Debating with Anti-communists from ex-"communist" countries

[Weezer]

Thought it's more frequent to see relatives of those killed by "Communist governments" or escaped from the "Communist governments", how does one rebuttal to a primary source of someone who lived under a "communist" regime like Yugoslavia or the USSR and thinks negatively of their experience, and thus communism in general?

I have a friend for example, who's been to Cuba and has family there, and is anti-Castro(however, politically he is pretty progressive, I think) claiming "Castro controls the food they eat and treats his people like shit." When I told him that Cuba had the highest doctor to people ratio in the world, he stopped arguing though. :laugh:

I mean, what am I supposed to say to something like that? Could these reactionaries who lived under the Soviet, East German, Albanian, etc. regimes be exaggerating their experiences, or are they right? I critically support some of the socialist(well, that's debatable) regimes of the 20th century, but when I read someone say something like: "I lived under Hoxha and it was bad!!1!!!!", how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.

[gendoikari]

Thought it's more frequent to see relatives of those killed by "Communist governments" or escaped from the "Communist governments", how does one rebuttal to a primary source of someone who lived under a "communist" regime like Yugoslavia or the USSR and thinks negatively of their experience, and thus communism in general?

I have a friend for example, who's been to Cuba and has family there, and is anti-Castro(however, politically he is pretty progressive, I think) claiming "Castro controls the food they eat and treats his people like shit." When I told him that Cuba had the highest doctor to people ratio in the world, he stopped arguing though. :laugh:

I mean, what am I supposed to say to something like that? Could these reactionaries who lived under the Soviet, East German, Albanian, etc. regimes be exaggerating their experiences, or are they right? I critically support some of the socialist(well, that's debatable) regimes of the 20th century, but when I read someone say something like: "I lived under Hoxha and it was bad!!1!!!!", how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.

Tell them the truth most if not all of the socialist regimes, were either:

A) really fascists in disguise like china, the soviet union, and North korea,
B) were so harshly economically sanctioned by the imperialists that life could not really have been good anyway,
C) They were stalinists or some other form of totalitarian (not to be confused with benevolent authoritarian) socialism, and there are alternatives which are much better.
D) some combination of the above

[manic expression]

Well, they almost always exaggerate...but anyway, I think your response to the anti-Castro Cuban was perfect. Just point out the facts and they'll have nowhere to run.

Also, sometimes their own little sob-stories will give you plenty of ammo to sink their arguments. I was talking to one Cuban-American whose father was oh-so-heroically smuggled out of Cuba because Castro was a big meanie...and sent to Spain...which I pointed out was under Franco. :lol: I asked him how he could claim to be so democratic when he defended the shipping of children to a fascist country...that shut him up real quick.

And if you get the "you've never been there so you don't know!" line, simply say that it's perfectly reasonable to analyze societies and situations one hasn't lived in. 99% of all politics is exactly that. Plus, read some reports (http://www.quaylargo.com/Productions/McCelvey.html) of people who were there and reference them...then your opponents won't have a single leg to stand on.

[Nox]

They lived in revisionist countries, not Communist countries, unless they either lived in Hoxha's Albania (and thus would give positive opinions on it), or Stalin's Soviet Union (and would give extremely positive views on it compared to what it was before Stalin took over) or Mao's China (see Stalin's bracket text).

[Per Levy]

well i live in east germany and work with people who lived under "socialism", you know these people were fed that the bureaucratic regime that ruled them was "real existing socialism", yet they had no control over anything even though they were the workers. also people got harrassed for listening to "western" music or got information that was not form the ruling party(and thats just the more harmless stuff). now these people are anticommunistic because they were told from their childhood that this shit was socialism. some have a bit of a nostalgic view on it though since they lived a long time in the gdr(german democratic republic).


how can I try to defend these regimes

why do you want to defend these regimes? they sucked thats why they're gone today. but if you really want to defend them, well you can always tell them that everyone had work back then and nobody had to starve.

[Per Levy]

Tell them the truth most if not all of the socialist regimes, were either:

A) really fascists in disguise like china, the soviet union, and North korea

really? the soviet union and china were never fascist, and north korea, while a terrible regime and might even be a bit debatable is also not fascist just extremly militaristic, opressive, nationalistic and in no way socialistic.

