this post was submitted on 04 Jan 2024
112 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15910 readers
301 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CrimsonSage@hexbear.net 55 points 10 months ago (5 children)

The more I learn about khrushchev the more I wonder about the competency of stalin for not purging the doofus.

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 33 points 10 months ago (1 children)

More and more people are saying this.

[–] Salmarez@hexbear.net 25 points 10 months ago

Khrushchev: "What do you think was Stalin's biggest failure?" ‎

Hoxha(?): "Not getting rid of you!"

[–] Alaskaball@hexbear.net 30 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's called the great patriotic war. Over 27 million people were murdered. In the war to save the motherland, nobody was made an exception to not take to the battlefield, not even the Communist party.

Not even mentioning people can at different points of their life be positive figures for socialism and at other points detractors to socialism. We can point to W.E.B Du Bois whom spent the majority of his life as a FDR-esque progressive and imperialism appreciator waited until he was moments from his death bed for his material conditions to lead him into understanding Marxism-Leninism was the correct ideological path. The inverse of being a positive actor for socialism then the conditions that a person finds themselves in can change them into a bad actor, detractor, or worse against socialism.

[–] CrimsonSage@hexbear.net 19 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes, but have you considered "corn man bad"?

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 9 points 10 months ago
[–] DayOfDoom@hexbear.net 30 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He was literally the best communist leader of his era.

[–] Dolores@hexbear.net 19 points 10 months ago

khruschev used the purge to get into his position, exactly the problem with a mass hysteria not tempered with procedural obstacles. talented opportunists have a field day.

[–] WIIHAPPYFEW@hexbear.net 40 points 10 months ago

WE COULD’VE HAD IT ALL rage-cry

[–] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 39 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I can get it

If you grew up dealing without computers, they would just seem like garbage cans with sparks coming out of them

[–] footfaults@hexbear.net 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

IBM was working with the Nazis and using computers to tabulate their genocide so it's reasonable to not be terribly interested

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 35 points 10 months ago

Eh. Stealing shit that works from your enemies is good and you should do it. Unlike most Nazi crap technology the IBM machines actually worked afaik.

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 6 points 10 months ago

I highly doubt Khrushchev was thinking about IBM’s role in the holocaust during his visit. I mean, he was in the US, the country that invaded the USSR and wanted Germany to wipe it off the map.

[–] TankieTanuki@hexbear.net 11 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

The sparks keep them warm :(

[–] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 6 points 10 months ago

data-laughing

Glad someone caught that reference

[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 3 points 10 months ago

Best me to it, had to scroll a bit to see

[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 4 points 10 months ago

The sparks keep them warm

[–] TankieTanuki@hexbear.net 38 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Was Khrushchev a gourmand?

[–] CrushKillDestroySwag@hexbear.net 38 points 10 months ago

I'm not saying he was right, but maybe Trotsky had a point that's all I'm saying.

[–] blobjim@hexbear.net 38 points 10 months ago

communism is when no mainframe

[–] frogloom@hexbear.net 36 points 10 months ago
[–] Frank@hexbear.net 35 points 10 months ago
[–] axont@hexbear.net 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The USSR did kind of lag behind in terms of computing. They had an internal network set up in 1982 called Akademset. It even connected to ARPANET. But it was mainly for academics to share papers. There was a Fidonet connection too. I guess geography was a problem because I'm reading that networking in the USSR was predominantly done over satellite rather than piggybacking on phone lines.

Like it would have been cool seeing Soviet people on Usenet.

[–] novibe@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In 82 I don’t think there was any computer network in the US or Europe that wasn’t an academic network to share papers…

[–] axont@hexbear.net 1 points 10 months ago

Well I was thinking that other places had Usenet, which had slightly more widespread use. My grandparents had some kind of Usenet connection in 85 they used to send emails to their pharmacist, for instance.

[–] SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 26 points 10 months ago

Chairman Treat Boy

[–] CoolerOpposide@hexbear.net 24 points 10 months ago

Most intelligent revisionist

[–] Kaplya@hexbear.net 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Khrushchev’s biggest problem wasn’t about computers, man.

Khrushchev’s biggest problem was re-introducing liberal ideology into the Soviet Union, even though in the form of “we’re actually competing with them”, which led to all kinds of faulty understanding of economics/the world that could have been avoided with the Marxist-Leninist path that Stalin was already set on.

I’ve always said that the fall of the Soviet Union wasn’t a failure of socialism, but a failure of liberalism. It was the lack of self-confidence of the socialist leaders in their own system and started to re-introduce liberalism back into the socialist state, thinking it could solve the internal problems they faced, that killed the Soviet Union.

[–] ppb@hexbear.net 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I wish self-service cafeterias were more of a thing

[–] nothx@hexbear.net 9 points 10 months ago

Yeah, but not buffets, buffets skeeve me out so much.

[–] odmroz@hexbear.net 9 points 10 months ago

Dudes rock.

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 9 points 10 months ago

I’m starting to think Stalin’s big spoon might’ve been a death blow the USSR because it made subsequent leaders hungry and sell out the country for literal treats

[–] Mardoniush@hexbear.net 5 points 10 months ago

In fairness, at the time the USSR was more or less at parity in computing and even ahead in areas, though miniturisation was lagging a bit.