4 ms·

This is the "but it was never implemented correctly" argument. To the rest of the world, I assure you that Soviet-style communism definitely qualifies as social

• mpyne 12y ago
  I think the "but it was never implemented correctly" socialists always seem to forget the strength of a state required to simply "implement" socialism, and then enforce it. Failing said state, it would require a very sizeable majority of the whole mass of people to simply switch over all at once, and again, somehow defend that new order from warlords and parasites.
• jahaja 12y ago
  That isn't even a reply is it? I could definitely build a solid case with a lot of historical references to support such an argument. However I'm very doubtful that you could build a solid case that Stalinism is in fact built on the foundations/ideas of Socialism. Just as it's pretty easy to build case that North Korea is not very aligned with democratic principles. This article is from 1940 and is skeptical of Stalinism. There's alot of more, and earlier, examples of such criticism as well. But the propaganda that Stalinism is actually what socialism stands for was in the interest of both sides of the cold war, and we live with this "repeat-until-its-true" legacy today.