Warsaw Pact general

soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=29943

is a better forum for this stuff. A ton of ex warsaw pact citizens hang there

Is it true that Finland educational system (considered one of the best in the world) was modeled after the educational system of DDR?

As someone who'd like to become a language teacher this makes me so sad.

Didn't they often had shortages? I'm not talking about stupid shit like the banana story.

Why does it make you sad? Because you'd be teaching in a system that is molding lumpens rather than educating people? Because THAT is truly sad.

rferl.org/a/czech-leaders-silent-or-spurned-as-country-marks-50th-anniversary-of-crushing-of-prague-spring-/29445518.html

theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/12/czech-communists-return-to-government-as-power-brokers

I did mentioned that they overspend on military, but overall no. Even in pictures with breadlines from the late 80's people are all well dressed and not starved.

Also, people were well feed. Especially Poland. That is why it had such high birth rate.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staple_food

Must see for all socialists on the subject of the events of 1968: youtube.com/watch?v=mmR8Y-a6b8c

Put CC on auto-translate to English

Since I'd like to teach to foreigners things are a bit different for me, but I don't really like how education is handled here.
I mean no wonder there are so many no-vaxxers here.

like i said in the other thread Zeman is like Lukashenko as he needs to worry about spouting shit on socialist czech republic because people (even if they don't admit it) do miss it.

That said me like, as I literally don't give a shit about ideological purity and just want to be against capitalism and have a red flag

tbh events of 1968 were result of fails. They should not focused so much on military, and people wouldn't even have a need to revel, play smart, not hard, dammit!!

A gross over-simplification. Watch the documentary

Most of the annoying no-vaxxers in the USA are basically people who don't understand the issue they're screaming about. Rather than understanding that its certain vaccines produced by Big Pharma that are toxic, they think ALL vaccines are bad.

I will later, however in the comments there is quite a lot Russian nationalists, a sign that I don't particularly like.

Bitch where? I've been there a few times. And judging a video by COMMENTS? What next, judging a book by its cover?

Hey Son, can you redpill me on Lukashenko? I saw you praising modern Belarus elsewhere. From where I stand he looks like basically Putin but with more free stuff.

Think Juche but toned down.

As one comment from the top
Если посмотреть в прошлое и подумать, сколько всего было построено на тех землях, куда приходили русские, возникает странное чувство, что "российскую оккупацию" надо еще заслужить. Такие "оккупанты" - на вес золота!

It basically says that everything was build by Russians rather than working people.

But you might be right, and I am just paranoid.

It's putinism is LARP characteristics.

As a very simple example, a lot of companies that mine natural resources in Russia are owned by very small amount of Rich individuals who don't pay taxes and store their money in the west. (Russia had capital flight of over one trillion since putin came to power) and perhaps has largest wealth inequality in the world. Meanwhile in Belarus economy is like in Germany in a good way, with mix of private and state owned industries with small wealth inequality

No that's not what was said at all, not to mention that the phrase 'russians'' is a generic cover all of people living in the territory of Russia. Buryats, Bashkirs, Tatars, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Ukrainians, Belorusians etc. are all considered 'russians' because they all live in territories that, until the last century were Russian territories. So the phrase Russia is a cover-phrase of all of them.

I doubt it.

Are you a russian speaker?

So its socdem, better than what we have but not by that much.

Fluent speaker, and culturally engrossed. I know when comments about "Russians" are nationalistic or not.

Хорош не русский оккупант, а русский оккупант, который несёт с собой социализм. Оккупация СССР и оккупация РИ - совершенно разные вещи. Даже если под русскими автор имел в виду не только этнических русских (в чем немного сомневаюсь), это всё равно националистическая и реакционная точка зрения.

