Comments by "N Velsen" (@nvelsen1975) on "How Communism Nearly Starved Vietnam" video.

@lubricustheslippery5028 So to sum it up, you're using the god-eternal fallacy of "That wasn't real socialism". I'm simply not interested. 15-20 years of having various children screech that cry while defending a failed genocidal ideology has left me a bit too tired to reharsh it again.
10
I'll paraphrase some things I remember from the lectures of Dr Leo Paul of Utrecht University. It wasn't so much 'on the advice of'. In Russia, nobody knew how to have an economy; it had never been done before. Everything was monopolised by the state and people were essentially slaves who worked as little as they could get away with, unless they had an avenue through which to get personal rewards. By exceeding quotas, you could get personal rewards (so basically capitalism, just without money) and this could consist out of being allowed to have a car or being allowed to have a holiday home. The ways of production were incredibly inefficient and passive. People were used to spend a lot of their day bartering and queuing up for goods instead of working, stealing was a constant thing for everybody. So.... communism is dead suddenly, now what? How do you run a company? They decided that everybody who worked there, would receive an equal share in ownership of the company. Congrats, you are now 1/3200th part owner of the factory where you work. But you can't actually do anything with the damn coupon. This is when the oligarchs were born. People who had lots of things they had already hustled and stolen their way to, would trade these company shares. Here's a pack of cigarettes for your coupon which is worthless by itself. So you hand it over and have a smoke. Through this bartering, one person could obtain ownership over giant former state companies, suddenly stretching property inequality to extreme lengths. Income inequality soon followed. The huge economic shock was because Russia has basically bankrupted itself through socialist inefficiency and military spending trying to conquer the world. So they were already in deep trouble. Then suddenly its no longer socialism, but you have a population who for generations have worked the socialist way. For example if you own or set up a company, you will your lightbulbs are breaking at an unnatural rate. How weird. Why? Well, under socialism you can't just buy a light. Only companies could. So, you brought broken light bulbs from home and changed those with working ones at your company, stealing their lightbulb. So you could expect your company to basically pay for many goods that would be stolen, on top of salaris, and lots of things breaking and causing inefficiency all the time.
5
@tekinet7958 Uhm, they did. The whole video discusses the Vietnamese communist party? Collective ownership? Maybe if you watch the video you can see what I'm talking about?
5
@tekinet7958 So it's going to be desperate doublethink, and talking with you is a waste of time as you'll only defend an ideology.
5
@SaretGnasoh Wow, what a bunch of nonsense. Why are you spreading racist hate against Americans?
2
@CengalLut When are racists going to stop demanding free money?
2
@lubricustheslippery5028 Uhm, how can you 'collectively own' the economy (meaning you mus STEAL everything and ENSLAVE everybody) while working for your individual gain? The two exclude eachother entirely. The Soviets are 100% marxist, because the party is everybody and everything. You just don't like that, because it points that marxism is a failed ideology that can never work and is inherently corrupt.
1
@matheusvillela9150 That's a good one, I also like absurd humour. But you mustn't forget that out there, there are retarded socialists who believe that Lenin and Stalin were indeed the best thing that ever happened to humanity and murdering 50 million people to achieve allround poverty for most except for the socialist apparatchiks, is somehow a good thing. Please don't ask me how that makes sense because like I said: They're socialists, they never make sense and love bloodshed. I don't understand them.
1
@kphamcao Uhm, so your argument is 'movie exists, therefore US loves Red Khmer genocide'... You really need me to point out that is a load of horseshit? Come up with a real argument or shut up.
1
@Trenchfood If you know anything of the kind I'd strongly advise you to take your anti-psychotics and call your therapist to tell her that the voices are back and they're telling you about American conspiracies. So you gonna get help bro?
1
@flubadubdubthegreat1272 You're right, but at that point those governments already had a negative image about them. They couldn't just be a part of years of opression and then go "Oh no, we're entirely different now; we shot the last ruler last week after all". People aren't going to believe it.
1
Yes, racists love blaming colonisation for all the problems.
1
Ah yes, the marxists' tiresome old excuse whenever they hear marxism failed again: Oh no that was not real marxism, if they had just marxismed better, and outmarxismed themselves, it would've worked since marxism works. Marxism can't make any mistakes by definition, so if there's a mistake, it's not marxism, even though it is marxism. Give up, your ideology has failed and can never work.
1
@tekinet7958 Yes, a centrally planned economy where as marxists put it the 'workers own the means of production' which the party which is them, coordinates. Do you understand now, or are you going to engage in desperate doublethink to try and salvage the ideology?
1
@tekinet7958 Yes sure, desperate marxist, it's 'not real socialism'. Keep clinging to your dead ideology.
1