i’m sure they will appreciate your BSD 2 Clause contributions at Microsoft HQ

explaining the difference between a Toyota and a Honda

Sitting around and waiting for a revolution from a small group of people with one idea of how to run things is a bad idea

This is just a strawman of vanguardism . The bolshevik revolution was only possible with the overwhelming support of the peasants and proletariat class. A revolution is literally not possible without huge numbers of soldiers turning on the government.

It’s proprietary so, no thanks.

systemd is an init system and just has not played the same role in the development of GNU/Linux distributions like GNU has. before systemd there was sysvinit, and there are number of alternate init systems. It’s not about system functionality that we name operating systems.

Uh no, it’s not. GNU has been integral to the GNU/Linux project for years. Without GCC, coreutils, glibc, there would be no linux distributions. Systemd has not played the same role.

Debian GNU/Linux has been called Debian GNU/Linux since at least 1997 https://lists.debian.org/debian-announce/1997/msg00013.html

Yes. The US. Mexico. Turkiye. Anarchist Catalonia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1921–1922

“We managed to squeeze the country so hard that an unprecedented number of literal millions died in famine, but at least we beat the aristocrats who were so incompetent that they couldn’t drag their heads out of their asses for the full ten minutes needed to form a government”

The Whites were supported by foreign powers and definitely could have won the civil war. Do you deny that war communism helped the Bolsheviks win the civil war?

Oh, yes, the Supreme Soviet unanimously ratifying everything placed in front of their noses was DEFINITELY a functioning democratic system. Literally what ‘democratic centralism’ meant.

Yes, so Democratic Centralism is inherently democratic. Democracy doesn’t mean that say, bills have to come to the floor and have a chance to be voted down. One party capitalist democratic states like the USSR or the PRC tend to deal with dissent before the bill comes to the floor, by the time its passing a legislature everythings been cleared up. Its just a different system.

Democracy doesn’t just mean, liberal multi-party parliamentary democracy. The USSR had all the elements of a democratic system, BUT, it was fragile, ineffective, and had poor protections to truly have a Free Capitalist DemocracyTM but it would have gotten there with time.

Check, please!

Do you dispute that North Korea has a parliament and a democratic system?

In the sense that they had lost support of the people, that the economy had fallen apart, and only by plundering the peasantry with ‘war communism’ could they keep their effort going? Uh, sure.

Also uh, they were in a civil war. Do you know of a country that managed a good economy during a crisis level civil war? The Bolsheveiks also won the civil war, which directly speaks to the success of war communism.

Oh, okay, so Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were democracies too, right? They had elections, representatives, an elected parliament…

In some essence, sure, but definitely less than the USSR to the point it wouldn’t make much sense to call them democratic. I would argue that Nazi Germany was significantly less democratic than the USSR, as Nazi Germany did not have a functioning democratic system unlike the USSR, and the Reichstag really only convened to listen to Hitlers speeches. The Soviet Parliament convened somewhat frequently and did pass laws, regardless of its flaws or inadequacies.

Oh, wait, is the DPRK a democracy too?

Yes the DPRK is a democracy, but it has a lot of problems (a lot the fault of the West) and the democracy is subordinated to the Kim dynasty. The USSR was more democratic.

‘war communism’ of the civil war period had been fucking ruinous

Regardless of its merits, there’s no denying that war communism won the Bolsheviks the civil war.

Not only that, but the NEP was extremely short-lived, far too short to build up industry to the standards of a capitalist mode of production

Not really. The USSR just moved toward a state capitalist model, and Stalin managed a social democracy attempting to build just that, industry up to the standards of a capitalist mode of production.

Democratic centralism is not democratic, and the USSR definitely was not fucking democratic in any real sense.

“Democracy is not democratic”. The USSR had elections, representatives, an elected parliament, decisions were made by majoritarianism, it was pretty clearly democratic.

All of what you said is true except…

a capitalist mode of production was not necessary to transition to a socialist workers

The Bolsheviks were quite well aware that socialism would be impossible in just Russia because it was pre-capitalist, and were banking on the success of the German Revolution to establish socialist supply chains. This is why with the failure of the revolutionary in Germany, the NEP was considered a tactical retreat.

were quite anti-democratic

Considering the Bolsheviks literally invented Democratic Centralism and made the USSR into a democracy, its definitely not fair to call them “anti-democratic”.

The USSR was just as capitalist as the PRC. Because it had generalized commodity production and wage-labor. You can’t have a socialist mode of production in just one country, as the interaction with capitalist countries will infect your system.

The PRC is a highly technocratic advanced capitalist democracy, and yes, it will likely outpace the west in a number of key statistics over time, that doesn’t make it socialist, because the productive mode is capitalism.

Taiwan will voluntarily reunify with China in the next two decades.

Because the Chinese state has fiat monetary sovereignty, it doesn’t function in the capitalist mode.

Yeah all nation states have this. Countries that don’t call themselves socialist have state owned enterprise and turn a profit. Non-seqitur.

“996” was never legal,

Cool. Union-busting is illegal in the US too. Not paying overtime is illegal in the US too. Doesn’t make it DoTP.

was never pervasive

Proof?

and the state cracked down on it years ago.

Proof?

Unfortunate that lemmy is such awful software it doesn’t syndicate my changes I made months ago. I do not support Ukraine anymore, and have not for a long time.

A state where the biggest capital holders

So you admit it is capitalist?

are regularly punished if they break the law or step out of line politically is not a state where capital has final say.

The state are capitalists, they employ workers in state enterprises and pay them a wage in exchange for their labor. They are just a different aristocratic rank then the private capitalists

There’s been no counter revolution in China, the organs of proletarian power remain in place even as reforms have been undertaken in every facet of life in China.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996_working_hour_system

This system would NOT be possible in a DoTP.

It’s not reductionist to say that China has all the elements of a Capitalist mode of production.