[manic expression]

They lived in revisionist countries, not Communist countries. Unless they either lived in Hoxha's Albania (and thus would give positive opinions on it), or Stalin's Soviet Union (and would give extremely positive views on it compared to what it was before Stalin took over)
That means nothing to anyone other than a certain number of Marxist-Leninists. Do you really think anyone's going to say "Oh, now I get it! It wasn't socialism, it was revisionism stemming from the shift away from Marxist-Leninist theory following Khrushchev's policy changes in the mid-1950's! It all makes sense now!"...........?


why do you want to defend these regimes? they sucked thats why they're gone today. but if you really want to defend them, well you can always tell them that everyone had work back then and nobody had to starve.Why would I defend it? Everyone had a job, food, a roof over their heads, leisure time, healthcare and communities in which people cared about each other. It didn't suck (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,634122,00.html)...especially when you compare it with the shiny new east Germany that's infested with Nazi goons, unemployment and inequality.

[gendoikari]

Well, they almost always exaggerate...but anyway, I think your response to the anti-Castro Cuban was perfect. Just point out the facts and they'll have nowhere to run.

I actually don't know much about cuba, all I've heard is the propaganda sent around. Are they/were they really socialist, were they totalitarian.... was castro really all that bad?

[Rusty Shackleford]

just dont bother. their mind is more than made up and its a waste of time.

a comrade of mine who lived in one of the SSRs and i were tabling and a russian man(a twenty something who lived under the 'horrors' of Gorby) comes up and criticizes us, i said to him 'you take this' and they proceeded to duke it out in russian. the other guy walked away and said 'im going to do something about this' becasue he was higly offended that i said 'fuck' and that he was called an idiot by our much older comrade.

he didnt do shit. weve been stopped by cops for posting but thats it. they cant touch us over political debate and nasty language.





anyways. moral of the story. dont bother unless you or anyone you know has lived in one of the former socialist countries or current ones.

[RedMarxist]

most Americans, and people I find in general, are completely uneducated about Communism, and because these autocratic regimes claimed to be upholding socialist values/"reaching communism in 20 years" they immediately associate communism(a classless, stateless society) with totalitarian societies.

Don't get me wrong, they were organized, especially during Stalin's Era, as if they were fascist countries. Tight control of everyone's lives, extreme repression(Prague Spring of '68, Hungarian repression, etc.), massive, if not herculean mobilization efforts, extreme and absolute loyalty to "the party"

Try to fill them in on Marxist ideas. start off by correcting them on their "definition" of what communism is. Then correct them on common myths of the regimes(such as they were "worker's states", they were "building socialism"). tell them that ideally a true worker's state would consist of worker councils and true democratic socialism.

My mom(I'm in high school) gets this shit wrong all the dang time. I've practiced my anti-red debating skills quite a bit. My whole family at dinner doesn't know shit about communism. They reluctantly allowed me to buy Bolsheviks In Power, oh and my teacher gave me a copy of the Communist Manifesto for keeps.(he was an awesome teacher. he was actually there when Tunisia's Ben Ali took power, and is a socialist, oh and he has all this Maoist shit in the classroom such as Quotations from Mao Zedong)

I once read First They Killed My Father., about a survivor of Pol Pot's "Socialist" Cambodian regime. I respect her, yet she I think is part of an anti-Communist organization or something. You have to understand, she was fed lies that Pol Pot was reaching communism and other bullshit nonsense. to her, IT WAS TRUE. people like that...don't change.

[Per Levy]

Why would I defend it? Everyone had a job, food, a roof over their heads, leisure time, healthcare and communities in which people cared about each other. It didn't suck (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,634122,00.html)...especially when you compare it with the shiny new east Germany that's infested with Nazi goons, unemployment and inequality.

hey i know that, i live here, still i would not call for a return of the gdr. am i calling for a revolution in germany? hell yeah but not for a return of the gdr. it died for a reason. people here are now nostalgic about it because of the reason you mentioned, because capitalism sucks.

but the gdr was not socialist, and also it would have gone broke sooner or later, it even was "saved" bye the west with a huge credit at one point. sooner or later it would have turned to full scale capitalism anyway like china or vietnam. and not to mention all the political repression, and before a strawman argument comes, i dont mean the repression of nazis, i mean the repression of communist and other leftwing thinking that was not in line with the party. and as someone who is not "marxist-leninist" i really do like to get all the information i want, all the literature i want without facing prison and so on.

