That’s why I am asking what counts as “world-changing,” as most people would consider the first man in space to be world-changing.

Surviving in space and successfully returning from orbit is absolutely an incredible achievement that spurred on the space race.

Vostok 1 was the capsule that contained Yuri Gagarin, the first man in space. All of these were critical advancements in space flight and science. What is the criterion for “world changing” that doesn’t include the numerous critical advancements in space?

Sputnik, Vostok, the artificial heart, the math behind modern multi-stage rocketry, and space rovers were all invented by the Soviets.

I really don’t think you can respond to any of my comments. It’s abundantly clear that I do in fact rely on logic and reasoning, the assertion that I do not seems to more be an attempt to paint me in a certain way so as to legitimize your own lack of effort in countering strong, logically backed Marxist positions.

The CPC does not redact all mentions of what is known in China as the “June 4th incident.” It’s true that the total death count is disputed, but you’ll find that much of the dispute comes from western or western friendly organizations. We know the west already lies about their enemies, from Palestinians to the claims of Iraqi WMD. The total death count appears to be, from the most credible sources, in the hundreds, not thousands.

Amazing, no actual response possible so just a weak insult to dodge making one. Classic.

To be honest I don’t rely on Wikipedia much at all. However, when I am making a point and Wikipedia even agrees with me, it’s enormously effective because it means that even those normally biased against socialism agree with the claims I make. This isn’t a particularly difficult idea to grasp, if they are biased against something but don’t have the evidence to back up someone’s anti-socialist claims, it means that no credible evidence exists, period, for said anti-socialist claims.

I have no idea what your incoherent rant about Russia is meant to imply. It’s a homophobic, capitalist country governed by reactionary nationalists. Defending Russia’s stance against western imperialism is not the same as saying Russia is a socially progressive and good country to live in, this isn’t a difficult concept to grasp either. Russia is similar to Iran in that communists don’t support their domestic policy, while supporting largely their foreign policy.

I organize with a communist party where I live. I actively work to bring about socialism where I live. I’d love to move to China, except it’s enormously difficult and would uproot the lives of myself and my family. Why is this a difficult concept to grasp for you?

NATO countries aid and assist with genocide. The purpose of NATO is to defend the collective interests of the world’s imperialist countries from anti-colonial and socialist backlash

Russia’s territorial expansion was provoked by the endless encirclement and expansion of NATO, with the refusal of Russian admission to NATO to protect it. When imperialist countries encircle you and refuse to let you join so as to protect yourself, it’s only reasonable to expect that one day said encircled country will lash out. The entire war was preventable even up to 2022.

NATO is as defensive as the IDF is. It’s a gang of imperialist countries protecting each other from the imperial boomerang, and will constantly invent new enemies to justify its own existence.

The new Ayatollah was not picked based on inheriting the title, but through a council election. That’s like saying the presidency in the US was handed down from H.W. Bush to W. Bush. I’m not going to say that the democratic process in Iran is amazing or anything, but I’m also not going to waste time trying to argue against it while it is currently fighting for its life against a genocidal terrorist empire.

I will say, I am not a fan of the mod of Inventing Reality, Geneva is a doomed and essentially a liberal with better than average political instincts. This means Geneva is frequently wrong and often takes ultraleft positions, argues that Hexbear is “transzionist” and other such absurdities.

Yea I don’t see Lula losing. Geneva is a terminal doomer, unfortunately, despite usually being decent when it comes to which side to support.

It went quite a bit deeper than that, you were contesting the idea that Iran is the most democratic country in West Asia. This is pretty true, considering their neighbors are largely monarchies or the genocidal apartheid settler-colony. The idea that Iran is all sunshine and rainbows is wrong, but that wasn’t the point actually being made, which was that Iran isn’t literally Mordor while many of their regional enemies are far worse than they are.

I have never seen anyone say Russia is a good place to live in. Maybe you mean the USSR, that would make more sense, but certainly not the Russian Federation. As for the Uyghur people, the CPC is overwhelmingly popular, including in Xinjiang. Over 70% of people in people’s committees in Xinjiang come from ethnic minority groups as well.

