They’re not perfect, but they’re pretty much carrying the world on green technology. Also they give non-predatory loans to African countries so they can escape the IMF & Co.

Map credits: OpenStreetMap contributors

the general opinion of Lemmy go from “Slava Ukraini, fuck Russian Nazis, here’s some footage of Russian teenagers getting blown up with drones, Trump bad for not wanting to give aid” to “Zelensky is a fascist war criminal and also a Nazi and dumb American liberals are bad for siding with them” seemingly overnight. The switch happened a while ago but it was apparently unanimous.

Lemmy has always had people who took the second position, and still has people who take the first position. There has been a general shift, but it was neither sudden nor unanimous.

Do you expect me to remember how to spell boorshwaasee? Also, ‘Epstein class’ is much more clear about the problem - it is not just that some people are obscenely rich, but also that the money has insulated them from people to the point that they have lost all humanity and social sense and behave like wild animals.

I don’t care what economic system Russia uses. That’s their internal matter. What matters to me is that they’re the only country with 6,000 nukes, and therefore the only country the US fears. So for my country to be independent, we need Russia to act as a counterweight to the US. (This is also true for many other countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa.)

since that has the longest track record in failure

Failure in achieving what?

A natural disaster would be handled by regional or national disaster response agencies.

How would there be a national disaster response agency without central planning? Who would fund it? Who would run it?

Since after the industrial revolution, the high productivity of cities has been subsidizing the wealth of the suburbs and rural areas to the significant detriment of overall productivity.

Are cities actually more productive, or is their higher productivity subsidised by rural areas?

you will find that the wealth and productive density per person will balance according to the inherit environmental factors to a much larger degree.

Perhaps, but is that what you want? The resource-poor societies of Central Asia lie between theresource-rich China and Europe. Would a theoretical Eurasian government not want to subsidise people living in these regions, so that they can service the trade routes between China and Europe?

a lack of central control and planning does not prevent collaboration and coordination from occuring between entities.

Who mediates disputes, and who enforces their decisions?

State ownership has both advantages and disadvantages; I just wanted to point out that it was a deliberate choice.

The state at national level should be limited to providing facilitation, infrastructure, defence and foreign policy. Independent Local governments should provide the bulk of public services.

What do you do when some regions are poorer than others, or one gets hit by a natural disaster? Again, it isn’t black and white. There are advantages to both centralisation and devolution.

The state ownership of production is deliberate, and aimed at improving efficiency and allowing forward planning. One (or a few, if you want competition) large factory is more efficient than a bunch of smaller workshops. State ownership can lead to corruption, as you pointed out, but it is a conscious choice and not happenstance.

Neither capitalism nor communism assume that their proponents are immune to greed. Capitalism was developed as an improvement over (European) feudalism and mercantilism. The idea is that division of labour expands the quantity and diversity of goods that can be produced. Communism is similarly supposed to be an improvement on capitalism. Here, the idea is that centralised planning can improve the distribution of the produced goods (and further improve the quantity and diversity of goods).

Lol I wish we had the poverty rate and quality of life the Chinese have. Maybe we should have thrown more corrupt politicias and businessmen in jail.

Yes, I pointed this out only because people often think that Facebook and Twitter are the biggest social media everywhere in the world.

While I agree with the overall statement, WhatsApp, Youtube and Instagram have more users, and a bigger impact on politics in India, than Facebook.

Okay, but hear me out:

Alligator-mounted velociraptors

If a developing country invests in public education, free healthcare, transport infrastructure, housing, etc., is that not social democracy? Why wouldn’t that work?

The label shift was a survival tactic

Fair, but why can’t social democracy function in a peripheral (=developing?) country?

Social democracy needs superprofits from the periphery to fund the core.

But there are social democratic parties in developing countries.

I too live in a country with 1.4 billion people. The party that leads our govt claims to have 100 million members, but that’s because you can become a ‘member’ by giving them a missed call.

Am I misunderstanding the graph, or does the Communist Party have 92 million members?

Is the lower photo real or AI? It looks like an album cover.

It was posted in the world news community yesterday. Here’s the mirror from that post: https://archive.is/c4JHd