• HelixDab2
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    166
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is fundamentally false.

    While it is true that there was inexpensive housing available in the USSR, and that rents were quite reasonable compared to anything that currently exists in the US, and people couldn’t readily be evicted if they lacked the ability to pay, it’s a flat-out lie to say that that was the “solution” to homelessness, or that it eliminated the problem. Rather, the USSR criminalized being homeless and not being engaged in socially-productive labor; people that were homeless ended up in prisons and were labelled as parasites. The problem that we have now is that the official records simply didn’t record the problem, in much the same way that Stalin had histories and photos revised to eliminate people that had become enemies of the state.

    • SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      110
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      8 months ago

      Not a tankie, but the USSR had mostly solved this problem, despite all its other issues. There did exist some homelessness, but nowhere near the extent of current USA.

      • pelya@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        62
        arrow-down
        43
        ·
        8 months ago

        Sure, you could get a piece of land in Siberian tundra at any time, I would not call that housing.

        Moving to a city was way more complicated than in capitalist US. You could not simply buy an apartment. You had to be allocated an apartment by the government. And you needed connections for that. Or bribes. Ideally both. If you think your local rabid Republicans do not care for little wage slave men, you never experienced USSR, it was like that but 100x worse.

          • pelya@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yup. And networking would inevitably involve vodka. All major decisions would eventually involve vodka in USSR.

            • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              8 months ago

              One of Stalin’s failures almost any tankie won’t deny.

              • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                Vodka had been linked to the Russian economy under multiple Czars. I’m not sure that Stalin could have separated the two even if he had wanted to. Admittedly it doesn’t appear that he wanted to.

                I’m pretty sure that the USSR was screwed the moment that Lenin returned from exile in Germany, or when Wilson was elected. Take your pick.

                The Menchaviks would have been a better government.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  The mechaviks literally wanted to continue ww1 and have a psuedo democracy where the bourgeoisie were literally guaranteed a majority of seats, wtf are you talking about?

                • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I just find it ironic that Stalin was everything that the party worried about Trotsky becoming.

      • Mercival
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Well, I’m from a post-USSR country and a substantial part of this was the criminalization of homelessness. Can’t have homeless people, if you lock them up (be it in a prison or asylum).

        Then again, just about anyone, who did not conform to the party’s message got locked up. Getting your place bugged at the slightest hint you might be up to something disagreeable and all that good stuff. The secret police could disappear and or beat you up without any real justification.

        I hate late-stage capitalism as much as you, but coming from a country that’s been through this, I am extremely reluctant to give the rotten and frankly repugnant USSR regime any credit.

          • TheSanSabaSongbird@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s the final refuge for tankies. That and the old “social democracy only works by exploiting the global south” canard.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              8 months ago

              “social democracy only works by exploiting the global south” canard.

              Yeah, I could see finding this unconvincing if you haven’t read theory, history, or were just cool with benefiting from imperialism

      • Praise Idleness@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        I mean even in the case of USSR they had to wait for more than a decade to actually get a livable apartment, not to mention severe lack of infrastructure…

        But of course, better than people just kicked out to the streets. But then again, less is not none. The housing situation definitely didn’t do USSR’s overall economic status any favor.

        People at least had somewhere to go

        that’s just moving the goal post, isn’t it?

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Soviet Union? It was uncommon for a family of 6 to live in a small apartment. You can even see it in old soviet movies where apartments would be separated by curtains (common comedy trope).

        • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          8 months ago

          In Communist countries people starve to death because of famine, in Capitalist countries people also strave to death because of famine while still starving to death after famines are over because they cant afford groceries.

        • probablyaCat@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          8 months ago

          Woohoo both systems suck. You can actually believe that just because one system is bad, what is considered the opposite is also bad. Marx was not some omniscient doctor manhattan. He had some ideas. Some were good critiques on capitalist culture. Others were fantasy that do not function in the real world.

          • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            24
            ·
            8 months ago

            Notice how the folks arguing in favor of Communism have sources and receipts, while the folks arguing against it have done nothing but regurgitated Capitalist propaganda. Also note folks who are opposed to Communism and Marx’s philosophy are always forced to admit that it only works on paper, because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

            • Praise Idleness@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              8 months ago

              No one is going to deny that making perpetual motion device is good. How are you going to do that?

              Do you have source and receipts for real life communism solving housing problem? Not being better than capitalism. Solving. Being better than capitalism is kinda low bar you know. There are plenty of other things that real life capitalism does better than real life communism, hence communism failure. No one is going to show up with receipts and sources because obvious.

