I believe in socialism, but I feel Stalin shouldn’t be idolised due to things like the Gulag.

I would like more people to become socialist, but I feel not condemning Stalin doesn’t help the cause.

I’ve tried to have a constructieve conversation about this, but I basically get angry comments calling me stupid for believing he did atrocious things.

That’s not how you win someone over.

I struggle to believe the Gulag etc. Never happened, and if it happened I firmly believe Stalin should be condemned.

  • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    1 month ago

    Wasn’t Stalin a communist dictator? We aren’t looking for communism or a dictatorship. Claiming otherwise is just misleading.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Stalin was a Communist leader of the USSR. He was not a dictator according to the CIA. Moreover, the idea that Socialists do not seek Communism is a bit strange, the two most major camps of Socialism are Marxism and Anarchism, neither of which has “Socialism” as an end goal. Anarchists seek direct implementations of full horizontalism and decentralization out of the shell of the old, so to speak, while Marxists seek full public ownership and central planning, ie they wish to implement Communism.

      The idea of a stagnant, static, never-changing system is foreign to the overwhelming majority of Socialist ideologies, ergo it must continue to advance. This advancement in my opinion is of course going to be Communism.

      Finally, the hammer and sickle is the symbol of Marxism-Leninism and the Soviet Union, which is used as the symbol for this community. You yourself do not need to support them, but using the term we in doing so is silly.

      • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Right, communism and socialism aren’t the same thing though, why are you conflating them? Regardless of sillyness.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Socialism, in my opinion, inevitably leads towards Communism if maintained. What matters is which has supremacy, Capital, or Humanity. I am not conflating them, but pointing out that Socialism, in the eyes of Marxists, is simply pre-Communism.

          • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            That makes sense! Thank you! I suppose communism can be seen as extreme socialism, in a way.

            (I had to block some trolls before I found your comment, sorry for the slow response.)

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 month ago

              Sort of. Socialism is simply when public ownership becomes the dominant and driving factor of an economy, typically marked by human supremacy over Capital, rather than the reverse. Since markets naturally centralize, they develop unique forms of planning suitable for their industries and sectors, paving the way for public aquisition and planning. Socialism trends towards full socialization, at which point classes cease to exist and as such class oppression ceases to exist, and “money” becomes superfluous, as there is no trade between institutions.

              • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 month ago

                I think any extreme is probably a bad situation. Thank you for clarifying! I’ve got some thinking to do now.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Why is an extreme a bad situation? What if said extreme was an eradication of poverty? Eradication of racism? Extremes are not inherently superior to moderatiom, nor is the reverse true.

                  If you want a reading list, I have one linked on my profile.

                  • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    An extreme version of capitalism would leave the weak and poor to die. And I’m pretty sure that in any financial/political situation you need some sort of constantly adjusted approach. Any extreme would fail to address the nuances (and humanity) of people, we’re not humans after all.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 month ago

      That is cold war / anti-communist propaganda, which capitalists and the media that they own will never stop propagating, because capitalists are definitionally anti-communist.

      Declassified CIA report:

      Even in Stalin’s time there was collective leadership. The western idea of a dictator within the communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain.

      Second Thought: We Need To Talk About “Authoritarianism”

      • Boomkop3@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        (Sorry for the stupid question, I only know what I’ve been taught in school.)

        If it wasn’t authoritarian or a dictatorship, why’d they build those absolutely giant statues? Just a democratic flex?

            • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 month ago

              under Stalin’s rule

              You are still speaking from the cold war framing of Stalin being a dictator and not an elected official who tried to step down multiple times.

              Joseph Stalin was elected as the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU in April 1922 during the 11th Congress of the Party. Between then and until his death, he asked to be relieved of his duties as General Secretary a total of four times — all of which were rejected.