Russia has a paltry amount of finance capital, it cannot be imperialist in the sense that Marxists analyze what the US Empire is doing with the global south. Aggressive? Sure, I can agree to that, but they aren’t the ones brutally exploiting the global south, because they can’t. The US can and does, and this is why its financial domination of the world is so important to oppose.

Communism isn’t a “fairy tale,” nor would any reason why the free market is a fairy tale be applicable to communism. I think this sounded good in your head, but reading it makes it incredibly obvious that you said nothing of note here. It’s just a slogan.

Alright, I’d love to give a definition of imperialism for you! Genuinely, this is actually the first major productive point you have raised.

In short, imperialism has the following characteristics:

-The monopolies generate the enormous finance capital.

-The banks are the vehicle through which this finance capital is organized and exported.

-The international monopolist associations are the cartelized form of this exported finance capital dividing the world.

-The territorial division is the political-military guarantee for the safe operation of this exported finance capital.

Russia has an absolutely paltry sum of finance capital, and the era of open neocolonial grabs in the global south is over. Russia has, at most, a national monopolist class, but cannot turn this into international monopoly. As a consequence, Russia cannot use super profits from the global south for a large welfare state like the west can and does.

As for NATO, it was formed against the USSR and the colonial liberation movements of the 20th century. The USSR just came out of an incredibly bloody war, and had no reason to attack. NATO was formed, therefore, to serve as a bulwark against anti-colonial revolution and socialism. This remains true today, where NATO is a gang of the imperialist powers protecting each other from the imperial boomerang.

I’m sure this comment is pretty typical, I’m able to elaborate my views coherently and back them up logically, as well as with evidence when needed, as is common among communists.

I asked you what you believe a leftist is, because in my view the left begins at anti-capitalism to begin with. Maintaining capitalism and imperialism is not a progressive stance, it is holding us back from future progress. Social Democrats in Europe maintain their cushy welfare states alongside immensely wealthy capitalists because they rely on exploiting the global south heavily. There is no way to have both a large welfare state and a dominant, healthy capitalist class without plundering it from somewhere, and that somwhere is the global south. Thus, considering European Social Democrats to be on the “left” is an absurdity to me.

I never lied a single time, you made the claims and failed to support them. This crashout on your part isn’t an actual point.

Why is the idea that communism is good not a leftist talking point? What do you think a leftist is?

1. Nobody says Russia is a good place to live in, nor does anyone believe it to still be socialist. China is a socialist country and is good to live in, yes.

2. NATO did provoke the Russo-Ukrainian war, through backing the 2014 Euromaidan coup and using Ukraine the way they use Israel, as an attack dog. Not all Ukrainians are Nazis, but Nazi batallions like Azov have outsized influence, and train far-right death squads sent to Latin American and African countries to destabilize them, similar to how Israel trains Statesian police.

3. Capitalism is bad and communism is good, I agree with this.

4. Statesian imperialism is identified by the hegemonic role that US finance capital plays in the world economy, through institutions like the IMF, and is maintained through NATO and the overwhelming overseas military presence of the US.

5. Yes, NATO is bad. It’s a coalition of imperialist countries designed to protect against blowback from the global south, and to depress revolutionary movements.

What you describe as “actual leftist talking points” are largely relegated to the realm of social welfare. Equal housing, rights, and universal healthcare are of course wonderful things that we all want to achieve. The problem is that we cannot achieve these things at a global scale with the present system of US imperial hegemony, by which the global south is super exploited for superprofits. Socialism remains necessary, and Nordic style welfare States retain imperialism in order to both have large welfare and a healthy and dominant capitalist class.

I personally think it’s a good thing to block that social fascist bar.

I think it’s a pretty common take that Trotsky’s idea of Permanent Revolution would have been suicidal for the fledgling socialist state, so yea, I think running the Soviet Union directly into a broader, protracted war and losing the entire Soviet Union would have been worse than Stalin.