Okay mister Bolshevik. What you write is contrary to everything that I’ve read about soviet governance, but I guess I’ll just have to take your word for it.

The collective west is currently taking part in an active genocide, out in the open for all to see. But gommunism bad holodomor vuvuzela no iPhone. We can’t upset the genocidal ruling class now, can we?

So democracy to you is when a state does SocDem welfare policies?

A state only does welfare policies when it is compelled to by democratic forces. After WW2, western masses were both militarised, and the threat of the USSR loomed large. This new power balance favoring the labor movement was the only reason they won their welfare states. As soon as the power balance shifted, western governments started dismantling the welfare states. In other words, welfare policies, and the distribution of income are an effective gauge of the level of democratic power in a country.

The USSR, unlike the SocDems went well beyond mere welfare. Rents were capped to 5% of your income, and most people didn’t even pay that, as home ownership rates were well over 90%. Food was subsidized to such a degree that in many socialist countries, it severely distorted the economy (and was likely a contributing factor to their downfalls ironically). Transportation and many forms of entertainment were virtually free (soviet citizens had access to community spas, theaters, an opera house in basically every city, iirc). Income differentials in the socialist states were orders of magnitudes lower than in SocDem states.

Now obviously, these policies aren’t “proof” of democracy, but are certainly a strong indicator. And my statements were never meant to prove anything really, as it was a joke.

But that tie-in would clearly be hard to accept if you wanted to argue for USSR being democratic, as it was far from a stateless classless moneyless society.

Ah, the timeless technique of using a different definition of a word that a community clearly does not use, purely to generate confusion.

unless you tie the idea of democracy to the liberal-fascist “will of the people” concept. But that would imply very bad things about your views, friend.

I don’t remember making any references to “the will of the people”, but even if I did, thinking that would make me a “liberal-fascist” (what I think you are implying) because of that borders on asinine.

if you wanted to argue for USSR being democratic, as it was far from a stateless classless moneyless society.

When you don’t know the difference between communism and socialism