This is my position. Everything Soviets did they did because of Communist Party and the working class. Russian nationalists always laugh about how Balts and others прасрали everything soviets did, yet it is the same in Russia

zen.yandex.ru/media/kak_wygit_w_krizis/grudinin-vo-vladimire-zakryli-poslednii-traktornyi-zavod-v-rossii-5b72e4d708501c00a9a943c5

Я это понимаю, но в контексте видоса коммент явно имеет в виду 'оккупацию' советскую. Даже Сталин, в своём тосте к победе обратился к народу как к РУССКОМУ, хотя он сам как большевик и Грузин понимал что СССР составляет не только этнических Русских. В составе РСФСР было сотни народов, но нельзя же всех произносить для фразы. Это воспринимать надо как художествиное допущение.

Attached: Сталин читает новости.jpg (1080x229, 166.05K)

No, it doesn't. Author explicitly uses (in a mocking tone) terminology of the anti-Communists (note his reference to "occupation" - a standard talking point of all anti-Soviet demagogues).

"Russians" there mean Soviets. That's how Soviet Union was always referred to by local Nationalists and anti-Communists of Eastern Europe. Not Communists, but Russians. The idea was to frame anti-Soviet movement not as anti-Socialist, but as resistance to Russian imperialism.

The only reactionaries and nationalists here are you two.

Please don't derail the thread,chauvinist.

Not him but how is he derailing the thread? The post is relevant to the past 10 thread posts after all.

Because I got too close to his weak spot. He is a right-wing shill.

By calling leftists reactionaries.

Nice projection, chauvinist.

ok, never mind, sorry and thanks for sharing the video.

I didn't know that about the czech republic. Sadly it seems most Eastern European countries either don't even have a communist party anymore or a completely marginalized one. How's things in Russia?

Yeah it would probably have to be the DDR.
Earlier this year I was in the former DDR (Leipzig) for a few days and in the first cafe we visited, they had a portrait of Honecker on the wall. Pretty cool that some kind of nostalgy for those years still persists.

...

8ch.net/leftypol/res/2624498.html

[citation needed]

...

why do the warsaw pact countries hate communism when they were under it for more than 50 years?

despite the 1956 violence, Hungary was actually a really nice country to live in. it had the best economy in the Warsaw pact imo, and fairly decent social life, although secret police was bad. after liberalization which destroyed the Forint, it's easy to understand why lots of Hungarians has nostalgia.

Denouncing Stalin does not fundamentally change the economy all of a sudden.

In some of them people are fairly nostalgic
But it's probably due to the stagnation and economic problems in the later years (80s) combined with porky propaganda, and in some countries the presence of shit tier leaders (Ceasescu, Hoxha) who fucked up the economy and were extremely repressive

What about the economic reforms he mentioned? You know, aka liberalization.

But it does change the international situation. France for example had a massive support for the communists, and they represented a hefty amount of members in the government. After Khrushev's speech the next election had them marginalized in the votes to this day. Not only that but it gave revisionists and reactionaries the perfect propaganda to use in their agitation, and indeed was part of the reason we got Hungary and Czechoslovakia's reactionary uprisings.
Khruschev also implimented a massive set of economic reforms that unraveled much of Stalin's work, and resulted in land erosion and drought in the Middle Eastern areas of the USSR. Along side this he pardoned many criminals, and as expected crime rates rocketed up from the influx of freshly released pardoned criminals. There is more than 1 reason corn-man is detested by many ex-soviet folk.

bunch of boomers, who's never been told to that Kádár was taking massive loans from the West

wrong terminology m8. Boomers applies to the USA and West, from the "baby boomer" generation born in the mid 50s

THIS IS YOUR MIND ON STALINBOO'ism

strawman argument

Attached: USSR greentext.png (716x2144, 302.87K)

I'm not calling Stalin bad
But claiming that "once Nikita came to power the USSR fundamentally changed and went to shit" is false

Nikita didn't change the Political or economic model of the USSR and quality of life and technological progress continued (Soace race is a good example)

It still remained a M-L Centrally planned state

Khrushchev did a lot of damage to socialism and while in the 60s and 70s this wasn't visible, his actions gave the seed of capitalism a place to grow in the minds of the soviet people.

