>>725477407
>Then explain why every ex commie country dumped communist exact moment soviet guns weren't pointed at them?
Nah, because thats not the point that was debated at all. Capitalists where feaced with the constant thread of their wagecattle turning communist if they didn't recieve enough tangible benefits from participating in capitalism simply due to aompetition existing, whether thats actually benficial or not not is entirely irrelevant.
>it's like dousing yourself in gasoline and setting yourself on fire because you were cold.
Not if you creta a system thats so hopeless for the average person that being on fire becomes the preferrable option.
>but communism isn't the answer and life under communism is always worse
I know americans are deeply immersed in propaganda from birth. SOme american once told me taht at school, they were made to repeat the phrase "the worst day in america is still better than the best day anywhere else in the world" every single day for multiple tiumes for example. So any debate is fairly pointless.
>>725477662
Yes, and. Another chapter in the eternal feud between Moscow and the Cossacks, has been a thing before the word "communism" even existed. The UdssR was basically a somwehat modified continuation of the Tsardom anyways, I have no idea why propagandized tards always bleat about muh gommunism. Communism is an unrealistic Utopia, so the lfties are insofar correct that the Soviet Union didn't have much to do with it besides the Iconography and propaganda phrasing.
>>725477453
>the false dichotomy you're presenting
My entire fucking poitn was that Communism exitsing AS THEORETICAL COMPETITION stopped capitalists from going full Laissez-Faire and implement checks and balances to make sure the average worker recieves benefits from participating.