[Ocean Seal]

Thought it's more frequent to see relatives of those killed by "Communist governments" or escaped from the "Communist governments", how does one rebuttal to a primary source of someone who lived under a "communist" regime like Yugoslavia or the USSR and thinks negatively of their experience, and thus communism in general?

I have a friend for example, who's been to Cuba and has family there, and is anti-Castro(however, politically he is pretty progressive, I think) claiming "Castro controls the food they eat and treats his people like shit." When I told him that Cuba had the highest doctor to people ratio in the world, he stopped arguing though. :laugh:

I mean, what am I supposed to say to something like that? Could these reactionaries who lived under the Soviet, East German, Albanian, etc. regimes be exaggerating their experiences, or are they right? I critically support some of the socialist(well, that's debatable) regimes of the 20th century, but when I read someone say something like: "I lived under Hoxha and it was bad!!1!!!!", how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.

I have plenty of primary sources who will testify to the better treatment under Eastern European regimes, in fact most of the people who I talk to, who still live in the same area but now capitalist will say that they preferred socialism.

Anyway the way to fight primary sources is statistics. Statistics always tear apart primary sources and make your opponent sound like they are exaggerating or doing a good amount of grandstanding.

Also most people who are like "Cuba suckssss. America rawks" have never been to another Latin American country at least outside of the pretty rich hotel areas. I remember, in Peru, there were these refugees that came, and of course the right wing media gave them all interviews to show what life was like back in Cuba and how a neo-liberal Peru was so much better. Well they went through the Cuba has no democracy stuff and it was getting pretty good until the interviewers asked them about food. And they started to complain and essentially detailed what they got in terms of food (type and quantity). Their complaining was so ridiculous to Peruvians that even the right-wing media ridiculed them because compared to what most Peruvians got for food they had it really good. Even middle class Peruvians were like shit, that's better than what we get.

[ColonelCossack]

I actually don't know much about cuba, all I've heard is the propaganda sent around. Are they/were they really socialist, were they totalitarian.... was castro really all that bad?

That's why the greatest weapon of leftists is education- we need to educate ourselves, and then the proletariat.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Well, they almost always exaggerate...

And you know this...?

[CHE with an AK]

relatives of those killed by "Communist governments" or escaped from the "Communist governments"
In the same way that family stories get embellished down through the generations, most "relative sob stories" are extremely exaggerated. For example, most of the immigrants from Eastern Europe who didn’t succeed in the U.S. crafted these elaborate stories about how they had everything back in ______ and if they could have taken it with them they would be millionaires etc.




how does one rebuttal to a primary source of someone who lived under a "communist" regime
Tell them, ok I live under a capitalist system, does that make my views on it irrefutable? They'll say no and that they also live under a capitalist system and like it, then tell them "exactly" - it depends on the person.




I have a friend for example, who's been to Cuba and has family there, and is anti-Castro
Anti-Castro gusanos are the worst. Especially the Miami (little Havana) historicos who came in the 1960's right after the revolution. These were the white upper class who owned the haciendas and latifundias and are mostly bitter that Fidel & Che took away their de-facto plantations. Most of these geezers are now in their 70's-80's and fill their grandchildren's minds with complete revisionist crap about how great Cuba was when it was America's whore house and casino. Gusanos are almost always unreachable - so don't even bother. Their hatred is seen as an essential part of their identity.




Could these reactionaries who lived under the Soviet, East German, Albanian, etc. regimes be exaggerating their experiences
Yes, they almost always do. What I love is their stories about how "nobody made it out alive", when clearly they did. Or how "nobody got an education", when many of them have free graduate degrees from universities back under "tyranny". :rolleyes:




"I lived under Hoxha and it was bad!!1!!!!", how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.
Just tell them, "Well I am sorry that you didn't fully embrace all that Hoxha's system had to offer, if you had, then maybe you wouldn't be such a dumb right-wing piece of shit."

