>Republics

You think the country constituted some form of monarchy?

>>1232760

>Monarchy
>Rule of one

Yes it did.

>>1232738
>United
Yes
>Soviet
Initially, but later the Soviets were basically vestigial.
>Socialist
More or less, not that socialist but socialist no less.
>Republics
Yes, defo republics.

>>1232801
>Every dictatorship is a monarchy.
lmaoing @ ur life.

>>1232801
It wasn't a rule of one. It was a single-party democracy. The leader didn't hold sole power.

>United
Well, Soviet Union was pretty centralized
>Socialist
You won't claim that USSR was a capitalist state really, huh?
>Soviet
De jure they were ruled by Soviets
>Republics
They were republics, even if not democratic

>>1232890
None of the persons in power were elected. Single-candidate elections to powerless faux governing bodies do not a democracy make.

>>1232922
Everyone in the party could vote.

>>1232930
Over who gets into the politbureau?

>>1232922
They were all elected by the party.

Are you implying that elections of the secretary of the party were genuine, free and secret?That the outcome wasn't decided by the behind-the-scenes powerstruggle between the various competitors in the elite and their supporters in the top of the cadre and the most powerful institutions?

>>1232810
>>1232908
both sides literally redefined socialism to mean state ownership so that the USSR could be called socialist

>>1232993
>Muh not real socialism

>>1233068
>Muh not real argument

>>1233072
>Muh not real counter-argument.

>>1233077
>Muh not real counter-counter-argument

>>1232993

Collectivization via the state is a completely valid form of socialism. The question is who the state represents

>>1233091
>socialism: collective ownership of production
>we'll say that the state adequately represents the people
>therefore state ownership is socialism
I don't buy it anon at best it's a tremendous stretch

>>1233078
>Muh not real counter-counter-counter-argument

>>1232738
>United
It was a federation of
>Soviet
by the time of creation of USSR the regions were ruled by soviets
>Socialist
what's your problem with this one?
>Republics
Yes. There were several republics there and they were ruled by non-monarchs. Otherwise every dictatorship is a monarchy.

>>1232738
>UNITED
>STATES
>OF AMERICA

>>1233096

He's right. If anyone thinks that the USSR from Stalin onwards even attempted to represent the people is a fool.

>>1232810
But under Lenin power over the means of production "passed from workers’ control to the creation of the Supreme Council of National Economy"(Chomsky quoting EH Carr)

>>1233187
the America part is tricky

>>1232922
Lenin was defeated in policy making many times. Look at the gosplan

>Union
It was ostensibly all about the plight of the worker. It was portrayed as a labor union.
>Soviet
A management system which defined the entity in question as an experimental form of management
>Socialist
They were trying to achieve actual Communism.
>Republics
There were various undemocratic republics which operates in concert and used the Soviet system. They weren't monarchies or liberal democracies. Republic is probably the best way to describe them without outright demonizing them and implying that the state lacked legitimacy (which, hey, maybe it didn't, but whatever).

>>1232801
keked