There are people that think the soviet union has fallen

>There are people that think the soviet union has fallen.
>There are people that don't think that the soviet union hasn't taken all over the world.
Lmao, you are all brainlets

Attached: 800px-Flag_of_the_Soviet_Union.svg.png (800x400, 4K)

...

>think the soviet union has fallen.
ee?! not true?

Is this alt-history?

Literally all governments nowadays are what the Soviet Union was, centralized strong governments that support oligarchs and state companies while taking all the riches from the common people. We are closer than ever to achieving full scale fascism/communism

>He doesn't support communism with chinese characteristics

Attached: cn.png (580x387, 3K)

>fascism/communism

Attached: marx-ot-cartoon1.jpg (480x563, 64K)

>when you win the cold war and bring democracy and freedom to the Warsaw pact countries
You did it Nato!

Attached: tum_Saparmurat_Nijazov_UN02_sm.jpg (355x569, 38K)

both communism and fascism share the same characteristics when it's about managing a country, the only difference is in the end goal

>communism
>country
Mate, you should really considerreading some Marxand Engeles

I've read it m8, I am considering a socialist state not a communism state

Ok then, but you also have to remember that the orthodoxal socialism has died out, and probably will not appear anytimesoon, making a path clear for his less totalitarian brother - democraticsocialism

we're more on the path to totalitarianism without a socialist excuse then socialism without totalitarianism

yes, sure but it adapted and dominated the entire world. The Soviet Union and old school socialism had centralized economic planning, the difference is that after China realized that was inefficient, they adopted the fascist model which was basically centralized strong government with private oligarchs to control the economy, and that concentrates the entire wealth in these oligarchs while impoverishing the population and making it impossible for others to compete with them, and that is the current system worldwide. Socialism has won, Capitalism as in free entrepreneurship and small state with a christian mentality has died. The US has lost the Cold War to China.

>we're more on the path to totalitarianism
Who are "we"?
About what totalitarianism are you talking about? Every single first-world country is neoliberal, I think it is just a propogandism of the mass media that makes you think like that mate

State capitalism is still a capitalism though

>hey italy I see our currency union didn't work out so well for you so we've appointed this technocrat for you kthxbye

Compared to the real historical dictatorships it's just anarcho-communism

>Every single first-world country is neoliberal
Lmao, if they were really neoliberal they would diminish the taxes for the middle class, diminish the government spending to fund and appease the rich and basically let the people do whatever they want like in old times. The only difference between first world countries and China and Russia, is that they had a history of real capitalism which enriched them and made them powerful to concentrate all that wealth in the hands of a few oligarchs, which are now trading their own country especially for China, because they can have much more power there. Capitalism is dead, Geopolitics nowadays is basically fighting for who can concentrate more wealth, ideology is dead.
Not really when you stop the common people from competing with others and literally monopolize the market within 3 or 4 capitalists, this is no different from China.

How about such countries as Switzerland, Great Britain, etc.? Though they do have corporations, the big amount of people there are commersants. Plus, state capitalism is based on the private property as well as the classical capitalism, therefore it IS capitalism at least in the majority of therespects

Capitalism from Adam Smith was based in a christian moral background where the state was minimum, and all problems were basically addressed in morality issues. That is where the Lassez-faire comes from, since everyone respects the christian morality there is no need for the state to punish those that simply want to become richer and richer and make everyone poor. The difference is that State Capitalism is a total corruption of that moral background, it instead of punishing those that are rich and make everyone poor, it punishes those that want to create their own company and create a healthy capitalistic competition background to the point of the state practically stopping them and giving their money earned to fund those that are richer. The state nowadays literally perverts morality instead of being backed by it. Capitalism as when Adam Smith created is the total opposite of State Capitalism.

I can agree on this, but hasn't the state capitalism been just the next stage of Adam Smith's capitalism? If we are relying only on people's moral in economy we certainly should expect lots of corruption

Not really, cause the Church and the Monarchy in his time did maintain the people from going corrupt. I mean just in recent times, especially after WW2, that the Church has lost its importance, because Christianism is essentially against the concentration of capital, hence the need to destroy Christianity and why moral decay and corruption are everywhere.

I doubt that the Church had the major influence on the intellegency in the times of Adam Smith, as the ideas of Locke have become quite popular by that time, so I guess only some peasants would really listen to the church. Oh, and it also has lost its might in 1648, not after WWII

>Literally all governments nowadays are what the Soviet Union was
Well. you tried, monkey, you tried