[RadioRaheem84]

Is everyone that ahistorical these days? There was no freedom before any communist took over any nation. Most were backward feudal, tribalistic, or fascist states.

For all the fault's of the former ML states, they accomplished things that we can only dream of in the West like free housing, healthcare, education and guarantee of employment. And guess what? They did this without resorting to genocidal imperialism or centuries long colonialism.

They were nations in a constant state of war and they succumbed to the paranoia of the leaders, inner corruption, bureaucracy, and autarky. On top of that were under constant threat of invasion, sabotage, economic blockade and terrorism. Of course dissent was treated with suspicion and repressed.

Western nations repeal laws and dismantle civil liberties because of terrorist attacks and growing crime. Imagine what the West would like under REAL constant threat of Communist invasion. They would look like third word fascist proxies in no time. In fact the nations under a real threat of Communist takeover were assisted by the US to become such fascist nations!

So help people understand the material conditions that these nations were under. It isn't a simple black and white, these nations were oppressive thing. It's the reality that these nations faced real serious threat of annihilation and succumbed to their own closed systems.

[MaciejRozga]

I live in „ex-communist country” and I have this problem too. Most people don’t see advantages of it because:

- they took free housing in those days and they don’t need new so they can’t see that’s problem;

- they get education and job in “communist country” and now they have it still – they can’t see that young people can’t get satisfactory job (they think that youth are lazy);

- they remember some events and ask: why Workers Party shoot to workers (i.e. Gdansk 1970)?

- they earned much money on privatization, so they don’t like back to “communism”;

- in capitalism utopia they have “democracy” – it was only one party, and now they have a lot of it!

But many people don’t think that living in “communist country” is worse. I know some people who say: “It was ideal system for workers. But workers didn’t appreciate it. Maybe workers have to live in oppression?”

My advice is: do not talking whit history maniacs and capitalist regime agents. Simple people know that “communism” wasn’t worse than capitalism. Intellectualists aren’t friendly for us and they won’t be. Copernicus waiting many years for accept for his works from intellectualists, we don’t have. We are for workers, not for intellectualists!

[Commissar Rykov]

I find it ironic that most avid anti-communists specifically those from South America and the Caribbean were typically part of pro-fascist movements. So of course they aren't going to support communism if they support people like Noriega, Pinochet and the like.

[gendoikari]

whats the beef with intellectuals?

[Apoi_Viitor]

whats the beef with intellectuals?

"To Read Too Many Books is Harmful" - Mao Zedong

[gendoikari]

"To Read Too Many Books is Harmful" - Mao Zedong

Well that's utter bullshit. An educated society, is a thinking society, and a thinking society is a worst a soon to be socialist society.

[manic expression]

And you know this...?
In general, in things political and apolitical, when someone's personal experiences are their first and last source on their position, there's a great temptation to exaggerate when faced with a skeptical opposing view. I find that if you just get them to talk long enough, oftentimes they'll contradict something you know to be true, press them on it and they'll have to concede sooner or later. Not all the time, but it's not uncommon.

"Cuba is homophobic!"

Me: "How so?"

"My friends are from Cuba and they say that homosexuality is illegal!"

Me: "That's certainly not the case today, as the Cuban government held an anti-homophobia festival in Havana a few years back, led by none other than Mariela Castro, the openly-lesbian daughter of Raul Castro and a prominent LGBT-rights advocate in Cuba."

"Um, well, derp."


I actually don't know much about cuba, all I've heard is the propaganda sent around. Are they/were they really socialist, were they totalitarian.... was castro really all that bad?
When the US (or UK, or Spanish, etc.) media talks about Cuba, you're hearing straight-up lies. Check your PM box in the next few days, I'll send you some useful info on the issue.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Well that's utter bullshit. An educated society, is a thinking society, and a thinking society is a worst a soon to be socialist society.

It was a joke. The quote was more or less a quip at how theoretical knowledge is limited, and must be balanced with empirical knowledge.

