• manicdave
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    6 months ago

    I hate that “soviet MLs” is used as a label here, because the failure of the USSR is down to the undermining of the soviets.

    The economy being centralised and then destroyed is why post-USSR states are disfunctional, and it’s the same vulnerability the EU faces.

    Were the economies actually managed democratically, they might have been able to weather the storm instead of getting fucked over by the world bank and IMF.

    Instead of cooperating to sort out their affairs post-empire, countries are expected to play monopoly and somehow magically not have the same end game as monopoly.

    • PugJesus@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I hate that “soviet MLs” is used as a label here, because the failure of the USSR is down to the undermining of the soviets.

      I mean, yes, but when most people use ‘Soviet’, especially in context of Russia and its history, they mean ‘The Soviet Union’, not the people’s soviets it got its name from and then subsequently neutered. It’s an unfair quirk of etymology or language development or whatever, but ‘Soviet’ as in ‘Of the Soviet Union’ is in far wider use than ‘soviet’ as in ‘of workers’ councils’.