              You show us tents as a capitalist solution. That’s not a capitalist solution. That’s the problem itself. You’re misleading.

              because his logic is irrefutable if you address it with a modicum of intellectual honesty…

              Can you at least try to sound less douche about things?

              • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                12
                ·
                8 months ago

                The joke is that Capitalism DOES NOT have a solution to homelessness because there is zero profit motive to solve it. And facts dont care about your feelngs, you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest. Capitalist Economists study Das Kapital because Marx was so fucking spot on.

                • Praise Idleness@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Yes, that’s why there is no pure capitalist country anywhere.

                  you cant refute Marx’s philosophy while being intellectual honest.

                  Why are you keep doing this? I said I don’t disagree with Marx. It’d be nice if communism can happen. Facts don’t care about your feelings either and all the shitty attemps of communism failed due to human being shitty. If you have to kill off people to keep the ideology, only to fail after about few decades, it has some reality problems.

                  And again, I cannot stress this enough, can you please stop sounding like a 16 year old kid who just read few paragraphs of Marx going iamverysmart about it?

                • WhiteHawk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  No need to refute Marx, reality has already proven time and time again that communism doesn’t work in practice.

                  Btw your argument only applies to “pure” capitalism, without any government interference. Homelessness is not really an issue in many European countries.

    • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah that’s called late stage Communism, which we have never achieved as humanity. Late stage Capitalism is currently pushing more and more folks into dangerous housing situations like the bottom right quadrant of this meme. Capitalism and Utopia are oxymorons while Communism and Utopia are synonymous.

        • Grayox@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Call me old fashion but no one living on the streets and having their basic needs met sounds pretty utopian to me.

          • MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            They don’t call you old fashioned for that, they call you tankie. It’s because they’re mad that you don’t buy the bullshit they push. Look at all the claims they make about the USSR here while providing no evidence or context for the situations they claim people were living in.

            They compare apples to oranges when it’s communism they are criticizing and stick their fingers in their ears while screaming when it comes to criticizing crapitalism.

          • xerazal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            There were still people that lived in the streets in the USSR. Also, the housing the USSR provided wasn’t really that… great… I watch a Russian YouTuber (NFKRZ) who has talked about Soviet architecture in not just Russia, but other former USSR countries and shows that yes it’s good they were built, they weren’t very well built.

            The USSR had many problems, and bureaucracy was a big problem. I never understood why tankies love the USSR so much when the USSR didn’t truly get rid of class. Those in the government lived like kings compared to the common man, who yes lived better than they had before but still not that well due to the bloated and mismanagement of the government.

            Idk, the fact that they even had a centralized government like that seems like… the opposite of communism to me.

            • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              I think what people don’t fully understand is that Marxism is meant to be scientific. That means that there will likely be many imperfect and failed attempts at building a socialist society before one comes along that is stable enough to outlast outside interference from capitalist states.

              As such, most people I know who like the USSR are also it’s biggest critiques. Unfortunately, there is so much misinformation about the USSR that most discussions about it online are just about delineating truth from propaganda.

          • GrapesOfAss@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Ah yes because there was no one living on the streets, yes because a propaganda told me that it must be true.

            I guess killing literal millions of your own citizens is better than being homeless, huh?

      • probablyaCat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah those soviets sure got rid of the homeless problem. Can’t be homeless when you were intentionally starved to death.

  • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    150
    arrow-down
    51
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Why is this shit always communist vs capitalist, like we’ve only got 2 answers avaliable. You fuckers never set foot in a communist country and worship this shit

    Fucking communist countries have killed how many millions of their own citizens? Don’t really think showing a picture of some buildings is enough to prove that they actually solved any issues. They may have solved those issues for some who were lucky enough to get an apartment, but don’t be a hexbear and pretend they housed everyone.

    And no, I don’t want a response with a link about hurr duer capitalism bad, yeah I know, but I live in capitalism so I already know that.

    • 小莱卡@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      This is not “one or the another” situation, communism is the next qualitative stage in development of society. It solves the primary contradiction that we experience in capitalism, that is socialized production being privatized by individuals, aka capitalists.

      You can’t just declare communism by signing a document, because it is a process of development in which small quantitative changes in production (socialism) lead to a qualitative change (communism), thus to achieve the communism stage you have to achieve a certain level of development.

      This is why China is considered a communist country by marxists-leninist even though qualitatively it is a capitalist country. They are actively working to develop communism, this can be clearly seen throughout their rhetoric (i.e. “The Governance of China”) and their material results.