their power to pull the rug out from under you?
Ideally, Communism would look like what the Hippies were trying to do. Just run some communal farms, vibe, and enjoy life. But what do you do when these fucking guys with nukes, tanks, and aircraft carriers say no? Shit gets a lot more complicated.
Had the USSR and China tried a slower, gentler, path to infustrialization the best case outcome would be ending up like big versions of Cuba and the DPRK - desperately trying to eke out what little quality of life is possible while trying to protect oneself from captialist siege while being unable to fight back on anything approaching equal terms.
Eternal quote https://twitter.com/stressbuilds/status/1446267873551388676?s=46&t=_sIaewHOjsWJhIx4s477QA
This is why I don't really get the fascination of Revolutionary Ukraine. They 100% would've been rolled by the Nazis in WWII, or even worse, actively collaborated with the Nazis in order to not get rolled. How is a peasant army and society supposed to stand against a mechanized military?
I think a lot of people figure that gumption and morals win wars, instead of things like money and resources.
Even the Bolsheviks experimented with measures like abolishing military rank and troops voting on orders. That was quickly dealt away with when idealism came up against the realities of battle. While you're being shot at, you don't have the luxury of voting on orders.
:xi-vote: me voting to flank left while an artillery shell rips my battle buddy into 8 pieces