What economic actions did he take that were revisionist or anti-socialist?

Keep dreaming you Godless cunts.

God sides with communism. Fuck off.

t. Pole Magyar Slovak

gwydionwilliams.com/history-and-philosophy/khrushchev-influenced-by-trotskyism/

I didn't ask whether Nikita liked iceaxe or not I asked if Nikita undertook a economic and social policy that fundamentally changed the Soviet economic and political system

Protip:
he really didnt

No he didn't
The only major change he made to collective farming was the ending of the Machine-tractor station system that existed through the country
Nikita did not abandon central planning
The only major change issued to the way GOSPLAN functioned was the creation of smaller local GOSPLANS on the local / SSR level to see planning carried out on a localised level and to ensure fulfillment of plans

1) I already described the political effects of his actions. They made socialism look very unfavorable to the world view, thus repulsing potential proles ready for revolution in their own countries.
I'll add to that, Khruschev's statements at the 20th Plenum, resulted in the economic issues in the Warsaw pact as well. Czechoslovakia's economy was one of the fastest growing and highest producing in the time of Stailn, but when he and his contemporary lin Czechoslovakia died, and after khruschev stated his petty lies, the bourgeoisie opposition, defeated in the 1946 elections began reforms that would lead to further and further worsening of the economy. Then they blamed the soviets and 'socialism' and proposed their faux "socialism with a human-face" which was nothing more than a fraud. The criminal negligence of Khruschev forced the USSR to take the final drastic measure and send in the international brigades and enter Czechoslovakia, to prevent it from becoming the fulcrum of NATO's cancerous growth.
2) His economic actions promoted what would become a private economy within the USSR. His political effect was more important, however economically he planted the seed for further revisions that led to the Gorbachev era.
lalkar.org/article/2570/how-the-khrushchevite-revisionists-destroyed-the-soviet-union

Kruschev recognised that Dubcek was going to cause a 1991 tier counter rev and steeped in and put it down good one in by book
As I have already stated he made little economic changes asides from the devolving of GOSPLAN Powers over a wider area and the only real change your article talks about is measuring the productivity of business using profitability (Which wasn't meant to mean he wished these business to be operated as private enterprise but rather to use profitability as a measurement of sorts to gauge efficiency)

Kruschev never made any Market or Capitalist reforms of any real significant nature

Most of the rest of that article is just bashing him for shit he SAID not what he actually did

It also claims he hurt global socialism when he supported many socialist uprising and causes over the world

Except that it was his own criminal negligence and politics that allowed this to happen in the first place. Sending in tanks was a final option that shouldn't have had to have happened, but did.
They were small in terms of the short-term effects, but their long-term effects were massive. He planted the seed of the bureaucracy and the embryonic upper class who became the oligarchs of the 90s.
Small in short term, but he basically created a small, niche private market, while also ignoring the growth of illegal private markets.
He hurt it politically, and his support was also sketchy. He didn't want to help Allendee and that reluctance caused their aid to be too little too late. His actions in Cuba were the only commendable things I could point out about his time.

That's ignoring his military effects. as he absolutely destroyed soviet cannon production and research with his obsession with missiles, forcing them to redesign cannons once his mad ideas were proven flawed in various foreign proxy wars. The West had a similar obsession but that is no excuse.

You seem to be blaming him for things Brezhnev Andropov and Gorbachev did decades later?

Countries don't hate anything. It's the ruling class that controls them that hates (and is terrified of) communism. Hence the constant propaganda about terrors of Soviet era and attempts to present this as united position of the population (which is not permitted to say anything).

While Khrushchev reforms were movement away from Socialist economy, it was not a total abolition of it. Private property was restored only in 1980s.

The question that is being discussed is if USSR became State Capitalist in 1956.

