Once again, you’re omitting key facts in your narrative. The USSR suffered massive destruction during fascist invasion, and then was thrown into a cold war by a the US which was able to develop its economy, and used that leverage to suffocate the socialist bloc. It wasn’t ‘productive forces of a capitalist rival.’ that USSR couldn’t endure. It was the advantage of the US not being a direct participant of the war. If you ignore this reality then you end up with absurdist analysis as a result.
And of course, you can suggest anything you like, but that wouldn’t make it true. The German communist movement lacked the will of the Bolsheviks and they thought they could attempt reformism and work within the system. Then they were summarily betrayed by social democrats who aligned with the nazis. Had German communists been more principled and achieved a revolution, then they would have been able to ally with the Soviet Union and there was no chance of English or French capitalists overthrowing them. In fact, western capitalists tried doing exactly that in USSR in 1918 and they failed there too.
Or maybe the Germans really did have the secret sauce to make Global Communism work, in a way Communists in Russia and India and Latin America and the Middle East didn’t? I just don’t think so. Not given how easily the country collapsed into the most enthusiastic kind of self-immolation.
You’re once again entirely missing the original point I was making which is that the reason capitalist world has the advantage is due to the fact that the second world war happened because Germans fell into fascism. Had that that not happened, then the advantage would have been reversed.
I don’t think there’s any economy in the 1930s that was going to come off the plate, swing one, and do International Communism right on the first try.
Great, because nobody has been making that argument here. Let me know if my point is still unclear for you.
Once again, you’re omitting key facts in your narrative. The USSR suffered massive destruction during fascist invasion, and then was thrown into a cold war by a the US which was able to develop its economy, and used that leverage to suffocate the socialist bloc. It wasn’t ‘productive forces of a capitalist rival.’ that USSR couldn’t endure. It was the advantage of the US not being a direct participant of the war. If you ignore this reality then you end up with absurdist analysis as a result.
And of course, you can suggest anything you like, but that wouldn’t make it true. The German communist movement lacked the will of the Bolsheviks and they thought they could attempt reformism and work within the system. Then they were summarily betrayed by social democrats who aligned with the nazis. Had German communists been more principled and achieved a revolution, then they would have been able to ally with the Soviet Union and there was no chance of English or French capitalists overthrowing them. In fact, western capitalists tried doing exactly that in USSR in 1918 and they failed there too.
You’re once again entirely missing the original point I was making which is that the reason capitalist world has the advantage is due to the fact that the second world war happened because Germans fell into fascism. Had that that not happened, then the advantage would have been reversed.
Great, because nobody has been making that argument here. Let me know if my point is still unclear for you.