You're right there was a long history of famines like everywhere else on earth, but Ukraine's famine was unambiguously caused by the Soviets. It's well documented that essentially all of the grain was being shipped out for export to fund the state's expenses, and Ukrainians weren't left enough calories to survive. You would get shot for "stealing grain" by picking spilled kernels off of the ground. It was manufactured just like the Irish famine being manufactured by the British.

Thank god the British took over Ireland and saw to it that no famines happened under their control after 1879.

Ukrainians and Irish are obviously too stupid to handle their own agriculture and desperately needed guidance from Moscow or London.

Salty indeed. I can take the intended joke of a username and use it too.

Either way, minus the communism stuff, can’t disagree that capitalism in its current form, especially in the US, is a cancer. Though, I think that’s unfair to cancer, as it’s natural and its suffering an unintended byproduct.

While I accept that may have some degree of merit RE the Soviet Union at least; so the post may as well be meaningless. Multiple countries and their variation of economics fall under capitalism. Seemingly none fall under communism. So the picture is essentially claiming “communism, a supposedly purely hypothetical system of governing/economics has never done anything bad” which ok so? By the same logic it’s never done anything good either, because it’s allegedly never really been implemented. It’s comparing real life to ideals/fiction.

They were leninists, not communists.

Claiming Leninists aren't communist is a bit like claiming Jeffersonians aren't capitalist. "No no! He purchased Louisiana with state money! Adam Smith explicitly said you shouldn't do this!"

There is, after all, no true communist.

Marxist-Leninists are the most widely adopted school of communist theory and practice. You're horribly butchering your understanding of Marxism when you conflate class with administration. Classes are relations to ownership of the means of production. In the USSR, industry and the land were collectively owned (for the most part, there were cooperatives called Artels under Stalin that were abolished under Khrushchev, etc.), and administrators received their pay in wages. They did not own capital and did not profit off of capitalism.

As for the DPRK, their model of democracy is based on approval voting. As of 2024, they have begun to roll out multi-candidate primaries, but prior to 2024 they had a Democratic Front which decided on what candidates to put to the vote, and then you can vote to approve or not. It's a very different democratic model from western countries, but it's inaccurate to call it non-democratic.

Just because groups like the Nazis have used names for their own advantage does not actually mean all groups are the opposite of their claimed ideology. I think it would do you good to study Marxism a bit more, both in theory and practice.

government was the most dominant class ever

I wish you people would bother to learn at least as basic a thing as what a fucking class is before you spout off.

If a government solely relies on competant politicians it's a government that won't last.