![Long+line+for+cooking+oil+-+Bucharest+Romania+1986[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/F44PaIs.jpg "Long+line+for+cooking+oil+-+Bucharest+Romania+1986[1].jpg")
Did the majority of the "proletariat" actually enjoy living under communism or were they just terrorized into submitting to their bleak existence under their new masters? Obviously I'm talking about the average working class member of these societies, not the intellectual elites and nomenklatura. Correspondingly, did the elites themselves actually care about the welfare of their proletarian subjects or were they just interested in their own status and wealth?
bump pls
>>1396531
In Eastern Bloc countries that enjoyed some degree of independence from the Soviets like Hungary, communism provided a decent standard of living. Stasi aside, East Germany was also well of compared to the average Soviet aligned republic.
I've taught immigrants from China who told me that back home they couldn't even read a newspaper because every word is a lie and their blood would boil, so they just stopped following the news. I'd imagine it was something like that in the USSR.
Communism was better than what they had in some ways and absolutely the worst thing that has ever happened in others
>>1396531
How the hell is having the capital of 20000bc with no savings or anything to show for it for non stop production over 100 years good for the "prole".
Real Communism has been tried, it is not ideal.
>>1397518
The prole lvoed their Tsar and millions died for him, foreigners who have no allegiance nor commitment to the people who built and created Russia enslaved all the Rus.
>>1397531
>Update
>>1397531
t.tsar nicholas II
There's a reason why Russians today don't promote socialism, because it doesn't work and nobody liked it
>>1397531
Tsar = Future
Communism = Slavery
After 1956 it wasn't even that bad. I'd even argue that thanks to all black market stuff, there was more economic freedom in the Eastern Bloc than in Western Europe.
Living under communism is worse than death.
>>1397554
Now you're just being an idiot.
>>1397554
This, money is a means for instincts and human condition fulfillment, Communism goes against fundamental human conditions.
>Did the majority of the "proletariat" actually enjoy living under communism
For the most part yes.
The great tell in this is the vote to keep the USSR solvent by constituents when asked. And that a notable portion of people that lived through the USSR remember it fondly when asked.
Counter-point: if the USSR was so great why do they not bring it back? The "Communist" party in Russia and elsewhere consistently fail to lock a majority in parliament (though it's questionable to imply Russia is functionally democratic and Putin's party would allow itself to lose). A great indication that people approve of the current capitalist status-quo do not fight to roll it back. Younger generations that don't remember the USSR are often very hostile to it.
Also the Baltics and to a lesser extent Poland do not share in positive polling. They are consistently buttblasted about the USSR.
Counter-counter-point: it's hard to create such a revolution. With the reality of the "Communist" past being decent but having obvious flaws no one that is so sympathetic as to want to fight hard let alone die to bring back the exact same. The Capitalist status-quo isn't so bad that it can't be endured for the majority.
The Baltics and Poland seemed to be more upset about Russian imperialism rather than the economic structure of Sovietism. "Communism" and and local nationalism are not incompatible.
You're call.
Objectively though the quality of life improved greatly for the majority of people within the USSR. People pay attention to the elites and their loss because that's who makes waves. Russia was a nation of dirt poor peasants and a couple of cosmopolitan elites in St. Petersburg. Guaranteed housing, jobs, modernized universal healthcare, free education, and social mobility are an amazing deal for the peasants even if the elites lost out big time.
>>1397554
seconding this
I'd rather die trying to escape a communist """"utopia"""" than live in one
>>1397622
>guaranteeing things that require no capital
Seems Jew
>>1397631
you wont hear "communists" guaranteeing the rights of the people to means of production aka land ownership.
Oh look anticommunists are racists and anti-Semites in yet another thread
>>1396531
nobody was terrorized
in some ways living in USSR was like being plugged to Matrix because state did everything for you: it gave you (free) education, it gave you (mandatory) job, it gave you (free) medical care, it gave you your guaranteed yearly work leaves and resort trips, it took care of your building and most of your bills were neatly incorporated into one single flat rate. It gave you years of childcare leave if you were a working mother. And State made sure most of them were encouraged by building a kindergarten in basically every living block (so that kids don't have to cross roads), at least in the big cities "housewives" were extremely rare.
