Haven't they greatly liberalized since the SU fell? I don't see evidence that they are under the dictatorship of the proletariat or are making any real effort to prevent class society or the rise of capitalists, which they seem to be encouraging. There are markets, foreign investment, and a thriving petty bourgeois class. (Much like Cuba.) Maybe it's not as bad as Vietnam, but still...
They still have a collective economy, and there's no signs of exploitation taking place, overall, on the Laos market. As far as their foreign services go, well they don't have much of a choice, now do they? Since, after all, they were the most bombed country during the Vietnam war, had to build up their economy from scratch, and have to rely on foreign help to progress it forward.
So, I see you've got a new blog now claiming Laos is socialist. Care to explain this odd position?
Well, it counts for something, if not determining truth. I'm reading some Stalin now and, to my surprise, he strikes me as a better writer than Lenin.
He did, which made him a popular propagandist. Though, I try not letting writing skills determine my choices of worth, & whether or not the works pertain under materialism or idealism.
You gotta admit that Trotsky had mad writing abilities, though.
Stalin is most definitely not the evil dictator many make him out to be. Granted, he conducted a good amount of errors, which deserves direct criticism, but I still favor him over Trotsky no matter what.
I just finished reading it. Quite the book - thanks for the heads up. I think I may actually like Stalin now. Damn you!
Alright, cool. Yeah, the book is really good. I definitely recommend for anybody who wants to truly learn about Stalin.
Thanks! A Google search turned up the pdf over at the PLP site.
