2 ms·
He's probably referring to the fact that we're still dealing with the effects of communism brought by Vladimir Lenin.
by ciupicri 2y ago
He's probably referring to the fact that we're still dealing with the effects of communism brought by Vladimir Lenin.
- n4r9 2y agoIt's not clear whether "we" means Russia or the rest of the world. But even so, would Russia be better off if the revolution hadn't happened?
- cryptonector 2y agoClearly u/usrnm meant the world, not Russia, and not the rest of the world, but all of us.
- piombisallow 2y agoYeah
- benterix 2y agoAs all hypothetical questions about the past, it's hard to say. From the PoV of a common citizen, people were as poor before the revolution as after it. Also, the rise of Stalin and WWII add enormous noise to the equation. In any case, the best we can do is to have a look at the countries that adopted Communism (the Eastern bloc) and compare them with their neighbors that didn't (have to). From that perspective, the answer is clear. OTOH, if instead of Stalin Russia had a wise ruler, if instead of a police state it allowed people to explore various ideas and develop them, I bet we could see some very interesting results.
- n4r9 2y agoThanks for the considered response. I guess it was a provocative question. Regarding this: "the best we can do is to have a look at the countries that adopted Communism (the Eastern bloc) and compare them with their neighbors that didn't (have to)" This does feel like an informative perspective. I suppose it assumes that Eastern bloc countries would be left to their own devices in the absence of the Lenin/Stalin USSR, which may be fairly safe to assume.