EL KAISER
25th October 2016, 04:51
Hello Comrades!, i noticed that in MANY places around the internet exists the ridiculous idea that there was a Bourgeois Class in Soviet-Type economies. Of course, people who think this dont have idea what they are talking about.
To counter this ignorance, i wanted to clarify certain things (which are proven facts) to debunk this theory that USSR wasnt Socialist XD or that it had capitalists inside it XD:
1: The Bourgeois Class can ONLY exist if its composed of persons who ACTUALLY own the Means of Production. Not just administer them, but POSSES them. That is, after their death, their offspring inherit those Means of Production. And also, these persons CANNOT be fired, because they dont even work as a proffessional. NONE of these people existed in the USSR. NONE. So where is the Bourgeois Class?
2: The State Capitalism system is one in which the State directs the economy and nationalizes its commanding heights, but one in which PRIVATE PROPERTY OF CAPITAL AND MEANS OF PRODUCTION IS PERMITTED AND GUARANTEED. That is, The USSR along with Eastern Europe, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, etc. ARENT State Capitalist. Nazi Germany WAS State Capitalist, like Fascist Spain and Fascist Italy and all WWI and WWII war economies (with the exception of the USSR).
3: The MANAGERS and SUPERVISORS in Soviet Russia (and in every country in the WORLD) were highly paid EMPLOYEES doing White-collar work who did not have Means of Production and lived thanks to a SALARY. You can argue that they werent part of the Working Class because they exploited other workers, alright. But they CLEARLY werent part of the Bourgeois Class. Come on, seriously.
4: The State Bureaucrats in USSR (like in any country in the WORLD) are ALSO employees WITHOUT means of production, hired by the State to perform a White-collar job in exchange of which they will receive a SALARY/Wage or whatever to live off. In resume, they ALSO arent Bourgeois.
5: Please dont use the stupid The-State-is-the-new-Capitalist argument because its simply pathetic. The State a capitalist? Really? Who in the State owned a mean of production? Huh? Who? I ask because the State is composed by PERSONS. And none of this persons possesed a Mean of Production. They were just employees without private property of Capital. So how can they be a capitalist class?
So, you basically CANT have a capitalist country WITHOUT Capitalists. You cant be in a Capitalist country WITHOUT Bourgeois. Anyone who says otherwise is either mistaken, confused, or lying.
Hope it helps those who are confused.
To counter this ignorance, i wanted to clarify certain things (which are proven facts) to debunk this theory that USSR wasnt Socialist XD or that it had capitalists inside it XD:
1: The Bourgeois Class can ONLY exist if its composed of persons who ACTUALLY own the Means of Production. Not just administer them, but POSSES them. That is, after their death, their offspring inherit those Means of Production. And also, these persons CANNOT be fired, because they dont even work as a proffessional. NONE of these people existed in the USSR. NONE. So where is the Bourgeois Class?
2: The State Capitalism system is one in which the State directs the economy and nationalizes its commanding heights, but one in which PRIVATE PROPERTY OF CAPITAL AND MEANS OF PRODUCTION IS PERMITTED AND GUARANTEED. That is, The USSR along with Eastern Europe, Cuba, Vietnam, North Korea, etc. ARENT State Capitalist. Nazi Germany WAS State Capitalist, like Fascist Spain and Fascist Italy and all WWI and WWII war economies (with the exception of the USSR).
3: The MANAGERS and SUPERVISORS in Soviet Russia (and in every country in the WORLD) were highly paid EMPLOYEES doing White-collar work who did not have Means of Production and lived thanks to a SALARY. You can argue that they werent part of the Working Class because they exploited other workers, alright. But they CLEARLY werent part of the Bourgeois Class. Come on, seriously.
4: The State Bureaucrats in USSR (like in any country in the WORLD) are ALSO employees WITHOUT means of production, hired by the State to perform a White-collar job in exchange of which they will receive a SALARY/Wage or whatever to live off. In resume, they ALSO arent Bourgeois.
5: Please dont use the stupid The-State-is-the-new-Capitalist argument because its simply pathetic. The State a capitalist? Really? Who in the State owned a mean of production? Huh? Who? I ask because the State is composed by PERSONS. And none of this persons possesed a Mean of Production. They were just employees without private property of Capital. So how can they be a capitalist class?
So, you basically CANT have a capitalist country WITHOUT Capitalists. You cant be in a Capitalist country WITHOUT Bourgeois. Anyone who says otherwise is either mistaken, confused, or lying.
Hope it helps those who are confused.