Anyways, the disdain for intellectuals is similar, as I think many in the left see them (and students) as idealists, who are detached from the experience and conditions of everyday life.

[gendoikari]

It was a joke. The quote was more or less a quip at how theoretical knowledge is limited, and must be balanced with empirical knowledge.

Anyways, the disdain for intellectuals is similar, as I think many in the left see them (and students) as idealists, who are detached from the experience and conditions of everyday life.

Do they not understand that you have to start somewhere and that an education is imparative to starting that somewhere?

[Dogs On Acid]

They lived in revisionist countries, not Communist countries, unless they either lived in Hoxha's Albania (and thus would give positive opinions on it), or Stalin's Soviet Union (and would give extremely positive views on it compared to what it was before Stalin took over) or Mao's China (see Stalin's bracket text).

http://assets.diylol.com/hfs/911/eb6/49e/resized/what-the-fuck-meme-generator-what-the-fuck-am-i-reading-3255b3.jpg?1311759026.jpg

Sorry Mods, I just had to post it.

[Weezer]

Me: "That's certainly not the case today, as the Cuban government held an anti-homophobia festival in Havana a few years back, led by none other than Mariela Castro, the openly-lesbian daughter of Raul Castro and a prominent LGBT-rights advocate in Cuba."

Mariela Castro is married to Paolo Titolo, a male Italian photographer, I don't think she's a homosexual. However, she is a LGBT-rights advocate in Cuba, and probably the most relevant one.

[Dulce et Decorum est]

My family is from the former Yugoslavia, and pretty much every one of them I have talked to in regards to their experience there has been positive. The only ones who would say it is bad are those who are religious fundamentalists, Nationalists, Fascists & those who only care about profit.

The tips & pointers that have been mentioned before other users are great, but I personally don't really support any Former/Current "Socialist" countries apart from Former Yugoslavia so I don't have the same problem you do. Most people I know who lived in Yugoslavia are Yugonostalgic, anyway.

[DarkPast]

My family is from the former Yugoslavia, and pretty much every one of them I have talked to in regards to their experience there has been positive. The only ones who would say it is bad are those who are religious fundamentalists, Nationalists, Fascists & those who only care about profit.

I have a similar experience. Most people say it was similar or better in Yugoslavia. Those who are against it are usually nationalists who blame the (insert any one of the following: Serbs/Croats/Muslims/Slovenians) for being lazy and living off the others.

To be fair, Yugoslavia was hit by an economic crisis in the 80's, but this was mostly because it implemented a more "free" market and took foreign loans.

Ultimately, it's always easier to blame problems on "them" (communists, foreigners, traitors) who "always" sabotaged "us", than to make a rational analysis of the situation.

[electro_fan]

how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.

Just, don't.

[Kiev Communard]

Actually the situation in Ukraine is rather mixed, as the majority of those proletarians who consider themselves anti-communist in fact blame the old CP not for its socialist ideology, but for the failure "to catch up with the Western standards of living" and the participation of the CP officials in privatisation.

As for the bourgeois nouveaux riches, they regard the Stalinists with the same sort of mixed feelings as the French royalist emigrés must have held on the Napoleonic Empire: "they have made this unruly mob that made the bloody revolution obey the state, paving the way for the return of the rightful owners, but they were still the godless rabble".

[aplparks]

how can I try to defend these regimes? They have a primary source, I don't.

Their being a "primary source" means nothing. What they're doing is alleging a generalized personal experience, which is evidence no one else can verify or disprove and that anyone could forge. This is not real evidence. It may be enough to sway them but that proves nothing to anyone else. Hit 'em with the statistics, or ask for proof that things could be improved by a regime change.


Tell them the truth most if not all of the socialist regimes, were either:

A) really fascists in disguise like china, the soviet union, and North korea,
B) were so harshly economically sanctioned by the imperialists that life could not really have been good anyway,
C) They were stalinists or some other form of totalitarian (not to be confused with benevolent authoritarian) socialism, and there are alternatives which are much better.
D) some combination of the above

Sage advice. I find that nothing wins folks over to socialism like equating all socialist societies with fascism.