That position not just wrong (Soviet structure was still Socialist, even if government got overrun by Revisionists), it was also reactionary - since it was used to support Capitalist regimes, which were presented as preferable to Soviet Union. William Bland (one of the supposed "Hoxhaists" and "Stalinists" of UK) literally claimed that USSR became Fascist and that any Communist should fight alongside British Bourgeoisie against Soviets.

This is what this bullshit is about.

this
the amount of MLs who fall for this feels>reals shit about how Khrushchev ruined everything that Stalin achieved is ridiculous. his secret speech was, as the name suggests, secret. he didn't shove anti-Stalin propaganda down the throats of every Soviet citizen, and no one even knew about the speech until it got declassified by Gorbachev. in fact, destalinzation was already happening under Malenkov, and would have happened in some form regardless of who was Stalin's successor. i'm not trying to justify all the stuff Khrushchev did (he was incompetent and centralised power) but peddling this narrative that destalinzation was the worst thing ever and planted the seeds of capitalism (or that it changed the mode of production) is just pure idealism.

Attached: 0eb8e259dc5590db36ffd23dce90a39341bfb0b3167cbca632e92581195bde12.jpg (640x455, 46.91K)

Khrushchev DID change political model, even if he was unable to abolish Socialism.

His action DID affect both technological progress (his fervent support of Lysenko, for example; slow deterioration of cybernetics is another) and quality of life (since that naturally follows from economic stagnation). Also, space race was over in 1957.

Effective destruction of GosPlan and privatization of state AgroTech stations (with subsequent transfer of said agrotech into ownership of kolkhozs - non-state farming co-operatives) would be the major two economic actions.

He also laid ground for Kosygin-Liberman reforms, but he got deposed before it got implemented.

Privatisation is not anti-Socialist? And it was privatisation of explcit industrial Means of Production, the ones that explicitly demanded control by the whole society (as it was proven in practice, when agricultural output of USSR collapsed).

This literally led to accumulation of Capital among kolkhozs. Without constant state intervention, this would've developed into fully Capitalist relations practically immediately.

I.e. decentralization of Central Planning. This led to producers exchanging their goods - initially, on extremely informal and vague level, but - as time went on - it was becoming dominant influence of Soviet economy, with local administrators wishing for proper transition to Capitalist economy - which is where Perestroika reforms got their support.

This is explicit Revisionism of Marxist position.

no it wasn't. it ended during the 60s (technically 1975 but i think that's a stretch)

They are not ML.

It was anything but. "Secret" part simply forbade discussion about it.

Okay. You are officially a lying troll now.

Space race ended in 1957. It was about who would launch first artificial satellite.

US propaganda later redefined the term, but there was no actual "race", there was no specific goal (unlike during actual space race) there was no public declaration by Soviets that they will beat Americans (again, unlike during actual space race).

what is your reply even supposed to be? at first it sounds like you're taking my stance even further by declaring that people who believe that Khrushchev destroyed socialism are not MLs, but then you go and call me a "lying troll" like a facebook boomer. as for his secret speech:

right but definitions aside the Soviet Union did make huge advancements in space technology beyond just the satellite, which was the point he was trying to make when he talked about the space race.

As I said - the "secret" bit only meant ban on public discussion.

Both major achievements (Sputnik and Gagarin - 1957 and 1961) happened before Khrushchev's actions could've made any noticeable impact. The only achievement Khrushchev could (and did) influence was the lunar program.

Remind me how that ended up.

Do they? I imagined they were the most rightist on average nowadays alongside the Polish.

old people in the country, retard

This is true, the lunar programm was fucked up by Krushev, after Koroliev's death instead of putting some good engieneer in charge (as they were doing to do) he decided to choose someone himslef that was not a "stalinist"

So Stalin died in 1956? Retard

Sure, so secret that the entire WORLD knew about it within months.

