Web Hosting Talk : Other Forums : Web Hosting Lounge : Russia's Putin: Soviet Collapse a Tragedy

[Torith]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...u/russia_putin

[Lev]

It was a tragedy... Soviet Union, before late 1990s, was a lot stronger than Russia is right now.

[Disgruntled]

Who'd have thought we'd miss the "good old days" of the Soviet Union? But it probably would have been better if the U.S.S.R. could have reformed a bunch of behaviors, policies, and positions without breaking into the current mess.

[SniperDevil]

Putin doesn't seem to be very good news for Russia, either. Why does it seem like Russia is always naturally trending towards socialism/Marxism?

The thing is, Stalin's socialist government wasn't even socialist. It was more dictatorial than anything. I don't think socialism is even possible, because those who claim to support a classless society tend to lead the socialist party -- which is a contradiction unto itself -- and therefore, when the candidate is elected to power, he and his party run the government and the country. Socialism is a contradiction of fundamental human nature, and I don't understand how some embrace it. If you support and want to lead a socialist government, how would it then be socialist?

[adorno]

Originally posted by Lev
It was a tragedy... Soviet Union, before late 1990s, was a lot stronger than Russia is right now.

How was it stronger?

Militarily? Maybe. But it was a bankrupt state using whatever productivity exsted from its people to sustain the military.

Enonomically? Nobody in their right minds would think so.

Socially? When you have a dictatorship, social reforms are not possible and the only social structure possible is that which is dictated to you.

The USSR was strong only because of its size. Otherwise, it was a miserable failure.

Russia is not stronger now only because the old guard (Putin, etc) insists on taking the country back to the 'good old glory days' which were not glorious at all.

[varg]

Originally posted by SniperDevil
Putin doesn't seem to be very good news for Russia, either. Why does it seem like Russia is always naturally trending towards socialism/Marxism?

The thing is, Stalin's socialist government wasn't even socialist. It was more dictatorial than anything. I don't think socialism is even possible, because those who claim to support a classless society tend to lead the socialist party -- which is a contradiction unto itself -- and therefore, when the candidate is elected to power, he and his party run the government and the country. Socialism is a contradiction of fundamental human nature, and I don't understand how some embrace it. If you support and want to lead a socialist government, how would it then be socialist?

Hmm, because Putin's a member of Russia's Communist Party and former KGB spy?

[GoTek-JP]

Excuse my stupid question, is it possible to have democracy in a communist system ? Why does it always have to be a dictatorship?

[Emil]

Yeah, real communism (if there is such a thing), is completely democratic, and is without a government (that is the people administer themselves, think of the ¨government¨ for the people, as the W3C is for the Internet).

There would also be an absence of wages, and thus money, to eliminate the exploitation that money brings.

Of course, theres various schools of ¨communists¨, some who think wages should still be paid, along with keeping an economic system, while others called ¨truists¨ who believe that market economics are inherently flawed, and serve as nothing more than exploitation and a constant drive towards growth that negatively impacts the environment/people. The main idea is that competition between human beings, and their desires is what drives the pace of innovation and not the profit incentive.

[Emil]

Maybe you could actually read the explanation provided by the Wiki, and then respond In case you do not know, there is not a lot of differencese between ¨Anarchists¨ and Communists, off hand the only difference I know of is the need for a socialist state to exist as a buffer for communism to take place. The rest is based on equality, and free individuals.

A lot of newer, communist-based movements, however, have drawn away from the need for a socialist state..Why? A bad track record. Please remember, that communism serves as a platform that is used and adapted by people (aka Leninism) so a lot of ideas will overlap.