• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    808 months ago

    Not a tankie, but the USSR had mostly solved this problem, despite all its other issues. There did exist some homelessness, but nowhere near the extent of current USA.

    • pelya
      link
      fedilink
      188 months ago

      Sure, you could get a piece of land in Siberian tundra at any time, I would not call that housing.

      Moving to a city was way more complicated than in capitalist US. You could not simply buy an apartment. You had to be allocated an apartment by the government. And you needed connections for that. Or bribes. Ideally both. If you think your local rabid Republicans do not care for little wage slave men, you never experienced USSR, it was like that but 100x worse.

        • pelya
          link
          fedilink
          -38 months ago

          Yup. And networking would inevitably involve vodka. All major decisions would eventually involve vodka in USSR.

          • GrayoxOP
            link
            fedilink
            48 months ago

            One of Stalin’s failures almost any tankie won’t deny.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -3
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Vodka had been linked to the Russian economy under multiple Czars. I’m not sure that Stalin could have separated the two even if he had wanted to. Admittedly it doesn’t appear that he wanted to.

              I’m pretty sure that the USSR was screwed the moment that Lenin returned from exile in Germany, or when Wilson was elected. Take your pick.

              The Menchaviks would have been a better government.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                The mechaviks literally wanted to continue ww1 and have a psuedo democracy where the bourgeoisie were literally guaranteed a majority of seats, wtf are you talking about?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  08 months ago

                  I wasn’t aware of that. I was under the impression they were less extreme than the Bolsheviks, and didn’t want to execute everyone that wasn’t a hard core Bolshevik

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -1
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    They were more extreme than the bolseviks but less extreme than the monarchists, they were just on the side of capitalists so were painted with a nicer brush by capitalist historians

              • GrayoxOP
                link
                fedilink
                -28 months ago

                I just find it ironic that Stalin was everything that the party worried about Trotsky becoming.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -28 months ago

      Well, I’m from a post-USSR country and a substantial part of this was the criminalization of homelessness. Can’t have homeless people, if you lock them up (be it in a prison or asylum).

      Then again, just about anyone, who did not conform to the party’s message got locked up. Getting your place bugged at the slightest hint you might be up to something disagreeable and all that good stuff. The secret police could disappear and or beat you up without any real justification.

      I hate late-stage capitalism as much as you, but coming from a country that’s been through this, I am extremely reluctant to give the rotten and frankly repugnant USSR regime any credit.