I am glad you guys brought up Hungary!! Hungary, Russia and even Poland!!! and many other post-Soviet countries during their second after 1990's elections voted for their local communist parties

In my opinion, had Russia had stronger leader ,Warsaw pact could have been brought back in 1997.

Czech republic and allegedly Hungary sill have somewhat pro Russian president
8ch.net/leftypol/res/2624386.html

Hi guys
Im from Azerbaijan AMA

Tell us more about your country, is it the usual corrupt shithole that every Eastern bloc country became after the fall of the USSR?
Do you have to give gifts to doctors so you can get treated just a bit sooner
Is the educational system made out of leeches that don't do anything but prop the children of parents that give them more cash?
Are the politicians useless opportunists that only care about their personal gain?

How is the situation with Armenia?

Attached: artsakh.jpeg (1339x1886, 1008.47K)

yes, both czechs and hungarians have pro-russian and anti-communist presidents.

imperialism

Sure, red army came to fight anti-revolutionary armies which never been there. Nevermind that it helped to grow discontent which ultimately aroused to capitalist revolution which made communist parties illegal. You guys would praise fucking erdogan as greatest hero alive if he waved a red flag from time to time.

That's most disgusting insult I ever seen.

Attached: whatewa.png (814x691, 362.22K)

From I have been told both of them use Socialist nostalgia to gather support, which is why president of Czech republic commemorate ganniversary of Prague Spring.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (600x338, 307.56K)

Then why did he refused to speak during the anniversary and overall causes but hurt?

I think Czech military production and equipment is criminally underrated. Some of the shit they came up with was Godamn genius and even the modified versions of Soviet tanks they made fucking owned.

Attached: T-72M4CZ_065.jpg (820x388, 76K)

Tovarišč, I do not know which exact speak are you referring to. This is zeman's speak from June and how is burning red "underwear": facebook.com/prezidentcr/videos/1775540362528381/

You can count on support of people in československo in order of socialist revolution in your country. You can count on fact that honoring NATO with full-blown war against the east will start with not only protests, but also murder attempts against politicians proposing it.

Do not however expect that češi or slováci will bring communism to the world. There are only 15 millions of us. Leftist politics might be such norm here that every normie is a socdem, but no further. Both communist parties on one hand praise marxism-leninism, on other hand praise mixed economy - state, communal and private property, but there is simply no way we could do otherwise without being crushed by imperialists. We might like leftism, but we like to be alive more.

Do not forget the fact that blitzkrieg was possible only by joined tank forces of third reich and czechoslovakia. The only person which expected this to happen was Stalin, and the irony is that Poland was one of the main opponents of such agreements during munich agreement. If only ruling politicians were listening to Stalin, second world war would never happen and whole europe could have transform to socialism more-less peacefully.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (697x393, 431.38K)

You guys sound like great nation.

That is literally factually incorrect you ideologue. Read the past 20 posts you impulsive faggot.
That's rich coming from an anarchist, after all among others it was anarchists who celebrated the 2014 fascist uprising in Ukraine. But hey it only matters if it's with "muh ☭TANKIE☭s" right?
You are a historical illiterate. Do you know what occurred during the Prague Spring? ANYTHING AT ALL? Have you bothered reading or watching anything related to it that wasn't another edgy video about "red imperialism"? I have
Should I mention how Dubcek's reforms encouraged privatizations of the economy and these privatizations were LESS efficient resulting in a sudden drop in production causing budget cuts and thus a surge of unemployment, pay cuts etc.? And how Dubcek conveniently blamed it all on "stalinist meddling"?
Should I mention that the soviets entered Prague only after the Czech government asked them to? And that the "innocent" protesters violently attacked entering troops without provocation? How dozens of confiscated fresh Western made weapons ended up in the hands of said protesters to be used against soviet troops? Or perhaps I should mention how people who tried to talk with soviet troops were treated in the classical Western-European habit of shaving their heads, pouring them in pigs blood and marching them naked down the street? People who merely wanted to talk with the soviet troops who were sticking to their camps as per orders. Or maybe how people would intentionally throw themselves in front of soviet trucks covered in pigs blood and then out of 'nowhere' media-men would come and record "intentional crushing of a protester"
The Prague Spring was a reactionary revolt created by edgy vengeful marginals of the government, encouraged by Khrushchev's attack on Stalin, who used this to incite violent protest by appealing to the misguided youth with shallow cries for "freedom from bureaucracy".