It's when people were unplugged from ALL that, the problems of re-integrating them into so-called "real-world" began
"Deficit" (extreme lack of consumer goods) was definitely a huge problem. Economics just couldn't bear the load past providing citizens with bare necessities (at least how Soviet leadership understood them: as in education, medical care, work leaves).
>>1397638
Lets equally distribute all the land to each citizen :DDD
what are you crazy?
We want slaves.
>>1397659
>SERF
>LANDLESS PEOPLE FORCED TO WORK
now what do buildings entail... landless people...
>>1397671
Russia/Area
Image result for area of russia
6.602 million mi2
Russia/Population
143.5 million (2013)
Germany/Area
Image result for area of germany
137,903 mi2
Germany/Population
80.62 million (2013)
yet no slave commie blocks in kaisereich or bundesrepubliks.
>>1397679
if commies built castles for every citizen then the people of the world would die to immigrate to there :DDD but that is not the case of bolshevism.
Eastern Bloc communism was literally prison, in the very definition of the word.
>You are accomodated free of charge, but the housing is shit
>You are fed free of charge, but your food is garbage
>Free medical care is provided but it's also of pretty poor quality
>You have to share your dwelling with people you don't like
>Officially everyone is "equal", but de facto if you're the warden's cousin your life will be easier than other prisoners
>Nothing will happen to you as long as you obey the guards and senior prisoners
>You can't leave
>>1397514
A good newspaper should be as blatantly corrupt as possible so people realized how bad newspapers actually are
Its basically all garbage, even the posh faggot papers who pretend to be sophisticated
>>1397679
Is it wrong that I think the lake is much more comfy and beautiful than the castle?
>>1398036
Castles are not comfy, castles are cold and damp and shitty. If you spent a night in one or two you would know. They are literally fortresses and not luxurious palaces.
>>1396531
Old Pole here.
It wasn't that bad. Some people can argue that it was better under commies.
>free education with higher standard
>free decent healthcare
>vacations organized and funded by gov
>secure jobs
>safety(although its pretty safe now in Poland as most criminals move to West)
Also for most people time under commies was actually step forward.
>be peasant on small poach of land or even without
>commies offer you work in factory and free housing
>your kids could become engineers or doctors if they were talented
>not even mention land reform and land grants
>on former Germany lands(the reclaimed territory)
Also TV produced more patriotic and more cultural stuff, more science programs, hell even common serials were had much higher quality than garbage today.
There where plenty of scientific and historic periodic with quality stuff. We have censors but it wasn't heavy handed.
Cultural life and social life was much better as social ties were much stronger.
Ask questions. I will reply.
>>1397622
>And that a notable portion of people that lived through the USSR remember it fondly when asked.
That is because of reactionary reverence of the status quo ante bellum, not because of communism itself.
>>1396531
It depends.
I will have time for explaining it later but for instance in Poland, you could buy anti-communist "underground" magazines on the streets back in the 70's in the middle of the day. The places like USSR or Eastern Germany were full Big Brother Watches tier though.
>>1398111
>status quo ante bellum
>bellum
>>1398119
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_ante_bellum
>>1398119
collapse was a social disaster easily comparable to war
not speaking of actual wars that springed out once the big stick disintergrated
>>1398124
In this case it's just status quo ante [event], there was no war.
>>1398102
Didn't religious bans affect the culture?
Especially for Poland which I thought to be incredibly religious
>>1397514
News is like that now. It's not strictly a communist thing.
>>1398102
>Also TV produced more patriotic and more cultural stuff, more science programs, hell even common serials were had much higher quality than garbage today.
>There where plenty of scientific and historic periodic with quality stuff. We have censors but it wasn't heavy handed.
It was extremely ironic what happened to all those artists (cinema/animation directors, writers) who were supposedly "suffering" under oppressive "bloody" regime. Once it disappeared, they
1) found themselves out of a job, because only socialistic State is motivated to create media that holds only cultural value without even a thought of monetising it
2) became creatively impotent and irrelevant in a new environment
>>1398462
Capitalism killed the communist star?
