well sry i dont know what i mean. I mean authoriatarianism as in, using the power of the state and laws and whatever to keep a select few in power, who are above the laws, while also using the power of the state to fullfill whatever intrestest some group of people have.
like a dicatorship or a kingdom
while i dont mean like democratic authority (whitout it beeing opression/ more then nessasary opressing)
Okay, sure, but we aren’t talking about capitalism but existing/formerly existing socialist states like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. That doesn’t apply to those.
It was not a dictatorship because it did not produce the material results you would expect from a dictatorship.
If it had been a system in power of a few people against the vast majority, as was for example monarchic feudalism (the state immediately before the USSR, the Russian Empire, being a good example of it), you would expect vast inequality leading to a two-class system with vastly different life metrics, wealth, and a degradation of the rights of the working people.
However, the Soviet Union had the lowest wealth inequality the region has ever seen, the highest earners were the highly trained professionals (not policitians as you may have been led to believe) and the salary difference were perhaps at most tenfold; access to healthcare was universal and free, as was education to the highest level, pensions for retirement were universal with men retiring at 60 and women at 55, homelessness was abolished and everyone had access to affordable housing (3% of monthly income on average), and everyone had the right to a job making unemployment nonexistant.
A system producing these outcomes is not the result of 4 generations of “benevolent dictators” from 1917 to 1991, it’s outrageous making such claims.
It was a dictatorship of the proletariat, ie the proletariat was in control and oppressed capitalists. For the working classes, ie the proletariat and the peasantry, it was a dramatic expansion in democratization, and society was oriented around fulfilling their needs. The gap between the richest and poorest was about ten times, compared to the hundreds of thousands to millions in the Tsarist and capitalist eras.
well sry i dont know what i mean. I mean authoriatarianism as in, using the power of the state and laws and whatever to keep a select few in power, who are above the laws, while also using the power of the state to fullfill whatever intrestest some group of people have.
like a dicatorship or a kingdom
while i dont mean like democratic authority (whitout it beeing opression/ more then nessasary opressing)
Okay, sure, but we aren’t talking about capitalism but existing/formerly existing socialist states like the USSR, PRC, Cuba, etc. That doesn’t apply to those.
how was the Ussr not a dictatorship
It was not a dictatorship because it did not produce the material results you would expect from a dictatorship.
If it had been a system in power of a few people against the vast majority, as was for example monarchic feudalism (the state immediately before the USSR, the Russian Empire, being a good example of it), you would expect vast inequality leading to a two-class system with vastly different life metrics, wealth, and a degradation of the rights of the working people.
However, the Soviet Union had the lowest wealth inequality the region has ever seen, the highest earners were the highly trained professionals (not policitians as you may have been led to believe) and the salary difference were perhaps at most tenfold; access to healthcare was universal and free, as was education to the highest level, pensions for retirement were universal with men retiring at 60 and women at 55, homelessness was abolished and everyone had access to affordable housing (3% of monthly income on average), and everyone had the right to a job making unemployment nonexistant.
A system producing these outcomes is not the result of 4 generations of “benevolent dictators” from 1917 to 1991, it’s outrageous making such claims.
It was a dictatorship of the proletariat, ie the proletariat was in control and oppressed capitalists. For the working classes, ie the proletariat and the peasantry, it was a dramatic expansion in democratization, and society was oriented around fulfilling their needs. The gap between the richest and poorest was about ten times, compared to the hundreds of thousands to millions in the Tsarist and capitalist eras.