The fact that tanks had to be sent in to end this reactionary bullshit is not good but I also stated that quite clearly here:
But to make the typical anarchist claim of "muh tanks crushing innocents' is an expected retardation from one who doesn't know diddly squat about the events of that year.

This. They also developed some really innovative artillery.

Attached: DANA.jpg (2048x1280, 241.32K)

Do not be foolish, any small divided nations would act like this. The fact that these 15 millions of represent lot's of slavic nationalities might have influence on our ruling ideology. To give example: Did you know that Warhol was rusyn? No, not russian. Not ukrainian. Ukraine, during their last census didn't even have their nationality as an option despite the fact there is more than one million of them, with their own language and culture. There is no such thing as "rusyn" nationality, so most of them have currently passports from slovak republic. Our democracy, thankfully, could enforce at least that people fleeing from ukraine have easy time coming there (which is unseen by EU's refugee policy) which is good, despite the fact that them immigrants are often very open anti-communist acting like law dictates 24/7.

I looked up every article I was able to find online. I am considering joining the party to learn more, but their policy of enforced attending their every event and democratic centralism is making me doubt if I am making good decision.
If you mean higher real buying power for people and more equal trade with SSSR, then sure.
I would love to hear that speech.
==HA HA HA== top-tier revision, comrade anti-commuist buddy
==HA HA HA HA== I am pretty sure (you) would stay calm if tanks of foreign nations would just stop at your town hall to enforce """peace"""
I do not know, (you) tell me!
wut
I do not understand, what do you mean by "camps"?
wut? Pigs deserved it I guess, but you are talking some really weird stuff.
The Prague Spring was a reactionary revolt created by edgy vengeful marginals of the government, encouraged by Khrushchev's attack on Stalin, who used this to incite violent protest by appealing to the misguided youth with shallow cries for "freedom from bureaucracy".
If de-stalinization AND basic removal of liberal freedoms like freedom of speech and freedom of assembly ČeskoSlovensko had before second world (removed by nazis, but somehow forgotten to bring back by marxists) were present, čechoslováci would never try to revolt and nobody like dubček would ever got to power.

I have no idea why the fuck==this==
==that== formating didn't work, but I have at least 2‰ alcohol in blood so I guess it is OK

Attached: Metallarbeiter - DER HEIMLICHE AUFMARSCH.webm (480x360, 4.74M)

Dude just shut the fuck up
Im not even a Anarchist but 99% of Anarchists i meet have a mostly neutral view of Ukraine

so what he wants CzechSlovak 2.0?

Waste of time, they're all liberals in denial
That didn't happen
That's rich coming from you
Nice gross over-simplification.
Tents etc. set up in the parks because the soviets "invading" Prague did not occupy any buildings except 1 government building, which they later left during the conflict.
It's called a false flag you moron. THey tried to set them up with fake bullshit.
Yeah that's just bullshit.

I'm not going to write all out, watch this, it has full czech/slovak subtitles if you can't understand Russian: youtube.com/watch?v=mmR8Y-a6b8c

I expect this kind of bullshit from Burgers and Britbongs, not Czechs, though considering the moronic statements about the Prague Spring I have heard from the Czech government it is not surprising to see children mis-educated in such a horrifyingly ignorant manner. Stop reading "articles" and start reading actual history. I suggest You start with some memoirs and primary research rather than the faggoty articles of edgy alt-leftists